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

Hi. This is the meow-send program at usenet. I'm afraid I wasn't able
to deliver any clue to the following address: laura bush - VEHICULAR
HOMICIDE >
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.


>On 3 Aug 2006 22:13:57 -0700, "gpsman" > wrote:
>
>>laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote: <brevity snip/groups adjusted>
>>> 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.
>>
>>Obviously you never read your own posts.
>>
>>> Of course accidents, by their
>>> very nature, can be prevented.
>>
>>I'll give you one, half right. Accidents can and do occur but crashes
>>are, by far, most often the result of human error.
>>
>
>Problem is that some people have the idiotic idea that if they're
>driving 100 mph and lose control and crash into another car, then
>that's an "accident" because they weren't actually trying to do it.
>As i've said before it's like some nut throwing a bomb in a restaurant
>and killing someone and then saying it was an accident cause he wasn't
>really aiming at the victim.

There's a small difference there, retardo. Throwing a bomb into a
restaurant isn't a normal every day activity.

Looking forward to going back to school? Say hello to your fourth
grade teacher for us.


---

"Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law? Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?" ~ Senator Ted Kennedy, 1973

--

El Pollo Loco (Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend) demonstrates it's complete gullibility, stupidity, and state of delusion when it falls for an April Fool's joke, hook, line, and sinker:

> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...6999983?hl=en&

Ragnar wrote:
> Gods, you're dumb. Its a rather obvious April Fool's joke. And you're
> the Fool.

This is no joke.

Hi. This is the meow-send program at usenet. I'm afraid I wasn't able
to deliver any clue to the following address: "gpsman"
>
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.


>Alan Baker wrote: <brevity snip/groups adjusted>
>
>> The most important factor in preventing traffic accidents is not speed,
>> it is driver awareness.
>
>How could they be seperated? Slower velocities offer great advantages
>of avoiding collisions; shorter braking distances, just to mention one.

Attentive, focused driving reduces the need for shorter braking
distances.

>> The leading cause of accidents is not speed, it
>> is failure to yield the right of way
>
>How can velocity be excluded from that equation?

You're thinking about the result of the equation, not the factors
therein.

>> 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.
>
>Surely you have a cite?
>
>Has it ever occured to you that speeding is the most common offense...
>therefore speeding might be the obsession of the masses first, thus
>enciting LE's "obsessive focus".
>
>It's always best to first search one's self for errors of behavior when
>that behavior conflicts with the law. It don't cost nothin'... it
>could save you some money.

I'm more interested in preserving my life than saving a few bucks.



---

"Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law? Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?" ~ Senator Ted Kennedy, 1973

--

El Pollo Loco (Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend) demonstrates it's complete gullibility, stupidity, and state of delusion when it falls for an April Fool's joke, hook, line, and sinker:

> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...6999983?hl=en&

Ragnar wrote:
> Gods, you're dumb. Its a rather obvious April Fool's joke. And you're
> the Fool.

This is no joke.

In article >,
"I-49" > wrote:

> >>
> >> If convicted, Gibson faces up to six months in jail, the district
> >> attorney's office said.
> >>
>
> CBS News spoke w/ a lawyer last night who said Gibson will probably NOT
> serve jail time because of his celebrity status. Instead, he'll simply pay a
> large fine and be on his way.

No, he probably will not serve jail time because most first-time DWI
offenders in that jurisdiction (and in most jurisdictions) don't, under
these circumstances.

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

> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 03:25:05 GMT, Larry > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
> >
>
> >
> >> 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.
>
> That's a bad analogy and you know it since the two crimes you gave
> differ hugely in seriousness. But DUI and extreme speeding are
> comparable crimes. THINK

No, they're not. They're not even close in terms of seriousness.

In New York, for example, DWI, depending on the circumstances, could be
a misdemeanor or felony punishable by as little as a fine and as much as
7 years in jail. Speeding is not even a criminal offense.

Don't let reality get in the way of your arguments!

In article > ,
(Matthew Russotto) wrote:

> In article >,
> Larry > wrote:
> >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.
>
> You're an Assistant District Attorney and you've never heard of the
> practice of "shotgun prosecution"? That is, the practice of charging
> people with anything you can thing of hoping at least one of the
> charges will stick, or hoping you can force them to plead because they
> don't have the resources to defend against them all?

