Gibson avoids felony charges and extreme speeding is IGNORED!!!

Loco laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE polluted rec.autos.driving with
this crap:

> He was pulled over for doing 87 in a 45!!

Too bad, asshole. Looks like you lose yet again.

> That's far more serious than the DUI but then, this is criminal
> coddler america.

Coddle, coddle, coddle......

> Mel should be locked up forever but he won't do a day.

I'll bet that really burns you up, doesn't it?? HAHA!!



--
--
Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend admits
to being a deadly speeder:

"There's a 55mph freeway near where i live and
if i do 50, everybody passes me. But if i do
60 very few do."
--Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 12/17/2004
ref: http://tinyurl.com/np3y6
Message ID: . com>

In article >,
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:

> On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 05:53:29 GMT, Alan Baker >
> wrote:
>
> >In article . com>,
> > "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote:
> >
> >> Andrzej Adam Filip wrote:
> >> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > writes:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > DHS is doing NOTHING to catch them even though DUI/speeding terrorists
> >> > > are a hundred times the menace bomb-toting terrorists are.
> >> >
> >> > Have you contacted your congress-person to fix the horrible hole in
> >> > national security?! ;-)
> >>
> >> They won't do anything. The auto industry pays them a fortune every
> >> year to ignore the millions of murderers on our highways.
> >
> >There aren't millions of murders on our highways. For that to be true,
> >there would have to be millions of deaths with each one being an
> >intentional act.
> >
> >Face the facts: people die on the highways because people spend a
> >significant portion of their lives *on* the highways.
>
> Now that is really stupid, even for you. How does being *on* a
> highway cause you to die?

Every human activity -- every single one -- has an element of risk and
accidents cannot be prevented. People spend a great deal of time driving
and the risk of death is very small, but not zero.

>
> They die because psycho-homos like you are speeding and drunk driving.

"Psycho-homos"? Please.

The most important factor in preventing traffic accidents is not speed,
it is driver awareness. The leading cause of accidents is not speed, it
is failure to yield the right of way. But because of the obsessive focus
placed on speeding it is perceived that if you're not speeding then you
can't be doing anything wrong *at all*; and nothing could be farther
from the truth.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>
>>> What felony charge did he "avoid"? Name one California felony he
>>> arguably committed.
>>
>> Anyone who drives 87 in a 45 while drunk is guilty of both terrorism
>> and attempted murder. THINK

You're terrorizing this newsgroup. Anybody who disagrees is a terrorist
coddler.

In article >,
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:

> On 3 Aug 2006 05:44:02 -0700, "morticide" > wrote:
>
>
> >
> >I'm not sure about CA, but in MO if the violation is tied to DUI, the
> >DUI (being the more serious offense) is the one prosecuted. Penalties
> >depend on whether it's a repeat offense.
> >
>
> That's pretty hard to believe. If they've got you for two crimes, why
> would they drop one of them?

It's very common. When someone commits a serious crime, there are
usually several lesser crimes (and not necessarily lesser included
crimes) that they're concurrently committing. But they're rarely
charged with all of them, for both legal and tactical reasons.

On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 18:18:53 GMT, Alan Baker >
wrote:


>
>Every human activity -- every single one -- has an element of risk and
>accidents cannot be prevented. People spend a great deal of time driving
>and the risk of death is very small, but not zero.

That's the craziest thing i ever heard. Of course accidents, by their
very nature, can be prevented. And as for the driving risk being
small, name one activity you do every day that is as dangerous as
driving.

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 02:12:35 GMT, Larry > wrote:

>In article >,
> laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
>
>> On 3 Aug 2006 05:44:02 -0700, "morticide" > wrote:
>>
>>
>> >
>> >I'm not sure about CA, but in MO if the violation is tied to DUI, the
>> >DUI (being the more serious offense) is the one prosecuted. Penalties
>> >depend on whether it's a repeat offense.
>> >
>>
>> That's pretty hard to believe. If they've got you for two crimes, why
>> would they drop one of them?
>
>It's very common. When someone commits a serious crime, there are
>usually several lesser crimes (and not necessarily lesser included
>crimes) that they're concurrently committing. But they're rarely
>charged with all of them, for both legal and tactical reasons.

In my experience it's just the opposite. If you're cuaght robbing a
bank say, they'll charge you with bank robbery and conspiracy to
commit bank robbery and if you force people to move from one room to
another, you'll be charged with kidnapping too!!! Yes that's
happened.

On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 19:16:55 +0200, Andrzej Adam Filip >
wrote:

>laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > writes:
>
>> On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 11:51:41 GMT, "I-49" > wrote:
>>
>>>> Mel Gibson Charged With Drunk Driving
>>>> Actor Faces Up To 6 Months In Jail For 3 Misdemeanor Counts
>>>.
>>>Much as I hate to agree with lbvh, I do agree that Gibson probably won't
>>>face any jail time. The judge will make him pay a small fine then slap his
>>>hand and say "go and sin no more"
>>
>> The fact that he has admitted to being an alchoholic means he'll never
>> stop his drunk driving and should have his license permanently
>> revoked. But that won't happen either. One of these days he'll kill
>> someone and buy his way out of that too.
>
>AFAIR George Walker Bush has admitted he had "alcohol problems".
>Do you suggest he is not worth to have driving licence too?

Hell - he has a dui conviction and that should have settled it long
ago. Anyone convicted of dui should lose their license forever. Stop
coddling these killers.

In article >,
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:

> On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 18:18:53 GMT, Alan Baker >
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Every human activity -- every single one -- has an element of risk and
> >accidents cannot be prevented. People spend a great deal of time driving
> >and the risk of death is very small, but not zero.
>
> That's the craziest thing i ever heard. Of course accidents, by their
> very nature, can be prevented. And as for the driving risk being
> small, name one activity you do every day that is as dangerous as
> driving.

Not every accident can be prevented.

In article >,
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 02:12:35 GMT, Larry > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
> >
> >> On 3 Aug 2006 05:44:02 -0700, "morticide" > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >I'm not sure about CA, but in MO if the violation is tied to DUI, the
> >> >DUI (being the more serious offense) is the one prosecuted. Penalties
> >> >depend on whether it's a repeat offense.
> >> >
> >>
> >> That's pretty hard to believe. If they've got you for two crimes, why
> >> would they drop one of them?
> >
> >It's very common. When someone commits a serious crime, there are
> >usually several lesser crimes (and not necessarily lesser included
> >crimes) that they're concurrently committing. But they're rarely
> >charged with all of them, for both legal and tactical reasons.
>
> In my experience it's just the opposite.

What is your experience?

I am an Assistant District Attorney in one od the DA's offices in New
York City. I make charging decisions like this on a daily basis.

> If you're cuaght robbing a
> bank say, they'll charge you with bank robbery and conspiracy to
> commit bank robbery and if you force people to move from one room to
> another, you'll be charged with kidnapping too!!! Yes that's
> happened.

Of course it's happened. But if you rob a bank and drive away in a car
with an expired registration sticker, I'm not going to charge you with
the registration offense. If you're just driving down the street and
have an expired sticker, you're more likely to be cited for it.

"Larry" > wrote
> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:

>> In my experience it's just the opposite.
>
> What is your experience?
>
> I am an Assistant District Attorney in one od the DA's offices in New
> York City. I make charging decisions like this on a daily basis.

Larry, the Xeton troll doesn't know anything about law, doesn't
respond to logic, doesn't make logical arguments, etc. Give up
now and plonk it.

FloydR