A Stupid Judge

[Grenadier]

Sometimes I can't help but feel my nation is full of stupid people. Especially amongst those in power. Honestly, at times I'd be happy to build a bunker and live out my days in it cut off from my fellow American idiots.

Especially Judge William Guglietta of Rhode Island. Another one of those judges who just needs to have his head examined:

He has permanently banned 17 year old Lyle Topa for life from driving. As punishment for a car accident in which Topa and his three passengers hit a tree. One of the passengers was in a coma for weeks.

Guglietta says that Rhode Island's roads are "littered with broken dreams and broken futures" and he says it's time to get serious about dangerous driving. His intention is to send a message to the boy about reckless driving.

Instead he sends the message that American judges are idiots.

Ok, so the accident was a terrible thing. And people were hurt. And one kid was in a coma for few weeks. But nobody died! The tree probably even lived for crying out loud! All persons involved will go on to live their lives.

Does this justify banning the kid for the rest of his life from driving?!? What about the impact that will have on his life in the future? Such as how it will greatly hinder his mobility in terms of going to and from work, running errands and the like?

The kid deserves a punishment no doubt about that! But a punishment that fits the crime. Not a cruel and unusual punishment. On the upside the kid will now save a fortune since he'll never have to pay car insurance.

But this is a stupid punishment meted out by a stupid man.

If he's so keen on sending a message that reckless driving isn't going to be tolerated what does he plan to follow up with? Is he going to ban other reckless drivers for life from driving as well? Of all age groups? And what will he sentence drunken drivers to? Or idiots committing road rage? And what about the judges own driving record? He was a teen one himself. Surely at some point this buffoon has driven recklessly. It's well known that most teens aren't the safest of drivers but just as much there are adult drivers just as bad. And I'd wager 99.9 percent of all drivers have driven recklessly at least once. In the loosest definition of driving recklessly one could argue that going just a bit over the speed limit is driving recklessly. Or being distracted by changing the station on your radio.

Apparently the boy can appeal this ruling. But such a ruling never should have been made in the first place. Now, I hate kids so I don't give a damn about the kid himself. See, I'm a jerk, anything that'll make a kid unhappy is a good thing in my world. This judge's stupidity is what offends me. Not only is he stupid but he has abused his authority. This idiot deserves a stupidity award.

[Aldramelech]

Sounds OK to me. I'd string the little ******* up and whip him too. I've always wondered why if someone picks up a gun and shoots someone they get life and yet some idiot driving like a complete tool kills someone they just get a couple of years.

[Morgan Darkstar]

what were the circumstances behind the crash?

[Grenadier]

I don't know the full particulars. The reports I've seen didn't go into detail. Just that they hit a tree. So one can assume it may have been a single car accident. And one can speculate what led to that. But no other details were presented.

The litigiousness of our society here is as stupid as this judge's ruling. For example a man sued a dry cleaner for ruining his pants for millions of dollars. And the man filing the suit was a judge!

[Morgan Darkstar]

so it could have just been an accident?

[Grenadier]

Certainly an accident. What actually led up to the accident is unknown. But because the judge is going on a tear about reckless driving, and the report says it was a single car accident, then I'd say its safe to assume the teen driver was doing something unsafe. Could've been speeding in bad road conditions or texting or other dumb thing. I've been in 5 wrecks over the years and know that it doesn't take much. Just looking off to the side of the road for a second can cause an accident.

[Emerald Rose Widow]

Without more information I am hesitant to say anything, but I am sorry lifetime bans are ridiculous. I am not even a fan of life without parole or the death sentence. There should never be infinite (or close to) punishments for finite crimes, the point of a punishment system is so that the person who committed the crime can reform. Instead we focus on the punishment and not on the reformation, which is where the main problem is in my opinion.

This may or may not apply to the situation here, but still, there should never be infinite punishments, instead there should be a means to reform and better ones self. People can learn and change if you give them the means, opportunity, and support to do so. If you tell someone they are a reprobate, and that they can never better themselves, even if that is through actions or not words, they will believe you and never improve.

