# Why is this an "accident".........



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Two charged in crash get bail
> Luxury cars were allegedly in street race that ended in death of Toronto taxi driver
> Jan. 31, 2006. 08:12 PM
> CANADIAN PRESS
> ...


 

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...309&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

Car or bullet.....equally dead ....criminal act.........both "launched" with no regard for others..

Let's see if it gets the "crime wave" treatment............


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Car or bullet.....equally dead ....criminal act.........both "launched" with no regard for others..
> 
> Let's see if it gets the "crime wave" treatment............


Hopefully.

If they were drunk, they could have just left the scene and gotten a lesser sentence. Hopefully Carley's law will be one of the first things to be passed in our new Parliament.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

I know where you're going with this Macdoc, you made your position quite clear in other threads.

So if this killing is equal to the killing of a 16yr old by a random shooting, then by extension, the NRA slogan..."guns don't kill people...people kill people" is true and we should not regulate and otherwise prohibit ownership of firearms. 

Seriously? Throw the book at them and the only thing they'll get to race, is cockroaches in their cells.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

kps said:


> Seriously? Throw the book at them and the only thing they'll get to race, is cockroaches in their cells.


Yep, you nailed it kps. No question. No doubt.


----------



## Makr (Jul 21, 2005)

Indeed, completely in agreeance.


----------



## CanadaRAM (Jul 24, 2005)

Three young men dead in BC last week. Wrapped a BMW around a pole racing with a Caddy SRS or something.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Firstly, agreed that the book should be thrown at these guys. Secondly, does anyone else think that there might be a better way to approach the issue in the long term? I know some communities have race tracks that the public can use. I have to think that would make a rather significant difference.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

these incidents are symptomatic of the 'me first' mentality of many of today's youth
there is no government plan that can ever teach these young drivers that 140 km / hour in a 50 km / hr zone is bad idea 

it starts with parenting, plain and simple
one way might be to make parents responsible for the actions of their children until age of majority or the child becomes emancipated
i'm sure a multi million dollar law suit would make a few parents think before giving their child the keys to a car

once the child becomes of age, they are pretty much "fully cooked" (to borrow from Judge Judy) and it's far too late to start making them into good drivers

i guess that the only method i see, that might have any effec, is for tougher licencing/testing
and that is a big "might"

this may not sound fair to the young drivers out there, but what solutions do they have?

as for access to race tracks, i don't know if that would help the problem since much of this "racing" seems to be about skirting the law as per the video game they found in one of the cars
i have a pc demo of that game and it is fun, but i would hardly extend that game into real life considering the physics of massive objects at high speed


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Agree with better training for ALL drivers...young and old.

There are probably a 'bazillion' legal, liability and insurance reasons why a public race track is not feasible. Aside from the fact that public money for such a venture would not be easily provided.


----------



## Jordan (Jul 20, 2002)

Part of the problem is some of these new and inexperienced drivers are given Powerful cars.
There was one street racing crash where they found "Need For Speed" game in the car.
In California they just started a program where if you're caught street racing, you're car gets taken away and crushed. Hits them in the pocket book. 

Oh, one more thing, there's no such thing as an accident!
All accidents are preventable!


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Last Saturday just after midnight, a 15 year old with only a learners permit took his Mom's Toyota 4-Runner to drive his girl friend home several blocks away.

On his return, he must have really booted the machine as he skidded over 60 feet before hitting a tree, about 3 feet in diameter on the opposite side of the quiet residential street. He hit the tree on the driver's door and the impact was so sever that the tree wound up in the passenger's seat. He died at the scene.

His mother and step-dad were vacationing in Mexico at the time. 

What in the hell is the matter with parents who leave a 15 year old home alone with the keys to the family vehicle?


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

I was just wondering: if the speed limit is from 90-120 km/hr on Canadian highways, why is it legal to sell cars that can do double that?

(I know this wouldn't address this particular collision, but I'm just curious.)


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> What in the hell is the matter with parents who leave a 15 year old home alone with the keys to the family vehicle?


exactly, as much as i dislike insurance companies, i hope these parents' car insurance company doesn't pay out for their, luckily, one car "accident"

after a $10,000 repair job maybe they will make sure their child doesn't have access to the family vehicle
and just wait until the kid tries to get car insurance.....
he's going to have to live at home for a long time....

"cause and effect"


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

lpkmckenna said:


> I was just wondering: if the speed limit is from 90-120 km/hr on Canadian highways, why is it legal to sell cars that can do double that?
> 
> (I know this wouldn't address this particular collision, but I'm just curious.)


the most defective part of the car is the "nut behind the wheel"

uh oh, lpkmckenna and i agree on something....


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> exactly, as much as i dislike insurance companies, i hope these parents' car insurance company doesn't pay out for their, luckily, one car "accident"
> 
> after a $10,000 repair job maybe they will make sure their child doesn't have access to the family vehicle
> and just wait until the kid tries to get car insurance.....
> ...


Um, maybe you didn't see the part about him being killed on impact?


----------



## JPL (Jan 21, 2005)

SINC you are exactly right. What the hell are parents thinking? It seems this "me first" attitude is so pervasive as to become the norm. In my youth parents lead by example which, normally, was parenting in a caring, responsible, law abiding and socially acceptable behaviour. 

Today it seems that most everyone is out for personaly gratification first and above all. Both parents IF they are together, are out working, no one home to supervise the goings on of their children or direct their activities. Shuffle em off to daycare, after school second hand quasi supervision by paid and un attached workers. 

Young offenders laws, child protection agencies, youth welfare, abuse hotline for kids etc speak volumes about our society.

This is one messed up and possibly unretrevable pendulum swing we are caught up in, and I for one am disheartened by the prospects of what we will reap form what we have sown.

If our youth is our strongest and most important natural resource, we sure have screwed the pooch on this one!

Obviously, not all kids fall into this abyss but a heck of a lot of them do, enough to make it a serious problem for them and society as a whole.

In short I hope these killers are made an example of in a constructive way and that they and their parents, as enablers, pay the price, not just in terms of incarceration but personal financial loss, not through the insurance company. Make these "kids" contribute substantially to the financial support of the deceaseds family for the rest of their lives, (take the place of the breadwinner they erased). A continuing financial obligation will be a constant reminder that indescriminate actions HAVE consequences that are far reaching and long lasting.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

lpkmckenna said:


> I was just wondering: if the speed limit is from 90-120 km/hr on Canadian highways, why is it legal to sell cars that can do double that?
> 
> (I know this wouldn't address this particular collision, but I'm just curious.)


Vehicles are made in such a manner that they have a reserve of power. While many would say don't make them to go that fast or somehow govern them so they are unable to do so are generally mistaken.

The extra power is in effect a safety valve. Think about the times you have driven and accelerated out of harms way. 

We've all done it at one time or another. Not having the ability to power ones way out of danger is a danger in itself.


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Car or bullet.....equally dead ....criminal act.........both "launched" with no regard for others..


While this is a serious crime, and should be treated as such, there is an important difference between this and a crime committed with a gun.

The street racers are doing something reckless and stupid, with tragic consequences in this case, but they didn't set out to hurt or kill anyone.

Someone using a gun intends to kill or seriously injure someone.

So even though they are both equally deadly, there is a difference in intent.


MacDoc said:


> Let's see if it gets the "crime wave" treatment............


It looks as though this problem *is* being taken seriously in other jurisdictions, for example, the folks involved in another street racing fatality were deported:

Bahadur Singh Bhalru was convicted of criminal negligence causing death in 2002 after a street-racing accident in Vancouver killed 51-year-old Irene Thorpe.

He was later deported to his native India.​source: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/01/28/1416004-cp.html


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

SINC said:


> Um, maybe you didn't see the part about him being killed on impact?


you're right i didn't see the part about him being killed
an expensive lesson for the parents


----------



## Myrddin Emrys (May 24, 2005)

Darwin Awards: The Idots with a Licence Edition.

I afraid of being a pedestrian.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Makr said:


> Indeed, completely in agreeance.


"agreeance" = a less important and different kind of crime

I'm completely in *agreement*.


----------



## Makr (Jul 21, 2005)

Yay for the grammar nazi! Thanks for that, i wasn't thinking when i posted that.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Darwin Awards: The Idots with a Licence Edition.
> 
> I afraid of being a pedestrian


and THAT would be the correct risk assessement as opposed to CRIME WAVE


----------



## trump (Dec 7, 2004)

to be completely honest, I feel sorry for the two guys that were racing (in addition to the victim mind you). I'm 18 and a car nut, so I know full well what was going through their minds when they decided to race and I can assure you that possible consequences of their actions was the last thing on their minds. I'm not justifying what they did, but just reminding people how things worked upstairs when you're 18.

