NeutralThinking Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 So what is your interest here then? My interest here is that as with most issues in south africa the same thing always happens. People enrage and blow something out of proportion. All kinds of hate speech happens. If you look at this threads Title and then read this thread you hardly see any constructive criticism towards the topic that was pointed out in that Title. A solution to a problem So far most of this thread has nothing to add that helps to solve a problem. Instead everyone just want to give their opinion of "OMG HE KILLED SOMEONE, HES SCUM< BLAH BLAH. HE SHOULD DIE" ... (example) ... no one wants to help solve the problem but everyone wants to give their 2 cents and go on about what a monster this guy is.
NeutralThinking Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 Indeed we do read and it comes across that you have some reason to defend him! To put into perspective...the cyclist killed in Kalk Bay by the SOBER bus driver who didn't flee the scene should now be charged with the same crime as someone who decided to kill someone and flee (you mentioned Involuntary manslaughter?) because he was drunk? They are 2 totally different 'crimes' and should def not be treated the same! The drunken murdering of drivers on the road doesn't only apply to cycling but cars as well. If you make the decision to drink, get drunk, drive, and ultimately kill someone then you should be charged with murder, plain and simple! God your logic is amazing Go read up the meaning of MURDER... Actually wait dont bother. Go ride your bike. Be happy and just forget i said anything. No point in trying to make you understand the context of that post
NeutralThinking Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 (edited) Seriously dude did you really think you gonna come onto this forum and try and be objective about anything !! The HUB aka "cycle GODS " have already made a decision and thats it !! Don't try and use logic or anything else to sway them !! The more you try and debate with them the more stupid they get ! yeah. In other words the government in this country isn't the issue but the way the majority of people think? Anyway as to the relevance of the government. Its because of the government that laws aren't inforced properly and things like this happen so easily.. Edited November 21, 2012 by NeutralThinking
NeutralThinking Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 I am wondering if this is perhaps the lawyer trying to set a scenario of some point to use in either the criminals defense or in mitigation of sentencing the criminal should justice actually be served in this situation. Yeah and we have pink flying pigs all over the place... Get real...
IndianRoadie Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 @Neutral thinking your brain is clearly in neutral and does have any drive function! i was in three car accidents and in all three i was hit by a drunk driver, i have no sympathy for these A$$es further i have a few things to say to you ! 1. for someone to come out of the blue, onto an old post an suddenly have this huge opinion, clearly means you have a relation to the drunken fool or you are the fool himself! 2. i just took up cycling and reading this makes me very scared, its not the part that someone got knocked down, its the part that someone got knocked down by a drunk driver and there is still this ghost trying to defend it !!!! 3. if it was a loved one in relation to you that was killed would you be able to still have the same Neutral thinking ??? i really dont think so. 4. you have some Eiers to come onto this forum il give you that , but over the net we all are extremly well mastered in Keyboard Kung FUi dont wish ill on people but i think you should take up cycling ....
cajohnston Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 God your logic is amazing Go read up the meaning of MURDER... Actually wait dont bother. Go ride your bike. Be happy and just forget i said anything. No point in trying to make you understand the context of that post How else do you then propose getting people to not drink and drive if there is a lesser sentence for someone killing another because they were drunk and driving? slowpoke 1
dirtrider Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 I have been in 5 car accidents and all the drivers where sober !!! Bloody sober drivers ? Is this argument gonna fly ? Maybe if I mentioned they all woman ?
NeutralThinking Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 @Neutral thinking your brain is clearly in neutral and does have any drive function! i was in three car accidents and in all three i was hit by a drunk driver, i have no sympathy for these A$$es further i have a few things to say to you ! 1. for someone to come out of the blue, onto an old post an suddenly have this huge opinion, clearly means you have a relation to the drunken fool or you are the fool himself! 2. i just took up cycling and reading this makes me very scared, its not the part that someone got knocked down, its the part that someone got knocked down by a drunk driver and there is still this ghost trying to defend it !!!! 3. if it was a loved one in relation to you that was killed would you be able to still have the same Neutral thinking ??? i really dont think so. 4. you have some Eiers to come onto this forum il give you that , but over the net we all are extremly well mastered in Keyboard Kung FUi dont wish ill on people but i think you should take up cycling .... A friend of mine phoned me a night or two after that happened and My initial response was. Hopefully Andre learns his damn lesson now. This is exactly what im talking about. You have been in accidents, Your emotional state affects your way of thinking when reading my post. You have a biased opinion out of personal experience. I did not defend Andre although it might seem that way. The topic was blown out of proportion and still is just based on your response. Well done. Its like Zuma and his million of wives. Everyone reacts with " WTF REALLY?" but nobody actually wants to do anything about it. Same with this thread. What answers or suggestion do you have to actually solve the problem of Drunk driving ? Isnt that what the this threads topic is?