[lobster-overlord]

We've got the opposite end here. A 'friend' and I use that term very loosely these days with this person, was in a single car accident involving a drunk driver (as in, he was the drunk driver) and drove into a ditch and tree. He is permanently paralyzed from the waist down. Ok, so dumb### is now in a wheel chair. All well and good for his own stupidity... But he is now on disability (which means you and I are paying for him to sit at home) and he has a brand new honda element that's been decked out with all the latest handicapped features (again, you and I just paid $80K for his new truck).

So, how is that fair? I say let the judge do what he wants. If the specifics of the case, which we don't know justify it, I'm OK with it.

John M.

[Grenadier]

According to that then a person who has murdered another can expect to serve a sentence and then live out the rest of their days amongst the population. I completely disagree with that view. I support the death penalty as well as life sentences. In fact, I support harsher sentences. For example, a pedophile who has repeatedly molest one or more children should never see the light of day again. You call them finite crimes. But they're not finite. If you are a psychopath who's murdered one or more people it's likely you'll do so again. And the pain and suffering inflicted on their victim's family is most certainly not finite. Many crimes have effects beyond the victims. Such as the family. And society at large. Same with sex crimes. Those are not finite either.

I had an ex-girlfriend who was repeatedly molested by an uncle. This in turn led to the usual disorders such as PTSD. And over all it led to her becoming an alcoholic. That in turn put a burden on me and her family. She became a danger to herself and others. It's not inconceivable to think she could have driven drunk one night and took out people in another car. The results of crimes committed are never simple as being "finite." Her uncle deserves to spend the rest of his life behind bars without parole.

Reformation is nice but it doesn't work for everyone. And sometimes a person does not deserve to be reformed. The suffering they've inflicted sometimes outweighs the value of their reformation. Consider Osama Bin Laden. On his orders 1000's of lives were taken. Each of those lives had a circle of family and friends. All now affected by the loss of those lives. Multiply that by 10's of 1000's people affected by the loss of his victims. Now imagine we captured Bin Laden instead of killing him. According to your view maybe he can be reformed and his crimes were finite. And not sentenced to death or life in prison. If our world was like this it'd not be a world I want to live in. The emphasis should not be placed on the perpetrator of heinous crimes because there is the greater social good to be served. Society comes first. Dangers to society should be deal with accordingly.


Without more information I am hesitant to say anything, but I am sorry lifetime bans are ridiculous. I am not even a fan of life without parole or the death sentence. There should never be infinite (or close to) punishments for finite crimes, the point of a punishment system is so that the person who committed the crime can reform. Instead we focus on the punishment and not on the reformation, which is where the main problem is in my opinion.

This may or may not apply to the situation here, but still, there should never be infinite punishments, instead there should be a means to reform and better ones self. People can learn and change if you give them the means, opportunity, and support to do so. If you tell someone they are a reprobate, and that they can never better themselves, even if that is through actions or not words, they will believe you and never improve.

[wittdooley]

Sounds OK to me. I'd string the little ******* up and whip him too. I've always wondered why if someone picks up a gun and shoots someone they get life and yet some idiot driving like a complete tool kills someone they just get a couple of years.

But....he said no one died here.

We need to force people to re-test for their license when they hit about 60 IMO. At least dumb *** teens still have their physical and mental facilities. I live in an area with an over abundance of blue hairs. It can be scary.

[Grenadier]

Try driving in Appalachia, where the roads are bad, steep, and curvy, and lunatics whiz up and down them like madmen.

[karlthepagan]

Why wouldn't this idiot make an example of a drunk driver? I've had family friends maimed and friends of friends killed by repeat drunk driving adults.

Kids like this are usually not responsible, so in WA they cannot drive with minors in the car if there is not an adult present (some exemptions).

[Grenadier]

The girl I had my very first crush on along with a close cousin of mine were killed by a drunk driver when I was a freshman in high school. He's probably out of prison by now.

[lattd]

I think the UK government should force a retest for drivers every 25 years, the amount of times ive been close to being hit by a car while crossing a pedestrian crossing is crazy, and my pet peeve is people not indicating!

[Grenadier]

Not using turn signals is a very common thing in my area too. But they go one step beyond. They'll be wanting to turn off the road and will actually cross into the lane on whichever side the turn is on 100's of feet from the turn. Even though the road isn't marked or set up for it. So you'll be going down the highway and some guy is swerving into your lane before he makes the turn. And they also ignore no passing lanes and will pass whenever and wherever they want!