I have no opinion on what should happen to them, as I have no idea really. I can picture myself in their shoes which makes me not want to see them made an example of, but at the same time they did kill somebody. However, I honestly think a track of sorts where racing can be done legally and relatively safely would be a good solution to this problem.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

I believe those exist here and there, but they must be quite expensive or remote.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

i guess i'm just showing my age, but i would never take my parents' vehicle nor race it up and down streets

my fun was scoing a touchdown or making a free throw

perhaps that is the answer

when i was in high school and university i played a few sports and the practice time plus games kept me pretty busy

i was even able to get my letter in intramural sports at university while still getting my BSc
i played hockey, football, basketball, soccer
it gave me a sense of community with my fellow players, physically fit and out of trouble (for the most part)

again, it didn't allow for a lot of time for stupidity


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Muscle cars weren't invented to be driven at the speed limit or in a responsible manner. The problem may be more prevalent now, but I suspect a large factor is that urban life is more prevalent.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

SINC said:


> The extra power is in effect a safety valve. Think about the times you have driven and accelerated out of harms way.


Can't think of a single time, actually. Hard to do that in grid-lock, really.


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> these incidents are symptomatic of the 'me first' mentality of many of today's youth
> there is no government plan that can ever teach these young drivers that 140 km / hour in a 50 km / hr zone is bad idea
> 
> it starts with parenting, plain and simple
> ...


I wondered if this topic would be brought up here. I agree with you, Macspectrum, that parenting plays a huge part, but at some point people must take responsibility for their own actions, and I would say 18 years old is certainly old enough to be held accountable, regardless of what your parents taught you (or didn't). I can't believe that at 18 people don't know they are putting others' lives needlessly at risk by barrelling down a city street at, what was it, nearly three times the maximum speed limit?


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

JPL said:


> *snip*
> In short I hope these killers are made an example of in a constructive way and that they and their parents, as enablers, pay the price, not just in terms of incarceration but personal financial loss, not through the insurance company. Make these "kids" contribute substantially to the financial support of the deceaseds family for the rest of their lives, (take the place of the breadwinner they erased). A continuing financial obligation will be a constant reminder that indescriminate actions HAVE consequences that are far reaching and long lasting.


:clap: :clap: 
I agree absolutely, JPL! All I can think of is the grieving widow, somewhere in Pakistan, whose future is gone beyond recall; and no doubt sorrowing parents and siblings somewhere as well. And over here the two twits who walked away without a scratch....


----------



## Myradon (May 13, 2005)




----------



## Wolfshead (Jul 17, 2003)

They're rich
They're from "good" families
They have "good" educations
They'll get a slap on the wrist


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

Myradon said:


> *snip* they were over the age of consent (18) and their names were not released to the news. Seems odd.


What? Sure they were. One's named Wang-Piao Dumani Ross and the other's Alexander Ryazanov, both 18.

As for their punishment, I don't know. I'm sincerely hoping whatever sentence is handed down is at least semi-meaningful and not just a slap on the wrist. There seems to be a fair amount of public outrage over this.



trump said:


> to be completely honest, I feel sorry for the two guys that were racing (in addition to the victim mind you). I'm 18 and a car nut, so I know full well what was going through their minds when they decided to race and I can assure you that possible consequences of their actions was the last thing on their minds. I'm not justifying what they did, but just reminding people how things worked upstairs when you're 18.
> 
> I have no opinion on what should happen to them, as I have no idea really. I can picture myself in their shoes which makes me not want to see them made an example of, but at the same time they did kill somebody. However, I honestly think a track of sorts where racing can be done legally and relatively safely would be a good solution to this problem.


You may be in the minority, trump. I have no sympathy at all for them or their parents. A man's life and a couple's future are gone as a result of their macho idiocy, so yes, I definitely do want to see them made an example of. Perhaps cooling their heels in jail for a few years will give them time to ponder the proper use of a vehicle. I find it hard to believe that all 18-year-olds drive like idiots, so I can't buy that argument either -- the fact that this pair just happen to fall in that grouping is nobody's fault but their own.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Myradon said:


> Now the real question. Does anyone here think two rich kids with likely influential parents are going to serve jail time for killing an immigrant. they were over the age of consent (18) and their names were not released to the news. Seems odd.


I'm not sure about the two "drivers" in this latest Ontario incident, but the vast majority of luxury car street races that seem to end in tradgedy out here ARE piloted by immigrants. Rich ones. Or their kids.

I had a whole slew of ridiculously fast cars and motorcycles in my youth. Most didn't have the handling or braking abilities of today's cars. But they did have huge horsepower.

Many of my friends also had cars like this. We worked on them ourselves in order to make them go even faster. This was the original musclecar era and street racing was EVERYWHERE.

Oddly enough, I don't recall very many fatal accidents. We mostly went out to the edge of town and did side by side drags on a straight section of quiet road...at least until the cops would come and then we'd all take off. Lots of beer was present, too.

But hardly anyone ever died. Or was even seriously hurt.

Pretty much none of us had parents that could afford expensive Mercedes or BMW's, either. They wouldn't have let us drive them anyway. That would've been STUPID. And we didn't race our musclecars in heavy traffic because that was really STUPID.

Obviously, times have changed.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Firstly, agreed that the book should be thrown at these guys. Secondly, does anyone else think that there might be a better way to approach the issue in the long term? I know some communities have race tracks that the public can use. I have to think that would make a rather significant difference.


It might make a small difference but I doubt it will make a big difference.

I ride a sportbike, which is capable of crazy fast speeds. There is one track one hour away, but you have to prep your vehicle to make it safe. That is a barrier for people to get into it. A second place people go around here is at an old airport runway. For $50 a day, you can rip around the track and you don't need to prep your bike.

It has helped slow me down on the road, but I don't see a big impact on my fellow bikers. Maybe 30 to 50 people regularly go to the track while there are probably a few thousand sportbikes in the Vancouver area. 

I view bikes as being less dangerous than cars. I have yet to hear of an accident caused by a bike that killed an innocent third party. While with cars, I hear of such accidents all the time.


----------



## CanadaRAM (Jul 24, 2005)

Vandave said:


> I view bikes as being less dangerous than cars. I have yet to hear of an accident caused by a bike that killed an innocent third party. While with cars, I hear of such accidents all the time.


But unfortunately, motorbike riders cripple and kill themselves with depressing regularity, just the nature of riding on the outside of a 2 wheeled vehicle vs. on the inside of a 4 wheeled one.

In Victoria, a motorbike rider passed a line of cars stopped for a red light , in the parking gap, and then turned back into the lane at the head of the line. Unfortunately, the lead vehicle was a large truck whose fenders and hood were taller than the rider on his bike, so he was invisible, tucked in front of the truck's grille, (unless the truck driver had happened to glance in his off-side wing mirror at the moment the bike passed him).  Killed when the truck moved on the green light.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Vandave said:


> It might make a small difference but I doubt it will make a big difference.


Thanks for the perspective, Vandave. I was just thinking of myself at that age. All I had to work with was a Suzuki Swift, so I wasn't setting any speed records. But I would have loved to race if I could have.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

"But unfortunately, motorbike riders are crippled and killed with depressing regularity, just the nature of riding on the outside of a 2 wheeled vehicle vs. on the inside of a 4 wheeled one."

Some do it to themselves (for which I have no pity), some have it done to them (always a tragedy).

Two sides of a coin...


----------



## PenguinBoy (Aug 16, 2005)

Globe and mail update on this story here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060203.wxcabbie03/BNStory/International/


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> I view bikes as being less dangerous than cars. I have yet to hear of an accident caused by a bike that killed an innocent third party. While with cars, I hear of such accidents all the time.


i'll remind myself of that next time i see a bike weave in and out of traffic on the 400

also, does the Canadian legal system allow for "wrongful death" suits?
if so, the kids and their parents should be sued
in today's day and age of "money" perhaps this is the only way these kind of people will understand


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

MacNutt said:


> I'm not sure about the two "drivers" in this latest Ontario incident, but the vast majority of luxury car street races that seem to end in tradgedy out here ARE piloted by immigrants. Rich ones. Or their kids.


obviously times haven't changed much for macnutt


----------



## jlcinc (Dec 13, 2002)

Ok, ok the reports are now "allegedly" racing. I don't know but I do believe they were racing. Most of the traffic on Mt. Pleasant at that corner is moving at about 80k even though the speed limit is 50k, and that turn is dangerous at any time. What I don't understand is that the cab turned left and that is illegal with oncoming traffic. If they were racing maybe he didn't see the cars coming toward him or maybe it was late at night and he just assumed that traffic was light and didn't pay attention. I'm not saying he was responsible for the accident but I would like to know what happened and I guess we will have to wait for the trial unless a plea bargain happens, I feel sorry for the cabbie his family and the kids. I am sure the kids will get off with a slap on the hand and will probably forgot about this in a couple of years or maybe society will get lucky and they will get jail time. I don't think it will do a thing to make other racers do anything different. I do like the idea of crushing the cars.