Never heard of it, never engaged in it, don't know any colleague of mine
who did, and it sounds like an extreme waste of time to me.

Besides, the majority of defendants have public defenders, so getting
into a battle of resources isn't relevant.

On 4 Aug 2006 06:59:43 -0700, "Larry Bud" >
wrote:

>

>
>When was Mel convicted of doing 87 in a 45?

Nobody said he was, you idiot. But the cops said they pulled him over
for 87 in a 45 and then didn't charge him!! I wanna know why.

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:11:46 GMT, Alan Baker >
wrote:

>In article >,
> laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 06:38:40 GMT, Alan Baker >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
>> >
>>
>> >>
>> >> 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.
>> >
>> >No. They can't. They can be reduced, but never entirely eliminated.
>>
>> You stupid brainless moron. Why do you take everything so literally?
>> Would you feel better if i said 99.99999 % of highway crashes can be
>> prevented.
>
>No, because that wouldn't be true either.
>
>People don't want to have accidents. Accidents are just as dangerous to
>those whose actions cause them as to everyone else. Therefore, people
>don't do things that are obviously dangerous. The reason most people
>exceed the speed limit is that experience has taught them that it is not
>dangerous to do so.

People do things that are abviously dangerous all the time, you
numbskull. People are not rational, they are idiots. My ****ing gawd
- we got millions of americans who smoke and give themselves cancer
and millions who pig out on snickers bars and get diabetes and then
there's you faggots who give yourselves aids.

HOW CAN YOU BE SO STUPID.???

On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 04:27:38 GMT, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE
> wrote:

>On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:11:46 GMT, Alan Baker >
>wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 06:38:40 GMT, Alan Baker >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In article >,
>>> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
>>> >
>>>
>>> >>
>>> >> 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.
>>> >
>>> >No. They can't. They can be reduced, but never entirely eliminated.
>>>
>>> You stupid brainless moron. Why do you take everything so literally?
>>> Would you feel better if i said 99.99999 % of highway crashes can be
>>> prevented.
>>
>>No, because that wouldn't be true either.
>>
>>People don't want to have accidents. Accidents are just as dangerous to
>>those whose actions cause them as to everyone else. Therefore, people
>>don't do things that are obviously dangerous. The reason most people
>>exceed the speed limit is that experience has taught them that it is not
>>dangerous to do so.
>
>People do things that are abviously dangerous all the time, you
>numbskull. People are not rational, they are idiots. My ****ing gawd
>- we got millions of americans who smoke and give themselves cancer
>and millions who pig out on snickers bars and get diabetes and then
>there's you faggots who give yourselves aids.
>
>HOW CAN YOU BE SO STUPID.???

Risk is fun. Get over it.

DPH

On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 02:16:54 GMT, Larry > wrote:


>
>In New York, for example, DWI, depending on the circumstances, could be
>a misdemeanor or felony punishable by as little as a fine and as much as
>7 years in jail. Speeding is not even a criminal offense.

If that's how NY treats speeding (and i suspect you're lying) then NY
is an idiot. Everyone knows 87 in a 45 is a serious matter. THINK

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

> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:11:46 GMT, Alan Baker >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 06:38:40 GMT, Alan Baker >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article >,
> >> > laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE > wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 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.
> >> >
> >> >No. They can't. They can be reduced, but never entirely eliminated.
> >>
> >> You stupid brainless moron. Why do you take everything so literally?
> >> Would you feel better if i said 99.99999 % of highway crashes can be
> >> prevented.
> >
> >No, because that wouldn't be true either.
> >
> >People don't want to have accidents. Accidents are just as dangerous to
> >those whose actions cause them as to everyone else. Therefore, people
> >don't do things that are obviously dangerous. The reason most people
> >exceed the speed limit is that experience has taught them that it is not
> >dangerous to do so.
>
> People do things that are abviously dangerous all the time, you
> numbskull. People are not rational, they are idiots. My ****ing gawd
> - we got millions of americans who smoke and give themselves cancer
> and millions who pig out on snickers bars and get diabetes and then
> there's you faggots who give yourselves aids.
>
> HOW CAN YOU BE SO STUPID.???

I'm sorry. Your ignorance is becoming tiresome.

--
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."