My van got totaled by two drunk rednecks in a Blazer. The section of highway I was on had three lanes. The center one being a turning lane for some homes on the side of the road. And I did everything right, including having my indicator on. I'm patiently waiting for the oncoming traffic to clear so I can make my turn. And it clears. Just as I begin turning a red streak from BEHIND me plows into my side of the van. Spun my van around in a 360 degree spin with parts flying everywhere. Hit me on my side just ahead of the door.

That Blazer came from behind. He tried passing me as I'm waiting to turn by going into the oncoming traffic! And before I made the turn I had to switch to that turning lane. And when I did I remembered checking my rearview to make sure nobody was behind me as I switched lanes. This means that Blazer was FAR behind me. He had to be going 90. So that shows these idiots were far behind me on the road and speeding for them to have caught me as I was making a legal turn.

[Joshuawesome]

I don't know the full particulars. The reports I've seen didn't go into detail. Just that they hit a tree. So one can assume it may have been a single car accident. And one can speculate what led to that. But no other details were presented.

The litigiousness of our society here is as stupid as this judge's ruling. For example a man sued a dry cleaner for ruining his pants for millions of dollars. And the man filing the suit was a judge!

Eh... I'd be hesitant to criticise the judge without knowledge about the full details of the case.

what did the kid do? was his driving not only reckless but ridiculously idotically so? how bad were the injuries? was it only a weeks-long coma?

without the full particulars it's hard to determine whether a lifetime ban is justified or not.

The kid could very well have been going at a hundred miles per hour, the wrong way down a busy highway while flipping other drivers off. It could very well be that he could have gotten many people killed and it was only through some miracle that the worst thing that happened was he put his friend into a coma. It could also very well be that lives would be saved if this numbskull never drives ever again.

Again, all speculation. We need to look at both sides of the coin, and for that we need the full details.

[Drunkencorgimaster]

Consider Osama Bin Laden. On his orders 1000's of lives were taken. Each of those lives had a circle of family and friends. All now affected by the loss of those lives. Multiply that by 10's of 1000's people affected by the loss of his victims.

32,708 people were killed in motor vehicle collisions in the USA in 2010. A lifetime licence ban for a teen is probably too severe, but I am okay with judges getting way more serious about getting psychopaths (like the rednecks who hit you) off the highways.

[eldargal]

That is simply horrific. Britain averages around three thousand a year, ten percent of the total in a population one sixth as large as yours. Even scaling it up would come to 18,000.

32,708 people were killed in motor vehicle collisions in the USA in 2010. A lifetime licence ban for a teen is probably too severe, but I am okay with judges getting way more serious about getting psychopaths (like the rednecks who hit you) off the highways.

[Grenadier]

Well, you know we have that whole "the punishment fits the crime" thing here and that pesky little "cruel and unusual" punishment thing too. Now from what I gather nobody died in this incident though one did spend time in a coma. A lifetime ban doesn't fit the crime obviously. A temporary ban perhaps. Paying restitution definitely. In the cases of those rednecks hitting me I should have gotten a new van out of it. In the case of my cousin and first crush the driver should have had at least 30 years in prison.


32,708 people were killed in motor vehicle collisions in the USA in 2010. A lifetime licence ban for a teen is probably too severe, but I am okay with judges getting way more serious about getting psychopaths (like the rednecks who hit you) off the highways.

[Necron2.0]

That is simply horrific. Britain averages around three thousand a year, ten percent of the total in a population one sixth as large as yours. Even scaling it up would come to 18,000.

The US is a car culture. We drive far more here in the States than anywhere in Europe. Zoning laws in the US generally result in people living far from where they work. As example, I drive roughly 48 miles a day to and from work, and I'd consider myself fairly typical. My daily commute starts with checking the news to see which roads are closed because someone splattered themselves. I have personally witnessed two fatal collisions in the past five years. I've seen countless other wrecks and fender benders with varying degrees of injury. I even managed to get myself splashed across the inside of my car once.

Unfortunately, our driving habits aren't really a matter of choice in many cases. Mass transit in the US is largely non-existent. What little there is generally is more of a nuisance than a help, and nowhere is the infrastructure set up to allow for it.