John


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> obviously times haven't changed much for macnutt


Tell that to the Chinese and East Indian community leaders here in Vancouver. They admit there is a big street racing problem in their immigrant communities.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Vandave said:


> Tell that to the Chinese and East Indian community leaders here in Vancouver. They admit there is a big street racing problem in their immigrant communities.


and so the right wing goose stepping marches on

does it make you fell better to identify crimes with an immigrant group?
does COPS make it into your regular tv watching routine?


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> i'll remind myself of that next time i see a bike weave in and out of traffic on the 400


You have no idea...

I have never heard of a motorcyclist being at fault for causing the death of an innocent car driver (in BC). I can find dozens of cases where the reverse is true here in BC just in this past year.

Ask any biker and they will tell you all sorts of horror stories about idiot cagers. I figure about 10 to 20% of people who currently drive, should not be on the road. Some people are simply not capable of piloting a vehicle. Yet, we hand out driver licenses like candy.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

ask most car drivers and they'll tell you horror stories of idiot bikers


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yeah a 5th generation oriental looking Canadian is still an immigrant in some minds so all those hot rice burners must be driven by "immigrants". 

update......WE ARE ALL IMMIGRANTS...whatever generation.
••

My concern is the kind of message it sends treating the instigators of this wrongful and criminal death differently than a disadvantaged kid.

It's one area where I think Canada's justice system does lean over backward, some would say too far, in trying to reduce the severity of sentencing for under 18s.

The issues range from why there are so many disadvantaged in prison due to soft drug convictions when marijuana is smoked and joked about at every level of Canadian society.
At the other end the imbalance of treatment for advantaged versus disadvantaged in cases like this especially for youth offenders.

Is justice - punishment?? revenge?? compensation?? a warning to others?? protection of society from someone likely to re-offend??

Personally except in a limited area ( hardened lifetime criminals, repeat offenders in violent crimes ie gang slayings and organized crime ) I don't see society well served by it's "heads in prison" count.

I only have to look south to see the results of that thinking.

In my mind justices know that disadvantaged kids don't get "equal" treatment.
I think they know that the system is skewed and inadequate.
They compensate for that in their own way to achieve a "balance" and get heavily critized for it.

There are 1%ers that all societies have to deal with.

These kids are not likely nor are many in our jails.
Even handed treatment leading to contributing peacable citizens should in my mind be the goal for the justice system and I think we should let the system do it's job and not react to "media circuses".

I admire the way the man's extended family and community have gathered in support.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> ask most car drivers and they'll tell you horror stories of idiot bikers


and vice versa

I've had to lay down ont he payment to avoid a truck who just didn't see me and I've seen a biker do a wheelie at 160 plus......on a lane exchange on the 401.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> and so the right wing goose stepping marches on
> 
> does it make you fell better to identify crimes with an immigrant group?
> does COPS make it into your regular tv watching routine?


Feeling good or bad has nothing to do with it. I just want to see things get better.

All communities want to see crime reduced. The first step in finding a solution is identification of the problem. If we become overly politically correct, we aren't going to accomplish anything. If people like yourself go around insinuating that people like MacNutt or myself are racist for identifying the obvious, then you are a fool.

I imagine you are aware that many of the gun deaths in Toronto are caused by immigrants from Jamaica or their second gen children. Many of these problems stem from a lack of father figures in that community.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> and vice versa
> 
> I've had to lay down ont he payment to avoid a truck who just didn't see me and I've seen a biker do a wheelie at 160 plus......on a lane exchange on the 401.


Right here in Canada...

We're not making this up...

That's just stupid on the bikers part. The only person at risk there is himself. Myself, I try to keep my wheelies under 100, within the speed limit.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> I imagine you are aware that many of the gun deaths in Toronto are caused by immigrants from Jamaica or their second gen children. Many of these problems stem from a lack of father figures in that community.


 

No insinuation needed you make your own bigotry case time and time again.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

I see MacSpec and MacDoc are in fine form today. They've already whipped out 'goose stepping' and 'bigotry' without a single slur thrown by VanDave. Note: unPC offerings, while always difficult to talk about and assess, are not slurs. 

Difference of opinion, expressed openly and without malice, isn't just harangued anymore, it's treated as fascist and racist! We've got two dirty PC-cops on this beat. Sorry to be so blunt (to put it mildly), but you two earned it today.

On topic...
jlcinc:
"What I don't understand is that the cab turned left and that is illegal with oncoming traffic. If they were racing maybe he didn't see the cars coming toward him or maybe it was late at night and he just assumed that traffic was light and didn't pay attention. I'm not saying he was responsible for the accident but I would like to know what happened and I guess we will have to wait for the trial unless a plea bargain happens, I feel sorry for the cabbie his family and the kids."

Any updates on this? There were some interesting points for clarification in here.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Well to be equally blunt you STILL can't read....or perhaps comprehension is the weak part. Not like you haven't need things spelled out before.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Well to be equally blunt you STILL can't read....or perhaps comprehension is the weak part. Not like you haven't need things spelled out before.


1) Still no hug. :love2: 

2) Perhaps you intend your posts to be read as the laughable rants they seem to be. I'm sorry I took you seriously.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Beej said:


> I see MacSpec and MacDoc are in fine form today. They've already whipped out 'goose stepping' and 'bigotry' without a single slur thrown by VanDave. Note: unPC offerings, while always difficult to talk about and assess, are not slurs.
> 
> Difference of opinion, expressed openly and without malice, isn't just harangued anymore, it's treated as fascist and racist! We've got two dirty PC-cops on this beat. Sorry to be so blunt (to put it mildly), but you two earned it today.


Thanks Beej.

For some reason, their stupid rants don't even offend me. I guess it is because I am so far from being a racist. I can't stand racism and it makes me sick. I can't help but laugh when I read their responses.

People who are recent immigrants and even second generation Canadians are distinct from other groups of people. This isn't to say that some groups are better or worse, just different. This is part and parcel of the multi-cultural society that we have. The failure to see these differences just exposes how close minded MacDoc and Macspectrum really are.

As long as they keep bringing their tasty recipes, I say keep bringing more immigrants in. They should add this to the immigration form. Tasty recipe? yes [ ] no [ ].


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Vandave: Ah, good ol' equal is not the same as identical. That and equal opportunity versus equal (read: identical) outcome are the foundations of many good political fights. Reminds me of the debate in Life of Brian (at the gladitorial match).

As an aside, I find it quite ironic that many Indian spices go so well with beef. Oh so tasty. Double-check because the recipes are tasty and even better with a dash (pound) of North Americanization...more meat, more cheese, more...

Now, with such potentially non-PC phrases floating around, I hope the PC-cops are firing up their label machine!


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Beej said:


> Vandave: Ah, good ol' equal is not the same as identical. That and equal opportunity versus equal (read: identical) outcome are the foundations of many good political fights. Reminds me of the debate in Life of Brian (at the gladitorial match).
> 
> As an aside, I find it quite ironic that many Indian spices go so well with beef. Oh so tasty. Double-check because the recipes are tasty and even better with a dash (pound) of North Americanization...more meat, more cheese, more...
> 
> Now, with such potentially non-PC phrases floating around, I hope the PC-cops are firing up their label machine!


Good movie that. Is that the part where they are eating noses? I have it on DVD but haven't seen it for some time.

Any funny that Indian food goes well with a nice Lager. The Brits are starting to consider Indian food as British food now. Makes sense. If the Italians call Spagetti their own and not Chinese, then the Brits eventually have to do it.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Vandave said:


> Is that the part where they are eating noses?


I believe so. In the scene they debate a character's right to have babies even though he can't physically have them, which is no one's fault, not even the Romans'.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

Beej said:


> I believe so. In the scene they debate a character's right to have babies even though he can't physically have them, which is no one's fault, not even the Romans'.


Yes, it is coming back now.

In one of my English courses at University we discussed the 'backlash' to political correctness. Our prof suggested it started in the 80's/90's. I countered by saying that a backlash could be seen in movies such as Life of Brian made in the 70's.


----------



## draz (Jun 13, 2005)

I myself am not racist..i just hate everyone the same. ha

Back to the topic at hand. I live 5 blocks from where the incident in quesiton took place. Now i will play a little devils advocate. Although the speed limit is 50 EVERY car that goes up Mt.Pleasant is doing 80km/h in that strech. Next the taxi turing there had no chance nor did driver to react travelling at over 140 feet per second. (its some what of a blind curve with the concrete divide and turing angle) 

And despite how innocent we all are (you mean my s#it stinks too) all young men make poor judgment decisions at that age! Be it in driving, drinking, unprotected sex, racing, throwing rocks onto the 401, flushing cherry bombs down the toilet, or getting the dog drunk.

Ok enought being the devils advocate. 

Some of the thing's i am seeing written here are a little extreme. why do they make cars that can go twice the speed limit? Because that is the result of a free society. IF they made all cars that only went 100km/h it would be like living in a communist state. And then you would also get criminals illegally modifying them to go faster and out run all others. 

