this guy was driving and he was drunk and he was driving 70 mph in a 45mph zone but he says the breakes didnt work what do u think?
2006-09-24 06:37:54 · 26 answers · asked by Girl 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
GUILTY. you aren't supposed to drink and drive, plus he was speeding. It doesn't matter about the brakes, he's GUILTY
2006-09-24 06:39:15 · answer #1 · answered by Elizabeth L 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
GUILTY - He made a decision to load the gun then point it aimlessly in the wrong direction - He consciencely decided to drink - got loaded drunk and, at the point a drunk gets behind the wheel of a car, he is aimlessly putting anyone else on the road in danger and threatening life - including himself.
If he had been sober and the brakes didn't work, I'm sure he would have realized it before he decided to speed. We all know the law and if we brake the law; it makes us guilty through negligence.
2006-09-24 13:52:00 · answer #2 · answered by whiskercreek 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Guilty! Any case of drunk driving is such a level of irrisponsibility that it overrides any other cause of an accident in my opinion. Even if the brakes didn't work if the man had been sober he could have taken other measures to avoid the accident, such as avasive steering, pulling the e-brake while pushing the release button, running his vehicle into something soft to slow it down...he is guilty. No questions asked!!
2006-09-24 13:41:54 · answer #3 · answered by rastapunker 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First the man was guilty for driving his car after he had been drinking.Then he was speeding doing 70mph in a 45mph speed zone.Last but surely not least is the fact that he killed an innocent person.So he is guilty of all three things.
2006-09-24 14:27:48 · answer #4 · answered by DreamWeaver 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Guilty. He should never have stepped into the car in the first place. That's the law. That's what has been ingrained in our heads for God knows how long with "dont drink and drive", "handover the keys" and all those MAAD commercials. You would have to be foolish to see all tohse and ignore all common sense....unless he had a deathwish. If he got a ride he wouldn't have been able to use the faulty car, so problem avoided.
2006-09-24 13:41:23 · answer #5 · answered by 1 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
honestly I wouldn't be a passenger in his car. Although I think he is guilty 'cause when you drive you shouldn't drink but I also think you shouldn't let a drunk drive. So didn't the passenger have some responsibility?
2006-09-24 13:46:20 · answer #6 · answered by AJK 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is a hard question. I do believe that when the driver went out he had no intetions of hurting anyone. I think some responsability falls on the passenger for agreeing to take the ride. Unfortunatly the result is what it is. Drinking and driving does not mix. But to blame it soley on one person is not fair.
2006-09-24 13:47:07 · answer #7 · answered by so sick of being broke 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
So guilty! Anyone that gets in a car drunk and kills someone is guilty. Period. Brakes, no brakes. Speeding or not. Guilty.
2006-09-24 13:44:21 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he was drunk so what good does he know? no offense but still...and there are signs every where: DON'T DRIVE DRUNK!!! So a little common sense: If You Are Going Somewhere And Gonna End Up Drunk Get Someone Responsible To Drive You There And Back...ya know?
2006-09-24 13:44:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
First, you should never drive drunk. You are responsible if you drive drunk and hurt someone. Drinking impairs your motor skills and your decision. Just common sense.
2006-09-24 13:40:40 · answer #10 · answered by Thot77 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Either way i don't care what happened to cause him crash. He was drunk. He shouldn't have been driving, he had the life of another human with-in his hands.
He deserves whatever punishment he gets!
Period!
2006-09-24 13:39:45 · answer #11 · answered by digitaldancer22 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