[Grenadier]

It made sense for America to become a car culture. Prior to the automobile most people never went very far from home. There was a time in this country your whole world was your town. Anything beyond it was something you'd dream of. A lot of people didn't really get to travel much. Of course there were the pioneers but once they settled somewhere they pretty much stayed there. The railroad made a difference as well. But ultimately, due to the nation's size and culture most people stayed very close to home.

Then along came Henry Ford and the Model T. It changed everything. Now cars were not toys for the rich. Now people could travel further from home. This meant you could go further for a job. And so we ended up with commuting. And it also meant we had our own natural tourism industry. Thanks to the car the sites and attractions America has became accessible to people. So was born the great American road trip. Something we still love here. Though it's getting more and more expensive.

The car really changed our country. To America mass transit is anathema to the spirit of our car culture. Americans always loved independence. The car in many ways is woven into that you see. If you own a car you're independent. Don't like your town? Load up the car and drive to a new one. Don't like this job? There's a better one for you 100 miles away. Bored and nothing to do? Hop in the car for a spin. Go on a weekend road trip. Hell, this is even reflected in our RV culture. What could be better than having a home you can drive?

Mass transit has its perks obviously. And is great for heavily urbanized areas. But overall it really is not an "American" thing. Still, I do like the idea of transcontinental rail travel. It must be nice to climb aboard a train and go from one end of the nation to the other.

The worst is bus travel. Be it the "government cheese" school bus or a charter bus. Long trips in a bus are always a miserable experience!

[Necron2.0]

The car really changed our country. To America mass transit is anathema to the spirit of our car culture. Americans always loved independence.

Oh, trust me. Even if mass transit were better I'd still own my car, for pretty much the exact reasons you mentioned. I'd just rather have safe, effective, economical and (above all) time convenient mass transit for my daily grind into work. I've ridden the Underground in London, it was nice how you could go pretty much anywhere in the city at a moments notice. I'd love to have something like that here.


The worst is bus travel. Be it the "government cheese" school bus or a charter bus. Long trips in a bus are always a miserable experience!

It's funny you mention it, because buses are one of the reasons why the US is a car culture. Once upon a time, every city had a trolley system, similar to what San Francisco has. General Motors and other companies bought up the trolley services so they could dismantle them and replace them with buses. Buses then became a major reason why the Interstate Highway system was developed. Naturally, all these new roads and highways meant GM (et al) could sell more cars, which has brought us to where we are now.

[Grenadier]

I've ridden one subway myself. Up in Washington D.C. I was surprised at how clean it was. And considering how they drive cars in D.C. I felt the subway was the only safe and sensible option. It was nightmarish to go anywhere up there on foot! You'd be at a crosswalk waiting for the light to tell you its safe to walk...and then almost be ran over for fools in cars ignoring the lights! They should have one that lights up and says "run for your life" on it!

And I road Disney's monorail. I guess it doesn't count though. I've been in every form of transportation except space craft. But hey that may happen one day in the future! Still, I prefer to use a car. It's funny though. I pretty much hate driving. But since I'm in command of the vehicle and I decide where it goes and when it goes and who goes in it I prefer opposed to being a passenger. I think that is why I loathe riding on a bus so much. The only thing I can control then is choosing to get on it or not.

[Mud Duck]

Just had a thought on your OP Grenadier; If the person in question is 17 years old at the time, was he charged as a minor? If so, doesn't all convictions and judgements become void (or locked up) when he hits 18 or 21 and becomes an "Adult"? So a lifetime ban on driving would only be a year or three because he was charged as a juvenile. Maybe the Judge used Lifetime Ban as a way of driving (sorry) the point home that the kid did something really stupid and should think about the cost of impaired driving. :confused:

As for intercontinental rail travel, if you don't have to get there fast, it really is a nice way to go. Good scenery, food isn't too bad, screaming kid? move to a different car, the rocking of the rails is just the thing to lull one to sleep and if that doesn't work, full bar.

[Grenadier]

I don't really know about that. Each state has its own way of handling crimes by minors. In some a minor can be treated as an adult. It's very complicated stuff. Some things get wiped off the record and other things don't. I'd assume by lifetime ban he means just that: for life.

They let kids on the rails huh? That ruins it for me. They ought to make 'em ride in the cargo compartments.