Why do we make 151 proof rum, when 80 proof is more then enough? (Because we can!!)

Besides i am a connisouer of over powered vehicles. IT is nice to smash the gas at a stop light leaving a trail of smoke and the others cars long gone in your review mirror only to stop accelerating at exactly the speed limit. Is it illegal? nope. Safe? More or less. But hey thats why we buy european cars. Would i race a guy next to me in an M5 nope. 

And in terms of comparing this to shooting someone. The out come is the same but the intention/execution is totally different. TO load, cock, aim and fire a gun you obviously intend to end a life outright. To pull up next to another driver and race down a street. YOu are beign completely stupid and taking your life and the lives of those around you into your own mindless hands. But do you actually think these kids intended to kill someone? No.

Don't get me wrong drag racing up Mt. Pleasant at 140km/h deserves to get you serious jail time, let alone killing an innocent man in the process. 

The other side is more driver training, better parenting, and less powerful cars may not have any effect on poor decision making. (A civic travelling at 140km/h driven by a kid with more driver trainging would still have killled the taxi driver)

(hey some one has to play the other card)


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

Vandave said:


> Yes, it is coming back now.


Beej on a soapbox (just like a different scene in Life of Brian  ):
Sometimes observations are just observations. Subject to proof and discussion of validity, but it would take someone truly *nothing polite to say* to leap to accusations and/or innuendo of fascism and bigotry without malicious slurs in play. The comments, put forward as honest good-faith observations and without hatred are not the problem; they should be examined further to see if they are indeed true and relevant. 

The vicious responses are the problem. These are the PC bullies. We flawed individuals cannot comprehend their warped vision of reality, but can only trust in their virtue. Otherwise there will be too many targets for the bullies to swing at, and they may sprain something.

Maybe a little perspective is in order for the local PC cops and Monty Python may be the right balance of humour and insight. Either way, it's funny.

STAN:
I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me 'Loretta'.
REG:
What?!
LORETTA:
It's my right as a man.
JUDITH:
Well, why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?
LORETTA:
I want to have babies.
REG:
You want to have babies?!
*LORETTA:
It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them.
REG:
But... you can't have babies.
LORETTA:
Don't you oppress me.
REG:
I'm not oppressing you, Stan. You haven't got a womb! Where's the foetus going to gestate?! You going to keep it in a box?!
*LORETTA:
[crying]
JUDITH:
Here! I-- I've got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can't actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody's fault, not even the Romans', but that he can have the right to have babies.
FRANCIS:
Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother. Sister. Sorry.
REG:
What's the point?
FRANCIS:
What?
*REG:
What's the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he can't have babies?!
FRANCIS:
It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.
REG:
Symbolic of his struggle against reality.*


----------



## MasterBlaster (Jan 12, 2003)

.


----------



## DoNotPokeTheScreen (Jun 9, 2005)

Just because the Chinese and East Asian community "leaders" admit that street-racing is a huge problem within their cultures make those communities the sources of the problem of street-racing?

I lived in Winnipeg. Almost ALL of my caucasion friends soup up their Hondas, Dodge trucks, neons, whatever they've got and street race. Their highlight of the week is to go downtown and watch excessively modified cars roam down Protege Avenue on Sunday night. Yet not a lot of people died in Winnipeg due to street-racing. Why? Because of the small population there and YOU CAN ACTUALLY FIND QUIET STREETS OR REACH THE OUTSKIRTS OF TOWN.

I now live in Toronto. I find Toronto a BIG city. There are no out-skirts of town... it seems like. So people street-race in busy, populated areas and so people die.

I feel terrible for Tahir and his wife. Wrong place at the wrong time. Lives ruined by some kid who was having fun with his 50 thousand dollar vehicle.

I am a first generation Chinese immigrant(or second? I came with my parents), and I was a little bit offended when some of you mentioned that the root of the problem is the group of people that I am associated with...

No doubt, people of my culture are insane over cars for whatever reason, but what makes you think caucasions don't street-race?

Most of the problems have been mentioned - bad parenting, youth attitude and such. To add to that, maybe the fact that Toronto is a Metropolis could be a reason as well? I would guess that street-racing is similar to gun-violence, both become more obvious problems for big cities.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

DoNotPokeTheScreen said:


> Just because the Chinese and East Asian community "leaders" admit that street-racing is a huge problem within their cultures make those communities the sources of the problem of street-racing?


Who said it was? Your reading into things that were not stated, nor inferred. It is a bigger problem within those communities than in general. 



DoNotPokeTheScreen said:


> I feel terrible for Tahir and his wife. Wrong place at the wrong time. Lives ruined by some kid who was having fun with his 50 thousand dollar vehicle.


To me wrong place at the wrong time is getting hit by a meteor. When you drive on the road, there is an expectation that other drivers are going to drive responsibly and not street race. Driving a car at excessive speeds is clearly putting other people at significant risk. Just because the kid was having fun, in no way minimizes his actions.



DoNotPokeTheScreen said:


> I am a first generation Chinese immigrant(or second? I came with my parents), and I was a little bit offended when some of you mentioned that the root of the problem is the group of people that I am associated with...
> 
> No doubt, people of my culture are insane over cars for whatever reason, but what makes you think caucasions don't street-race?


I am sorry you are offended. I never said the root of the problem was immigrant communities. It is a bigger problem in those communities than in the larger community. Why would you assume that I think caucasians don't street race? 

You might find this interesting:

http://www.richmond-news.com/issues02/121202/news/121202nn8.html

He understands the problem and has some solutions because of it.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Beej - thanks for the reminders about Life of Brian. Watched it last night, at least until I dozed off. But that was most of the way to the end. I only missed "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" and the whole crucifiction scene.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> I never said the root of the problem was immigrant communities.


yeah, but macnutt did and you never noticed (see no evil?)


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

RevMatt said:


> Beej - thanks for the reminders about Life of Brian. Watched it last night, at least until I dozed off. But that was most of the way to the end. I only missed "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" and the whole crucifiction scene.


You're welcome. You can always start your day with the song.


----------



## DoNotPokeTheScreen (Jun 9, 2005)

Vandave said:


> Who said it was? Your reading into things that were not stated, nor inferred. It is a bigger problem within those communities than in general.


Nobody said exactly those words "THE PROBLEM ROOTS FROM THESE TWO COMMUNITIES" but that was the feeling I got when I was reading MacNutt's post.





Vandave said:


> To me wrong place at the wrong time is getting hit by a meteor. When you drive on the road, there is an expectation that other drivers are going to drive responsibly and not street race. Driving a car at excessive speeds is clearly putting other people at significant risk. Just because the kid was having fun, in no way minimizes his actions.


I was writing in sarcasm. I'll be sure to use emoticons next time.
I have absolutely no sympathy for the two kids. I wish they get a proportionately heavy sentense. Even if one of them was my kid, i'd hope he gets jailed and learn a lesson.[/quote]



Vandave said:


> I am sorry you are offended. I never said the root of the problem was immigrant communities. It is a bigger problem in those communities than in the larger community. Why would you assume that I think caucasians don't street race?


Not exactly offended, instead I should say, I'm "uncomfortable". 
No, you really did not say the root of the problem was immigrant communities.
When I first heard the news, without knowing the drivers' names and color, I thought it'd be some Asian kid behind the wheel. I was wrong.

I have to go out now, I'll keep my eye on this thread.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

it's a youth problem, NOT an immigrant problem


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> it's a youth problem, NOT an immigrant problem


Are you sure?

I guess parents have no fault in any of this then?


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Sinc, how does framing it as a youth problem rule out the responsibilities of parents?

Anyway, speaking as a GTA'er who sees all sorts of souped-up little cars (and indeed, we have rented some of them for our television series production and have therefore met and photographed their proud owners), I can assure you that all sorts of kids spanning the colour spectrum are into this past-time. I'm guessing that any kid who goes to the trouble of radically modding his little Japanese car is also going to go the extra distance and race it against his equally youthful (and seemingly immortal) competitors.

Part of the problem is just that. Try telling a 16 year old boy who's full of p!ss and vinegar that he could get himself or someone else killed with his wheels and he'll blow it off.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Max said:


> Sinc, how does framing it as a youth problem rule out the responsibilities of parents?


It doesn't, which was my point.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

SINC said:


> Are you sure?
> 
> I guess parents have no fault in any of this then?


parents and youth
i stand corrected

seems that when i was a kid parents spent more time and gave less stuff
now they spend less time and give more stuff
the results are painfully obvious

i'm glad to have moved out of toronto
me and my dirt road and forested property will do just fine...


----------



## DoNotPokeTheScreen (Jun 9, 2005)

Then it's a society problem then?

Both parents have to work full-time to provide for the family.
Feel guilty for not being able to spend time with the kids, so instead they give more material to them.

Um... I think capitalism is the root of the problem...


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

DoNotPokeTheScreen said:


> Then it's a society problem then?
> 
> Both parents have to work full-time to provide for the family.
> Feel guilty for not being able to spend time with the kids, so instead they give more material to them.
> ...


