Tiger Woods Injured In Car Accident

[Thumpalumpacus]

Has Woods had his driver's license suspended?   I'm betting the answer is no. Anybody?

As noted above, black-box data cannot be used as evidence in traffic cases in California, so for a short answer, probably not.

[TheGentlemanBastard]

I have to disagree with this line of thinking.  One's wealth—or lack of—should not alter the imposition of
financial penalties for breaking the law, one way or the other.  You're notion seems to be that if you're very
wealthy, then there's no point in fining or jailing you solely because  of this wealth.    Which is absurd.

You can disagree with that strawman all you like. I'm referring to this case, at this time, and the limits of the current laws. I'd love to see fines put in place that are punitive to all while remaining fair to all, like the day-fine mentioned earlier. Also, had Woods walked away, I'd be yelling for fines as well. My point is that in this case, the fine do absolutely fuck-all except express vindictiveness. It's not about whether he's rich, but that fines, especially within the limits of current law, will not teach him a single fucking thing at this point that losing his career hasn't.

[SYZ]

I have to disagree with this line of thinking.  One's wealth—or lack of—should not alter the imposition of
financial penalties for breaking the law, one way or the other.  You're notion seems to be that if you're very
wealthy, then there's no point in fining or jailing you solely because  of this wealth.    Which is absurd.

...My point is that in this case, the fine do absolutely fuck-all except express vindictiveness. It's not about whether he's rich, but that fines, especially within the limits of current law, will not teach him a single fucking thing at this point that losing his career hasn't.

You missed my point about a fine's deterrent effect (hopefully!) on other drivers who may consider
speeding as being perfectly okay.  That someone walks away scot-free after driving at TWICE the
posted speed limit sends all the wrong messages.  Fines have nothing to do with any "vindictiveness"
by the state; it's simply a matter of applying the law fairly to all  individuals, regardless of their
status in society.

[Vera]

What utter crap! Since when is people being held accountable for breaking the LAW, vindictiveness? Oh, because it's a useless celebrity, hence - we must be jealous or something?

Oh, but he got hurt so he's been "punished" enough? So if someone attempts to hold up a place and gets shot and badly wounded in the process, they won't be prosecuted because they "didn't walk away"?

Why even have laws and rules, eh?

It is NOT about this entitled, arrogant jerk. It's about making clear that speeding like this is not acceptable. Not wait until a jerk like this actually kills someone.

[Dancefortwo]

I have to disagree with this line of thinking.  One's wealth—or lack of—should not alter the imposition of
financial penalties for breaking the law, one way or the other.  You're notion seems to be that if you're very
wealthy, then there's no point in fining or jailing you solely because  of this wealth.    Which is absurd.

...My point is that in this case, the fine do absolutely fuck-all except express vindictiveness. It's not about whether he's rich, but that fines, especially within the limits of current law, will not teach him a single fucking thing at this point that losing his career hasn't.

You missed my point about a fine's deterrent effect (hopefully!) on other drivers who may consider
speeding as being perfectly okay.  That someone walks away scot-free after driving at TWICE the
posted speed limit sends all the wrong messages.  Fines have nothing to do with any "vindictiveness"
by the state; it's simply a matter of applying the law fairly to all  individuals, regardless of their
status in society.

One warm summer's night at about 1:30 in the morning I was driving home from a formal party.  I was dressed to the nines and had a rather short skirt on with a low cut blouse, drop earrings and high heeled shoes.  I was going about 25 miles over the speed limit because the cross town freeway was totally empty and I just wanted to get home.  I was stopped by two police officers.  One of the guys got out of his car with his little book in hand to give me a ticket but I carefully arranged my hair and blouse to expose just a wee bit more decolletage and I smiled at him cheerfully and apologized for going so fast.  We talked for a minute.  He asked me where I had been and where I was going and he seemed to be satisified with my answers and told me to slow down.  "Sure officer."        

And that's how you get out of a speeding ticket when you're a white 22 year old female in the United States of America.

[TheGentlemanBastard]

I have to disagree with this line of thinking.  One's wealth—or lack of—should not alter the imposition of
financial penalties for breaking the law, one way or the other.  You're notion seems to be that if you're very
wealthy, then there's no point in fining or jailing you solely because  of this wealth.    Which is absurd.

...My point is that in this case, the fine do absolutely fuck-all except express vindictiveness. It's not about whether he's rich, but that fines, especially within the limits of current law, will not teach him a single fucking thing at this point that losing his career hasn't.

You missed my point about a fine's deterrent effect (hopefully!) on other drivers who may consider
speeding as being perfectly okay.  That someone walks away scot-free after driving at TWICE the
posted speed limit sends all the wrong messages.  Fines have nothing to do with any "vindictiveness"
by the state; it's simply a matter of applying the law fairly to all  individuals, regardless of their
status in society.