Jigghead Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 (edited) Omg. I am referring to when this happened. you mentioning the emotional state of the family has no bearing on the point i was making. DO YOU PEOPLE READ? I said he has to pay for his actions. I was only giving perspective on those actions and the situation. If I discharged a firearm into the air and the bullet, upon landing killed someone, I would be charged with murder, not culpable homicide. So, if I get into a car, no less deadly under the right circumstances than a firearm, and handle it irresponsibly should I not be held to the same level of accountability? As you mentioned in your initial post, drunk driving is a serious problem in South Africa, everyone is aware that booze mixed with cars kills. Fortunately Darwin often sees to it that the drunk drivers kill themselves, the problem is sometimes they're not alone. The only way to curb this irresponsible behavior is to ensure that the consequences are dire for those transgressors. Boohoo that this idiot's family now have to deal with the pain and heartache of seeing their little misguided son being dragged through the courts and press. Boohoo that they now have a chunky legal bill to fund. Boohoo that this idiot should be given the chance to right his wrongs. This guy as misguided as he may have been, unless he was retarded, knew that driving whilst drunk was wrong and did it anyway. His friends probably also new he was drunk, and let him drive. This cyclist, got up early one morning to go and get some exercise, and yes believe it or not have some fun, left his family in their beds and never returned and you have the nerve to suggest that cyclists, most of whom ride within the law, should not be allowed to ride on some roads? What type of an idiot are you? Because w~nkers like this cannot control themselves after a few drinks, us law abiding citizens should be relegated to little cycle parks for our own safety? FU man (apologies to the mods) I'll ride when I want and where I want and as long as I'm doing it within the law and doing it safely, I should be afforded more right to a future of any kind than idiots like Andre Gouws! Edited November 21, 2012 by Jigghead slowpoke, cajohnston, ruib and 2 others 5
NeutralThinking Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 How else do you then propose getting people to not drink and drive if there is a lesser sentence for someone killing another because they were drunk and driving? Ok. You get manslaughter and you get murder Murder in its core from a legal perspective means it was pre-meditated. You made the choice to go kill someone and did in other words manslaugter is without that pre-meditation.. So because some guy drank too much and drove he made the choice to kill someone? so its pre-meditated?
NeutralThinking Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 If I discharged a firearm into the air and the bullet, upon landing killed someone, I would be charged with murder, not culpable homicide. So, if I get into a car, no less deadly under the right circumstances than a firearm, and handle it irresponsibly should I not be held to the same level of accountability? As you mentioned in your initial post, drunk driving is a serious problem in South Africa, everyone is aware that booze mixed with cars kills. Fortunately Darwin often sees to it that the drunk drivers kill themselves, the problem is sometimes they're not alone. The only way to curb this irresponsible behavior is to ensure that the consequences are dire for those transgressors. Boohoo that this idiot's family now have to deal with the pain and heartache of seeing their little misguided son being dragged through the courts and press. Boohoo that they now have a chunky legal bill to fund. Boohoo that this idiot should be given the chance to right his wrongs. This guy as misguided as he may have been, unless he was retarded, knew that driving whilst drunk was wrong and did it anyway. His friends probably also new he was drunk, and let him drive. This cyclist, got up early one morning to go and get some exercise, and yes believe it or not have some fun, left his family in their beds and never returned and you have the nerve to suggest that cyclists, most of whom ride within the law, should not be allowed to ride on some roads? What type of an idiot are you? Because w~nkers like this cannot control themselves after a few drinks, us law abiding citizens should be relegated to little cycle parks for our own safety? FU man (apologies to the mods) I'll ride when I want and where I want and as long as I'm doing it within the law and doing it safely, I should be afforded more right to life of any kind than idiots like Andre Gouws! lol ok. you obviously didnt get what my point was there. I gave options to solve a problem. I personally do not believe that cyclists have to be restricted to parks. This entire thread lacks rational thinking... And i guess i should start thinking rationally and stop replying to people with tunnel vision
IndianRoadie Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 A friend of mine phoned me a night or two after that happened and My initial response was. Hopefully Andre learns his damn lesson now. This is exactly what im talking about. You have been in accidents, Your emotional state affects your way of thinking when reading my post. You have a biased opinion out of personal experience. I did not defend Andre although it might seem that way. The topic was blown out of proportion and still is just based on your response. Well done. Its like Zuma and his million of wives. Everyone reacts with " WTF REALLY?" but nobody actually wants to do anything about it. Same with this thread. What answers or suggestion do you have to actually solve the problem of Drunk driving ? Isnt that what the this threads topic is? i honestly think drunk drivers should be hung from a light pole( not by their neck) with a big sign on them saying " i am looser " but that wont happen !! so next best thing they should be held accountable, they should realise the seriousness of their actions and they should be charged with Murder( if they killed someone) !!! there are enough campaigns about not drinking and driving, there has been enough deaths. you saying im being biased im saying i am speaking out of experience !!! if this guy is charged with murder sent to prison and bum raped im pretty sure his friends would NOT drink and drive !
Jigghead Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 lol ok. you obviously didnt get what my point was there. I gave options to solve a problem. I personally do not believe that cyclists have to be restricted to parks. This entire thread lacks rational thinking... And i guess i should start thinking rationally and stop replying to people with tunnel vision The problem is not cyclists but rather the people who disregard them as legal road users. Don't suggest restricting cycling if the problem is drunk and incompetent drivers. slowpoke 1
fabes Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 Mr "neutral" thinking lets see how neutral you are. You have posted your version of what is fair for Mr Gouws now please have a look and post your opinion on how Clems' family should look at this whole situation and state what you think is fair for them to be going thru in this situation I don't think anybody is over reacting. Yes if the cyclist was pushed off the road and got up and cycled home and all these remarks were made then yes these statements would be over reacting but sadly a life has been lost Lastly seeing as you have joined a cycling forum post a pic of your bike Gravity and ruib 2
cajohnston Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 Ok. You get manslaughter and you get murder Murder in its core from a legal perspective means it was pre-meditated. You made the choice to go kill someone and did in other words manslaugter is without that pre-meditation.. So because some guy drank too much and drove he made the choice to kill someone? so its pre-meditated? This is exactly what everyone is saying. We know the difference and that one is pre-meditated and the other not. The argument is that you KNOW what can happen if you drink and drive and by making the DECISION to follow through with that action could ultimately lead to the death of someone else, which should then be seen as the your decision to kill someone knowing that it could happen. slowpoke 1
fabes Posted November 21, 2012 Posted November 21, 2012 And I also do not believe he fled the seen out of fear but instead fled to try avoid trouble ruib and Jigghead 2
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now