Both parents have to work full-time to provide? Maybe a smaller home, public transit, fewer electronic 'goodies' and simpler decoration are a better choice. 

If we're talking about kids with hot rods, we're not generally talking about needy families. 

Parents are choosing to spend more time away from their families to earn more money to pay for family goodies and mini-mansions. The root of the problem is families choosing material comforts for the family over the family itself. They are responsible. Unloading this burden to 'society' or 'capitalism' is unloading the burden of parental choice. 'Society' is difficult to oppose (ie kids embarrassed at not having that latest ipod) but parents must make tough choices and not make their primary goal pleasing their kids and eliminating peer-based discomfort. When did so many parents start thinking that their child being mad or sad was something to be avoided at all costs?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Beej said:


> Both parents have to work full-time to provide? Maybe a smaller home, public transit, fewer electronic 'goodies' and simpler decoration are a better choice.


An excellent point. People's wants in today's society far outstrip their needs.

One can get to work as well in a Civic as a BMW. Four TVs could be replaced by one. 3,000 square feet is mostly a wasteland and 1,200 is adequate.

That winter break to sun and sand could easily be replaced by a summer vacation driving and exploring this great land with the children.

If you think about it, you can come up with hundreds more examples.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> Both parents have to work full-time to provide? Maybe a smaller home, public transit, fewer electronic 'goodies' and simpler decoration are a better choice.


yep....



> One can get to work as well in a Civic as a BMW. Four TVs could be replaced by one. 3,000 square feet is mostly a wasteland and 1,200 is adequate.
> 
> That winter break to sun and sand could easily be replaced by a summer vacation driving and exploring this great land with the children.


yep, again.



> Um... I think capitalism is the root of the problem...


and that's what the powers that be don't want to look at, let alone admit
"hardcore" runaway capitalism seems to reduce the sense of community
and impose a sense of "me first"

stalin used cheap vodka to placate the masses
runaway consumerism seems to have replaced the vodka in western cultures
either way the ruling class wins


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Two major factors in crime are poverty and the gap between rich and poor.



> The utter poverty of badly serviced neighbourhoods encourages violence. The Montreal Conference of Mayors (1989) identified " ... the basic causes of violence increase: urban growth with marginalization of the underprivileged and the isolation of groups at risk, qualitative and quantitative insufficiency of social housing programmes and community amenities, unemployment of young people". In a society that promotes consumption and competition to the detriment of sharing and solidarity, young people with no hope of employment or success look for ways to survive and to gain a sense of recognition at least from their peer group. This often leads to violence and youth gangs.


If it "takes a village" for a child it takes a society overall to address root causes....
not some simplistic nostrums.



> The involvement of city governments in crime prevention is recent. It was promoted by the Montreal(1989) and Paris (1991) Mayors' Conferences on this issue. New initiatives have been taken since in industrialized countries and in Latin America.
> 
> The initiatives of prevention are described in this issue of Habitat Debate by Claude Vézina of the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime and highlighted by the presentation of Rory Robertshaw of the ongoing crime prevention programme "Safer Cities: Greater Johannesburg". They are based on the following principles:
> 
> ...


_
http://www.unhabitat.org/HD/hdmar98/safer.htm

Cooperation and inclusion instead of condemnation and isolation. No better example than France recently of what happens if groups are disenfranchised and ghettoized.

Many of those kids were FOURTH generation French citizens.....with different names and different coloured skins 

Those that argue against supported multicutluralism and the importance of targetted social programs to diminish the "gap" for economically challenged communities take note.

TANSTAAFL.

France 2005









Los Angeles 1965







_


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

At the risk of incurring the wrath of He Who Knows All (even when He is wrong), is street racing connected with poverty or other, more common, violent crimes? 

I don't have data on family incomes of those charged with these acts, but it seems like a very different form of crime requiring different action. If the crime isn't linked to poverty, standard comprehensive approaches to address poverty-inequality-crime linkages are not likely to work. 

To use an extreme example, if someone is a corrupt inside trader on the stock market, standard 'soft' approaches to crime will do nothing because the ignition for the crime is vastly different -- nothing to lose versus much to gain is, although a fine point, an important distinction. 

If street-racing is a crime of the middle/upper income brackets, then very different action is needed than if it is a result of poverty.


----------



## NBiBooker (Apr 3, 2004)

Street racing as a result of poverty is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. 

It takes cash, oodles of cash, to soup up a car. If you're so poor you're turning to crime, odds are you don't even own a car.

No, what's needed in this case are still penalties for dangerous driving causing death. Not house arrest, as is the common sentence.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

interesting that the drivers didnt' elicit the kind of treatment and outrage if the driver(s) failed a blood alcohol test

seems that driving at 140+ km/hr and sober means that judgement was severely impaired


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

DoNotPokeTheScreen said:


> Then it's a society problem then?
> 
> Both parents have to work full-time to provide for the family.
> Feel guilty for not being able to spend time with the kids, so instead they give more material to them.
> ...


Now you are getting somewhere. The problem of youth doing stupid and risky things is as old as time itself. The problem knows no economic, social or racial boundaries. If kids get access to fast cars, it can end up killing innocent people.

I don't think capitalism is the root of the problem. It's parents who don't want to raise their kids properly. They make the choice, not capitalism.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> At the risk of incurring the wrath of He Who Knows All (even when He is wrong


Piss off - your continually trolling is puerile.

•••

The point of my post is the ATTITUDE expressed toward "immigrants"- not the specific act.

Teenage male apes and teenage male humans act irresponsibly - goes with the hormones and too often it ends in expensive or deadly consequences.
Our society and ape communities deal with it. The silverback beats up on junior or in worst cases the group exiles the trouble maker. Our choices are not so straightforward tho some would have it that way now.

Making sure there is an even hand in dealing out the consequences is responsible society building that is inclusive to cultures or neighbourhoods that may be disadvantaged.

If rich kids get off and poor kids get hammered it simply feeds the cynicism that the system is biased and instead of racing cars it ends up with burning them.

That kids will compete and race or be rowdy in other ways is a given. That there will unfortunate and sometimes deadly consequences is also a given.

Society does have a say in how evenhanded it is in dealing with the kids. Pointing to group and saying "it's them furriners" - doesn't do a damn thing and makes the situation worse.

Recognizing the common ground that all cultures and economic strata face in dealing with rambunctious and hormone driven young males and providing a system to deal with that treats all fairly does help.

It starts with attitude for everyone in society in identifying real sources of problems, not making the situation worse with bigotry implied or otherwise, and creating a system to handle the problems and consequences evenhandedly.
So it's "seen" to be fair by all.

How to achieve that "fair system" is the difficult part. 
Recognizing that it's there is not a "simple solution" SHOULD be easy.
Apparently not given the "hoary nostrum" prescriptions bandied about.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Cooperation and inclusion instead of condemnation and isolation. No better example than France recently of what happens if groups are disenfranchised and ghettoized.
> 
> Many of those kids were FOURTH generation French citizens.....with different names and different coloured skins
> 
> Those that argue against supported multicutluralism and the importance of targetted social programs to diminish the "gap" for economically challenged communities take note.


Maybe this should be the topic of another thread.

I am not sure the lack of targetted social problems is the cause of these problems (definately not for street racing). 

On the surface you might say LA would be a good example of the lack of targetted social programs being the cause of racial violence. However, I don't think that is the case with France which is quite a socialist country and many of the rioters were living off all sorts of government programs (welfare, housing, etc..).

Another example of a failed 'social state' would be England. They have had similar racial issues occur. In the case of England it wasn't limited to recent black immigrants or dark skinned people. There is huge number of disenfranchised white people who have became extremely anti-social and violent to society at large.

I don't think the causes of these problems are racial so much as economic. 

I don't think throwing money at the problem is the solution either. Look at the sad state of affairs for our native people. We have been throwing money at this issue for years and years, yet things have not improved significantly. This is not acceptable to me. We have to try different things.


----------



## Beej (Sep 10, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Piss off - your continually trolling is puerile.


Another Word from on high coupled with the required insult and more sermons. Some useful commentary, mostly just stubborn ranting. But, of course, it is we poor souls who dare to discuss who have comprehension troubles, not He. 

Thanks for your input. I give you the respect you have earned.


----------



## scootsandludes (Nov 28, 2003)

This subject has gone way off topic. 

I'm on a car forum, and this story has led to 2 discussions, and both of them didn't see a second page. It was pretty much agreed that, these guys f***ed up, and they should be punished for their crimes. The discussion of ethnic background, money or parental control or whatever was never brought up, because it had nothing to do with it. This car forum that I visit has more mature members, and very few under 20's, you can figure out what kind of car we are talking about playing around with my user name. There are the occasion where a new member will start a street racing thread, which is usually, locked, or the OP is flamed. It's not tolerated, and all race action is taken to the track. But back on topic, it was agreed upon that this incident happened because of peacocking and just being young, and inexperienced.