I didn't miss your point. Fines already have a deterrent effect on people for whom they are more than a nuisance. That's why I'm in favor of something like the day-fines. Personally, I don't think anyone's going to look at this case, see that Woods ended his own career, costing him millions, and didn't get a $1,000 fine and say "well, I guess I can be a reprehensible douche-bag too, cause he got off scot-free." Hell, I don't think anyone can look at the accident, apart from any douche-baggery and say he got away scot-free.

[TheGentlemanBastard]

What utter crap! Since when is people being held accountable for breaking the LAW, vindictiveness? Oh, because it's a useless celebrity, hence - we must be jealous or something?

Oh, but he got hurt so he's been "punished" enough? So if someone attempts to hold up a place and gets shot and badly wounded in the process, they won't be prosecuted because they "didn't walk away"?

Why even have laws and rules, eh?

It is NOT about this entitled, arrogant jerk. It's about making clear that speeding like this is not acceptable. Not wait until a jerk like this actually kills someone.

I can see you're all triggered, which is nothing new. Come back when you want to have a reasonable discussion and not a hissy fit.

[SYZ]

What utter crap! Since when is people being held accountable for breaking the LAW, vindictiveness? Oh, because it's a useless celebrity, hence - we must be jealous or something?

Oh, but he got hurt so he's been "punished" enough? So if someone attempts to hold up a place and gets shot and badly wounded in the process, they won't be prosecuted because they "didn't walk away"?

Why even have laws and rules, eh?

It is NOT about this entitled, arrogant jerk. It's about making clear that speeding like this is not acceptable. Not wait until a jerk like this actually kills someone.

I can see you're all triggered, which is nothing new. Come back when you want to have a reasonable discussion and not a hissy fit.

This is an unfair comment, and also smacks of misogyny.  If claiming someone—particularly a female—is
having a "hissy fit" is really the best you can offer as  a debating point, then you've fallen over at the starting
line.  Sorry.  On the whole, I agree with Vera's point of view.  Our road laws are there for a purpose, in fact
more than one, and for Woods to escape even the mildest of condemnation and/or penalties after driving at
TWICE the posted speed limit is legally unconscionable.  It seems you've failed to comprehend the seriousness
of Woods' driving misdemeanour completely.

[And please don't tell other people what they can do or shouldn't do—it's called "memberating".]

[TheGentlemanBastard]

What utter crap! Since when is people being held accountable for breaking the LAW, vindictiveness? Oh, because it's a useless celebrity, hence - we must be jealous or something?

Oh, but he got hurt so he's been "punished" enough? So if someone attempts to hold up a place and gets shot and badly wounded in the process, they won't be prosecuted because they "didn't walk away"?

Why even have laws and rules, eh?

It is NOT about this entitled, arrogant jerk. It's about making clear that speeding like this is not acceptable. Not wait until a jerk like this actually kills someone.

I can see you're all triggered, which is nothing new. Come back when you want to have a reasonable discussion and not a hissy fit.

This is an unfair comment, and also smacks of misogyny.  If claiming someone—particularly a female—is
having a "hissy fit" is really the best you can offer as  a debating point, then you've fallen over at the starting
line.  Sorry.  On the whole, I agree with Vera's point of view.  Our road laws are there for a purpose, in fact
more than one, and for Woods to escape even the mildest of condemnation and/or penalties after driving at
TWICE the posted speed limit is legally unconscionable.  It seems you've failed to comprehend the seriousness
of Woods' driving misdemeanour completely.

[And please don't tell other people what they can do or shouldn't do—it's called "memberating".]

Tell you what SYZ, you can have the last word, especially if the only thing you've taken from our conversation is that I think the law doesn't apply to the rich. It seems we're just talking past each other and I just don't give enough of a shit about Tiger Woods or his misadventures..

As to the hissy fit comment, had you come at me with the same tone Vera did, I'd have accused you of having one as well. You want to read more than there is into that, that's up to you.

[Vera]

https://image.ibb.co/iZnGF6/Eye_Roll.gif[/img]

Wow, triggered. The "accusation" of the truly desperate. Am I also woke and a SJW? Or is it just that time of the month?

Come back when *you* have anything worth saying. I won't be holding my breath though

[TheGentlemanBastard]

https://image.ibb.co/iZnGF6/Eye_Roll.gif[/img]

Wow, triggered. The "accusation" of the truly desperate. Am I also woke and a SJW? Or is it just that time of the month?

