Didn't say me, I said my post. You stopped posting discussion and began arguing about my post.
He said that anyone else would have been charged with the crime. There is no point in pursuing legal claims against a 92 year old man for something this small. He wasn't arguing for the license revoking and fine. He was saying that was the absolute minimum that should be accepted.
I understood him......
Anyone else (younger) would have been charged accordingly... That's why it is absolutely reasonable to punish that old man with a milder, and for his age more appropriate punishment.
See, and that is what he said..
And right he is......My point is anyone else would've been charged. he should at the very least get his license revoked and some kind of fine. Anyone in their 20's,30's, 40's, would be charged.
If a 20, 30, 40, 50yrs old would argue "my foot got stuck", the cops would have laughed, and arrested them anyway..
Your foot stuck is no reason to mow down half a parking lot lol
Hit the emergency brakes, turn the damn engine off.. So many ways to minimize the incident... If you can't do that, you aren't fit to drive anymore.
Last edited by Wildtree; 2015-02-18 at 01:54 AM.
"The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."
Nobody is arguing that he is fit to drive. Nobody. I already said take his license away. Being charged with the crime would likely involve mandatory jail time based on the charges (reckless endangerment, hit and run, etc). A younger person would be placed in jail, and they would come out of jail and pay the fines for a while. This man would enter jail and never come out and never pay the fines, costing the state thousands of dollars. Or, they could just think for a moment and take his license.
- - - Updated - - -
Notice that I am still posting about the topic, yet you still aren't? Just sayin.
- - - Updated - - -
Whatever you gotta tell yourself
"The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."
Then he used the wrong words. You don't charge a 92 year old man with crimes that will land him in jail and there's no reason to bring up that anyone else would have been charged unless you are saying that he also should have been. The only appropriate action in this situation is to charge his insurance and revoke his license.
I don't believe I ever actually said he should be in jail. I did say that he should be fined and his license should be revoked. It's possible to give him a lesser charge or give leniency in the form of a fine and revoked license. I find his excuse to be very flimsy. "He was alarmed," yet he didn't see the need to stop after he hit the first series of cars. "His foot was stuck on the gas pedal," yet he was able to stop and put his car in reverse to hit the other cars. Then he hit that truck and from what the video shows, he kept on going.
- - - Updated - - -
he tried to flee the parking lot after he hit the first what was it 7 cars? I'm assuming he only stopped after he hit that red truck. Had he not hit that red truck, (if he even stopped after that) he probably would've kept going.
People get copped to lesser charges all the time. For example when I got into trouble back in my younger days I got into trouble and could've been charged with breaking and entering into a cabin. However when I apologized and paid for the door that my friends broke I got copped to criminal damaging and tresspassing. No jail time was served. Just had to pay restitution and be on probation for 6 months. Something similar could be done about this old man.