Like somebody else mentioned, street racers come in every ethnic variety. Yes there are a lot of ethnic community leaders who will claim responsibility for their own. But it's not just their problem, it's everybody's problem. If you went to mostly white community, you'll find street racing too. Woodbridge anybody? 

Blame the parents? For what? It's a young mans mentality, you show off your machoness, to try to get laid. Plain and simple. It working is another story. No teenager is going to listen to their parents, nor will they go on a family road trip. Or spending 'valuable' time with them. Back when I was a teenager, being seen hanging out with your parents is worst then hanging out with the school loser (unless they were buying you something), and that's what being a teenager is all about. Status. The more status you get, the better chances of you getting laid. 

These guys messed up large, don't think anybody is denying that. So why is it that we have to find every excuse to try to explain why this happened, when the obvious is right there. Young Man Stupidity. One of the media reports that there was a copy of Need for Speed in the car, and that got blamed for one of the reasons for street racing. I doubt 2 educated young men are that stupid to imitate a video game. When YMS syndrome is more likely. 

I street raced when I was teen, I also raced my bicycle when I was teen/kid, and even had foot races with the neighbourhood kids when I was really young. It's the same thing, you just want to be the fastest. It's not the fault of my parents, media, video games, movies or ethnicity for wanting to be the fastest. That's just trying to find a cop out. 

Yes, I do agree that guys should be punished to the full extent of the law, and be made an example of. I also don't think these guys will just get a slap on the wrist. This is gonna be criminal trial, and I doubt a jury will feel sorry for a couple of rich kids, no matter how good their lawyer is.

vince


----------



## Myrddin Emrys (May 24, 2005)

Two points:

1) The term 'kids' should apply since they failed the most important rule to be called an adult, recognizing responsibility for someone else due to your actions.

2) Stupidity transcends any and all ignorantly proposed colour, creed, or race opinions or perceptions.

I don't see why there is all this 'statistical' information clouding the crime at hand. The facts are that 2 kids broke the law and because of such caused someone's death. I say that the kids be given the sentence of driving taxis and the proceeds go to the widow and family dependent on the dead taxi driver.


Just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

scootsandludes said:


> Blame the parents? For what? It's a young mans mentality, you show off your machoness, to try to get laid. Plain and simple. It working is another story. No teenager is going to listen to their parents, nor will they go on a family road trip. Or spending 'valuable' time with them.


An example of what happens when your parents fail to teach proper values?


scootsandludes said:


> Back when I was a teenager, being seen hanging out with your parents is worst then hanging out with the school loser (unless they were buying you something), and that's what being a teenager is all about. Status. The more status you get, the better chances of you getting laid.


I know plenty of young fellows who could care less about status or getting laid. While the thoughts may cross their mind, they have both goals in proper perspective, thanks to caring parents, family members and teachers.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

SINC said:


> An example of what happens when your parents fail to teach proper values? I know plenty of young fellows who could care less about status or getting laid. While the thoughts may cross their mind, they have both goals in proper perspective, thanks to caring parents, family members and teachers.



Teachers?

These two went to a $40,000 per year private school...:lmao: 

This is not society's fault, this is not the parent's fault, this is not the video game's fault, this is not the extended family's fault...

This is the fault of two reckless teenagers...let's stop analyzing it. It's crystal clear.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> This is the fault of two reckless teenagers...


the level of recklessnes is attributable to the lack of parenting
i was stupid as a young man and did stupid things, but never think of racing my car on a city street in excess of 100 km/hr
hell, i didn't have a car until i was in university and it was ponticac acadian at that - hardly a racing car
40K a year for private school, eh?
sounds like mom and dad have more than enough money to pay the widow for the rest of her life

what kind of money does a full time student have that can afford a bmw?
i didn't get my first one until i was 35 yr.


----------



## scootsandludes (Nov 28, 2003)

kps said:


> This is not society's fault, this is not the parent's fault, this is not the video game's fault, this is not the extended family's fault...
> 
> This is the fault of two reckless teenagers...let's stop analyzing it. It's crystal clear.



Yes, exactly my point. Why do we keep blaming others, when it should be blamed on the perpetrators. 



Sinc said:


> I know plenty of young fellows who could care less about status or getting laid. While the thoughts may cross their mind, they have both goals in proper perspective, thanks to caring parents, family members and teachers.


What is their ultimate goal? To live in a huge house alone and become sterile? to become a priest? Are Mormons and trying to recruit others? I don't think I need to explain where I'm going with this! I don't think you should generalize that everybody should fit into your little perfect utopia of a 1950's suburban tv lifestyle. It doesn't exist! A proper upbringing that you think everybody should have can also lead to a worst case scenario too. Just like how somebody who has no advantages without a proper upbringing can also lead to a great person.

Sync, do you know the family personally? You know them so well that you can judge what kind of parents these two idiots had? How bad their life at home was? How bad their private teachers are? I really like to know how you can come to a conclusion on how well a person behaves in public is based on their upbringing.

My conclusion is whatever people do, Sync can find a link to their parents, and not the thought of "It seemed like a good idea at the time". Also Sync never makes a mistake, because he had a perfect childhood with family values.

vince


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

fine, charge the drivers with vehicular homicide


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

They were charged, according to the news story cited in the parent post, with Criminal Negligence Causing Death, which is an appropriate charge. "Vehicular Homicide" is only found on the books of some US States, and although it is an equivalent charge, typically the penalty in the US is much lighter.

In Canada it carries the same penalty as murder: life in prison. If convicted, the offender may be paroled, but they will remain on parole until they are dead.

An amendment which includes stricter penalties for "street racing" were introduced by the Liberal Government but it is likely the Tories and the NDP brought the government down before they could be passed. I will attempt to find out if the amendments were proclaimed or died on the order paper due to the election. All I can find for sure is they passed second reading, which isn't enough to be made into law.

Current Penalty:
Maximum of Life in Prison, discretionary driving prohibition (up to lifetime ban).

Proposed Amended Penalty as per Bill C-65:
Maximum Life in Prison, mandatory driving prohibition of minimum of one year; up to a maximum lifetime driving prohibition.

The driving prohibition begins after the sentence is served or the offender is paroled (there are also 3 lesser offenses covered in the same bill where driving bans could be imposed if street racing was found to be a factor).

The government amendment is based on a Private Member's bill introduced by Chuck Cadman [deceased] (MP-Surry North; Conservative Party of Canada). Mr Cadman's bill would have had a mandatory 3-year ban for a first offense but removed the option of increasing that beyond 3 years. The Liberals preferred retaining the option of up to a lifetime driving ban for a first offense.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

So the judge on this will have a pretty wide discretion if I'm reading you correctly under the current penalty.

I would think vehicular homicide might have some intent aspect and may be harder to prove. 
ie a spouse uses a vehicle to kill their partner or a criminal runs over a cop attempting to stop the vehicle. Would that be an outright murder charge in Canada???

The extended and mandatory penalties for street racing proposed might have some deterrent affect tho the Criminal Negligence seems to give the judge a very wide latitude.  Life in prison......wow

So it's up to the judge tho I'd bet any severe penalty gets appealed by expensive lawyers.

Do deals get cut in this kind of case???

•••

If I recall only a pardon way down the road if they are convicted would pull the restrictions that result from being found guilty.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

Criminal Negligence Causing Death and Impaired Driving Causing Death have always carried the same penalty as murder in Canada (minimum sentence of Life In Prison).

"Vehicular Homicide" is a form of criminal negligence and typically the statute describes the offense using those two words.

Parole eligibility varies between them, but if the offender does not admit guilt, go through treatment, take ordered counseling, cooperate with psychiatric assessments, embark on job skills training, and so on, Corrections Canada will never grant Parole (as David Milgaard will attest; he spent 13 years beyond his parole date because he refused to admit guilt, and had he not been exonerated, he'd still be in jail as long as he insisted on his innocence). Another excellent example is Colin Thatcher; he won his "faint hope clause" hearing reducing his minimum parole date to 17 years, he's a "model prisoner" and has been in minimum security for many years, but he's had every parole application refused and its long past 17 years time served. He refuses to admit guilt, so he will never be paroled. It's that simple.

Similarly, Parole can be revoked at any time for the life of the offender.

It's in stark contrast to the US, where life sentences are considered cruel and unusual punishment. Instead we get the "99 years" and the like, but Parole can be granted in many states after serving any amount of time, and the Parole Board in many states can actually alter a sentence after a judge has handed it down. There are many cases of convicted murderers in the US who have served the sentence and been discharged from parole; they are free men. That is impossible in Canada.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Thanks.
So gazing into the crystal ball......what's YOUR guess for these kids??


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

scootsandludes said:


> My conclusion is whatever people do, Sync can find a link to their parents, and not the thought of "It seemed like a good idea at the time". Also Sync never makes a mistake, because he had a perfect childhood with family values.
> 
> vince


Who's Sync?