Come back when *you* have anything worth saying. I won't be holding my breath though

You've got a man you don't know convicted of a crime you can't prove without all the evidence and you're only responses to me are to completely misrepresent my arguments while pitching a fit then pitching another. Yeah, I'd say triggered fits perfectly. But, I'll let you win the argument. You're hardly worth arguing with.

[mordant]

Has Woods had his driver's license suspended?   I'm betting the answer is no. Anybody?

As noted above, black-box data cannot be used as evidence in traffic cases in California, so for a short answer, probably not.

In addition, Woods is a Florida resident with, doubtless, a Florida driver's license. I don't know how such matters work across state borders but I would assume it's up to Florida to revoke Wood's license for something that didn't happen in Florida. Probably not likely.

[Vera]

Let me put this – again – in terms that even the simplest-minded can understand.

The purpose of laws is not punishment or revenge (not in any civilised society anyway); the purpose of laws is (among several others) to prevent and protect society and its members. Which includes setting up systems that discourage the largest amount of people from breaking rules and laws.

In the case of infractions such as speeding, drunk driving, not wearing a mask during a pandemic, even littering, that includes fines, revoking of driver’s licences, community service, probation, etc.

Most people tend to think they’re better drivers (among other things) than other people so many, especially those already prone to such irresponsible speeding, would read about such an accident and think “Nah, this can never happen to me. I’m a much better driver than that schmuck Woods” and proceed to disregard speeding limits, risking their lives and, much more importantly, the lives of others.

The thought that they might be fined a substantial amount or lose their licence for, say a year, might and will give quite a few people pause. Around New Year’s Eve in Rio, where vast crowds gather on Copacabana beach, this year they announced they’d be fining people 5000 reais for going there. Now, 5000 reais is a huge amount for the vast majority of Brazilians. Would they even have fined anyone? I’m not sure. But the mere thought that you might be fined a rather hefty sum is certainly going to discourage quite a few people who would otherwise have said “screw the rules and the pandemic. I want to party” (of course, there were other measures taken to prevent the gathering of crowds.)

Will it stop everyone from ever committing a infraction of any sort? Of course not. Will it discourage people who would otherwise be breaking all sorts of rules, knowing that there are no consequences? Most certainly.

And yes, this also mean that high-profile cases can be made an example of. Not an example in the sense of “let’s tar and feather him and drag him through the streets so that all the vindictive villagers can spit at him”, but an example that system works – for everyone – and that breaking rules and laws has consequences

It doesn’t matter one tiny bit whether he smashed his spine or sprained his pinky. It doesn’t matter one tiny bit whether he is a millionaire and won’t even feel a fine. The point isn't – and never was – to punish him.

Now, should I try and explain it again, using sentences with no more than five words and words with no more than two syllables?

(Interestingly enough: “A vast majority of the literature on illusory superiority originates from studies on participants in the United States. However, research that only investigates the effects in one specific population is severely limited as this may not be a true representation of human psychology. More recent research investigating self-esteem in other countries suggests that illusory superiority depends on culture. Some studies indicate that East Asians tend to underestimate their own abilities in order to improve themselves and get along with others.” Make of that what you will.)

[Thumpalumpacus]

At least you found a way to feel superior today!

[airportkid]

At least you found a way to feel superior today!

Jesus.  Her post (if that was the post that was in reaction to) may have had a patronizing tone - but so what?  Nobody was attacked or insulted.  To come back with snark like that IS an attack, to what purpose?

If I've misread the exchange I retract the outburst.

[GenesisNemesis]

At least you found a way to feel superior today!

Jesus.  Her post (if that was the post that was in reaction to) may have had a patronizing tone - but so what?  Nobody was attacked or insulted.  To come back with snark like that IS an attack, to what purpose?

If I've misread the exchange I retract the outburst.

And personally, as someone who's had a family member and a high school friend die in separate car accidents, I'm not much a fan of speeders. 

[jerry mcmasters]

[Thumpalumpacus]

At least you found a way to feel superior today!

Jesus.  Her post (if that was the post that was in reaction to) may have had a patronizing tone - but so what?  Nobody was attacked or insulted.  To come back with snark like that IS an attack, to what purpose?

If I've misread the exchange I retract the outburst.

She's got a history of making broad swipes like this, and we've gone 'round about it before.

Sorry if you don't like my reply, but I'm not sorry I made it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

And personally, as someone who's had a family member and a high school friend die in separate car accidents, I'm not much a fan of speeders.

I don't think anyone here is defending speeding. I know I'm not. I'm explaining why a conviction may not be obtained.

[GenesisNemesis]

And personally, as someone who's had a family member and a high school friend die in separate car accidents, I'm not much a fan of speeders.

I don't think anyone here is defending speeding. I know I'm not. I'm explaining why a conviction may not be obtained.

Fair enough.