----------



## JPL (Jan 21, 2005)

scootsandludes said:


> This subject has gone way off topic.
> 
> I'm on a car forum, and this story has led to 2 discussions, and both of them didn't see a second page. It was pretty much agreed that, these guys f***ed up, and they should be punished for their crimes. The discussion of ethnic background, money or parental control or whatever was never brought up, because it had nothing to do with it. This car forum that I visit has more mature members, and very few under 20's, you can figure out what kind of car we are talking about playing around with my user name. There are the occasion where a new member will start a street racing thread, which is usually, locked, or the OP is flamed. It's not tolerated, and all race action is taken to the track. But back on topic, it was agreed upon that this incident happened because of peacocking and just being young, and inexperienced.
> 
> ...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

JPL said:


> scootsandludes said:
> 
> 
> > As for the parents not having any responsibility in this, where do you think the fancy cars came from? Who is paying for the insurance, gas maintenance etc.? Are they not responsible in some form or other ala the bartender who serves the drunk another drink?
> ...


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

I have a friend who works for Bryant (pov attorney gen). He says that they will probably get 2 years each.
Also apparently they are recieving HUGE numbers of call from people who are upset that the two got bail.

Of course given the nature of the law they should have been granted bail. 
The most funny part of all these people second guessing the legal system and demanding no bail for them is that every day spent in jail pre-trial = 2 day served on final sentence. Given that they will serve relatively less time than the froth at the mouth set would like, you would think that early bail would be best. Early bail = more time in jail.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

early bail could also mean early departure from canada as parents obviously have much more money than brains
have the parents of drivers offered any public statement or apology to the dead man's family?


----------



## martman (May 5, 2005)

I wouldn't know about an apology but I do know that nobody expects these people to to be a real fight risk.
I think it is not fair to blame the parents for the stupididty of their children without knowing the facts. Some kids are just plain difficult. Ultimatly I have enough faith in the courts to let them handle this and I see no reason to second guess the system on this.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

martman said:


> I wouldn't know about an apology but I do know that nobody expects these people to to be a real fight risk.
> I think it is not fair to blame the parents for the stupididty of their children without knowing the facts. Some kids are just plain difficult. Ultimatly I have enough faith in the courts to let them handle this and I see no reason to second guess the system on this.


if the kids are indeed difficult, it makes it even more incomprehensible as to why the parents would buy them high end vehicles

might as well drink a mickey of scotch and get behind the wheel
such stupidity


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Tossing a rock from overpass or driving or racing a Mercedes......the cost of the item involved in the incident is hardly a factor, testosterone in young adult males goes with the species.
Irresponsible acts WILL sometimes engage laughter and sometimes tears and outrage as in this case.

In my mind only even handed and "seen to be fair" handling of the conseqences of the act is perhaps the only comfort society can derive.
Scarring an offender with mental or physical abuse just compounds problems - never resolves them.
IF the "system" can gain the respect of the offender at that crucial age then despite the damage some cautionary good is accomplished and the system is perceived to be fairminded and even handed by public and perp.

Of course it's understandable victims rarely feel penalty offsets the damage of the crime to themselves or family. That's where community justice systems that that can sometimes help heal that rift are laudable.

For me - handling the inevitable mishaps of youth - trivial or serious in a fair and seen to be even handed manner is critical. We'll see in this case.


----------



## VAM (Feb 15, 2006)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> if the kids are indeed difficult, it makes it even more incomprehensible as to why the parents would buy them high end vehicles
> 
> might as well drink a mickey of scotch and get behind the wheel
> such stupidity


Just incase you haven't been paying attention to the news, the cars belonged to the parents and the accused were borrowing them. Most of you seem to be intelligent individuals so I find it quite interesting how none of you are reserving judgment until the facts about this incident come out in court. I hate to play devils advocate here but let’s just look at all the possibilities here. I mean absolutely no disrespect for Mr. Tahir Khan but feel as though these two 18 year olds deserve a fair trial before being convicted if convicted. 1st off, we must realize that almost everyone is getting their facts from the media and the media only gives us the facts that will sell their papers or get them highest ratings. 2nd, this is being labeled a two teens racing without any evidence of this except for “eye witness accounts” which is not solid evidence. None of them had a radar gun and, as far as I know, none of them are trained in approximating speeds of vehicles by just watching them. As a matter of fact, it is impossible to just “eyeball” the speed of a vehicle. What’s the reason that the police use radar guns instead of just watching a car pass them then pulling them over and giving them a ticket for going “x”km/h over the speed limit. Oh it’s because every ticket would get thrown out because there is no training available because it’s impossible. 3rd, did any of the witnesses see the accident? Do we know if Khan was doing anything illegal himself which may have contributed to the accident in any way? And finally, everyone who is saying that these kids are dysfunctional and have no regard for any one else has to ask themselves, have you ever done anything stupid in your lives? Have you ever done anything, anything at all in your lives that may have jeopardized your safety or anyone else’s’ safety like say changed lanes without signaling or driven 10km/hr over the speed limit or cut someone off accidentally? I surmise that if you answer truthfully, you can think of at least one instance where you did something stupid. In conclusion, I submit that until people have more facts and these two have their day in court, everyone should reserve their judgment. As I see it, if it comes out in court that these two were just speeding and NOT racing, they should not have to spend the rest of their lives (25 years in Canada) in prison.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

VAM said:


> Just incase you haven't been paying attention to the news,
> 
> ...
> 
> As I see it, if it comes out in court that these two were just speeding and NOT racing, they should not have to spend the rest of their lives (25 years in Canada) in prison.



What is the difference between speeding and racing? And should we care? Both are dangerous, both involve a car, and in this case, the act involved someone else dying a horrible and needless death.

The 25 year sentence is extremely unlikely, especially for the youth who did not hit the other car. Unfortunately there is no minimum sentence for being a coward.

This is a discussion forum. We don't pretend to convict these people, we are stating opinions. Thanks for yours.

As for the media presenting stories that sell papers, sure, I guess you've never bought one, but I haven't seen the racers deny they were racing. That probably would have been reported somewhere. Maybe it's on their blogs? Probably a legal thing: don't deny it in case you look bad when it's confirmed.

The "Need for Speed" video was a great touch. "Stupid is as stupid does."


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Umm while I understand your point it's very unlikely the police would lay such a serious charge without strong reason to do so as it gets harder to make stick over say dangerous driving.
HOW this is handled is as much a comment or more on the justice system as it is on the kids as it will indicate.

a) even handed for all
b) purpose of "punishment"


----------



## VAM (Feb 15, 2006)

Here is a suggestion for reducing the number of people who street race. How about building race tracks in areas that are fairly easily accesible by people where they could go to race inexpensivly. They could have waivers signed by the drivers before they get to go on the track, must have their cars inspected before getting to go on the track for mandatory safety features such as cut off switches for the battery and feul as well as having the standard safety features on the track ie. tire walls, paramedics on site etc. No you will not completely eliminate street racing but I'm sure that it will reduce the number of people racing dramatically. Deterants don't work and I think we all know that, that's one of the reasons why we don't have corporal punishment here. Instead of trying to figure out how we can punish people after they have done something wrong, why don't people focus their attention on how to try and prevent these things from happening in the first place. It's like trying to cure the flu once you get it instead of taking the flu shot so that you reduce your risks of getting the flu in the first place. Just a thought.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Whether you are an apologist for street racing or a "devil's advocate" (or even a real advocate, or hired by the accused's "advocate") or whatever, I think you'll find that you have driven into a wall of deterrence-preferred mindedness here.

If it turns out they were speeding, or racing, or whatever, the idea is not to build a track so they can go play. The idea is: let them build license plates for about 10 years.


----------



## VAM (Feb 15, 2006)

*yes but however*



HowEver said:


> What is the difference between speeding and racing? And should we care? Both are dangerous, both involve a car, and in this case, the act involved someone else dying a horrible and needless death....
> 
> The "Need for Speed" video was a great touch. "Stupid is as stupid does."


I am assuming that you never once in your life EVER drove over the speed limit. You ask what the difference is between speeding and racing. I suppose by that logic then, in your eyes, everyone who is caught speeding should in turn be charged with racing and not just get a ticket because you seem to think that there is no difference. 

Hypathetically speaking, what if you were speeding down a street (only going 10 km/hr over) and a padestrian steps out in front of you and you hit them and kill them. There are no witnesses around to see you hit the person but there were people who saw you speeding down the street just moments earlier. You are charged with wreckless driving causing death or neglagence causing death. What should happen to you? I understand that this is not quite the same but I think you see where I'm heading with this. 

What does the "Need For Speed" game have to do with anything?


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

I asked what the difference is between speeding and racing as a rhetorical device. We know what the difference is.

Like the person who accepts something like money for sex but doesn't call themself a hooker, we aren't arguing over what this was--we're just discussing the price to be paid.

Most people who can drive a car understand that going 10 or 20 km over the speed limit isn't speeding, it is "driving." There is no question that these men were speeding and only some question about whether they were racing. In any case, it was dangerous and they killed someone.

In the future, sure, let's build them an oval or straight road and let them burn rubber on it. As for now, confirm that one was behind the wheel, driving dangerously and say goodbye to him.

I gather you are now simply spelling words wrong so you won't look like the family lawyer anymore. FYI we often know that the bunny is in the hat before you pull it out. That isn't magic, it is misdirection.

You may be the only person clueless enough to ask what the "Need for Speed" video game lends to this discussion. Either that, or see the paragraph immediately above this one.





VAM said:


> I am assuming that you never once in your life EVER drove over the speed limit. You ask what the difference is between speeding and racing. I suppose by that logic then, in your eyes, everyone who is caught speeding should in turn be charged with racing and not just get a ticket because you seem to think that there is no difference.
> 
> Hypathetically speaking, what if you were speeding down a street (only going 10 km/hr over) and a padestrian steps out in front of you and you hit them and kill them. There are no witnesses around to see you hit the person but there were people who saw you speeding down the street just moments earlier. You are charged with wreckless driving causing death or neglagence causing death. What should happen to you? I understand that this is not quite the same but I think you see where I'm heading with this.
> 
> What does the "Need For Speed" game have to do with anything?


----------



## VAM (Feb 15, 2006)

*you missed my point*



HowEver said:


> Whether you are an apologist for street racing or a "devil's advocate" (or even a real advocate, or hired by the accused's "advocate") or whatever, I think you'll find that you have driven into a wall of deterrence-preferred mindedness here.
> 
> If it turns out they were speeding, or racing, or whatever, the idea is not to build a track so they can go play. The idea is: let them build license plates for about 10 years.


First off I'm not "hired by the accused" or even a fan of racing. I am however, a person who prides myself on being open minded. I'm not saying that these two should be let off and given a race track to race on. I'm saying that in general, instead of looking at how we should get revenge "not justice because none of you are talking about justice, just revenge", but rather how can we minimize the risks of this happening to someone else.

Am I the only one who wants to try and stop crimes from happening in the first place instead of wanting to deal with it after the fact?

Everyone is entitled to their own oppinion. This is just mine.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

I'm sure the defendant's lawyers will try to present to the jury every reasonable defense to the charges.

As to whether it was "speeding" or "racing", it's not particularly important unless you're on the jury, where you might decide the law has the wrong man, and you agree to acquit them.

If they are convicted then speeding with negligence causing death is no different than racing with negligence causing death. The penalty is identical (since the amendments did not make 3rd reading before the government was dissolved; the law has not changed and there is no special penalty for racing).

These boys will almost certainly not get 25 years in prison no matter what. The penalty for the charge they are facing is Life In Prison, but parole is less than 5 years away (4 years is typical). The judge cannot impose a minimum period that must be served before they are eligible for Parole; that is only possible with murder charges.

What that means in the grand scheme of things is:
They will stay in Jail until they admit they were wrong, show that they accept responsibility for their actions, and take whatever steps Corrections Canada deems necessary to insure they do not end up in trouble again.
Once they are granted parole, they will be on parole until they die a natural or unnatural death.
They will not be able to visit most countries on Earth, and even a trip to Mexico might involve being deported if their aircraft should land in the US for some reason, even if only briefly and even if they never leave the plane.
If they ever screw up again, for even some rather simple things that you or I would not have to worry much about, there will be no need for a bail hearing; parole will be revoked and they will automatically return to jail to finish serving their life sentence. Although there is a good chance they might get Parole a second time after a while, I don't think we have much to worry about with these two. They've screwed up their lives royally already.

" ... every day spent in jail pre-trial = 2 day served on final sentence. ..."

That only works when the sentence has a finite length. Credit for time served in Remand can only be applied to the sentence itself, not the parole eligibility. 
Assuming they are convicted of the offense they are charged with, there is some fancy math but hopefully you guys can follow:
Life in Prison - (Days in Remand x 2) = Life in Prison.

" ... I surmise that if you answer truthfully, you can think of at least one instance where you did something stupid. ..."

Part of becoming an adult is taking responsibility for your actions. Whether by dumb luck or otherwise, doing something stupid and doing something stupid that leaves bodies laying around are completely different things, because the outcomes are different. I've cheated death more than once, but I also know people who, for whatever random reason, gambled, lost, and paid with their own lives.

Trust me, were there dead people in the wake of my dumb actions, I would be up the same creek and looking for the same lost paddle, and so would you.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

VAM said:


> Here is a suggestion for reducing the number of people who street race. How about building race tracks in areas that are fairly easily accesible by people where they could go to race inexpensivly.


I don't see that as a big solution. 

It's a bit like asking criminals to register their guns or only use them at a firing range.

Here is my anecdote as a sportbike rider. In Vancouver there is a track for sportbikers to race and also do stunting. It is cheap ($50 day) and very accessible. Yet, only a regular crowd of 50 to 100 people show up out of 1000's of sportbikers.

The presence of this track has done little to slow bikes down on the street or stop stunting on public roads.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Alleged street racers go to court in March
> 
> CTV.ca News Staff
> 
> ...


http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/lo...t_appearance_060223/20060223/?hub=TorontoHome


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

an the result is.......



> *House arrest in cabbie's death*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


http://www.thestar.com/article/218886


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Were the other charges dropped because they pleaded guilty to dangerous driving?

Gross.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Two young men who drove at high speed up Mount Pleasant Rd. in separate cars and caused the death of a popular Pakistani taxi driver have been sentenced to house arrest for a year." In the US, this would be considered "cruel and unusual punishment", and thus, on appeal, they would have been released with all charges dropped. Sadly, they are in Canada when the swift and harsh rule of law fell upon these poor innocents. The taxi driver should not have been in their way. I can just imagine the "hovels" they will be forced to live in during this house arrest. Where is the justice?!?


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

So, what are people looking for?

Vengeance? Punishment? Reform? Deterrence?

These two kids made a huge mistake. There was no intent to kill the cab driver.

What would locking them up for 3 years in cell accomplish? Would it make them "more" sorry for their crime that what they have now? Would it reform them into better citizens, or push them towards becoming hardened criminals?

Are we looking for vengeance? They took a life, so we should destroy theirs? How does that help our society improve itself, or is it that we don't care about society, we just want to get back at these kids.

A years house arrest and 150 community hours will do a lot more to reform these kids than years behind bars. It will take their dreadful actions and hopefully produce some good out of it.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

3-5 years in jail will not destroy their life, I've known several people who have come out of prison to lead a normal life after.

Always vengence with the bleeding hearts, how about deterance. What is stopping the next rich kid with a suped up honda thinking twice before they street race? House arrest? Please, this sends a gross message that if you have money you can get away with murder, or in this case vehicular manslaughter.

This is injustice at it's finest, I hope they appeal this, they deserve jail time, plain and simple.


----------



## Voyager (Aug 7, 2005)

> "It was an exercise in speed and bad judgment, not criminal intent, that resulted in the death of Mr. (Tahir) Khan," Moore said.


No, it was street racing, pure and simple, by a pair of young rich kids. A person is dead because of an illegal activity and all they get a years house arrest and 150 hours of community service. Then they get on with the rest of their lives. Where will they have to do community service, I wonder? Probably not in a hospital ER where they might see the results of "speed and bad judgment".

Until the system gets serious about it though, people are going to continue to be injured or die. House arrest and community service aren't much of a deterrent. Now, confiscating the car of anyone caught street racing. injury or not, and crushing the car, with no reimbursement, might have the desired effect of making people think twice before doing it.

Oh, and doing 140 in a 50 zone (almost 3 times the legal limit) isn't just speeding, it's racing.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Although it sure looks like streetracing, nothing anybody says in this thread can disavow whatever was presented in court. If the judge is wrong, a higher court will have to overturn the verdict. Until then, let's hope this was correct, and that a few paragraphs from the newspaper don't make us all judge and jury when we all know that much more information would be presented in court. The decision may seem horrendous, but it either reflects what was presented in court--or will be successfully appealed by the crown.


----------



## Voyager (Aug 7, 2005)

HowEver said:


> Although it sure looks like streetracing, nothing anybody says in this thread can disavow whatever was presented in court. If the judge is wrong, a higher court will have to overturn the verdict. Until then, let's hope this was correct, and that a few paragraphs from the newspaper don't make us all judge and jury when we all know that much more information would be presented in court. The decision may seem horrendous, but it either reflects what was presented in court--or will be successfully appealed by the crown.


Hopefully the crown will appeal the sentence on general principle. However (no pun intended), unless the judge made an error in law, it may be difficult to get it overturned. Judges, it seems, have a certain latitude in regards to sentencing. Their attitude towards street racing also seems to be on a par with their attitude re: drunk driving. They don't seem to think it's all that serious an offense.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> So, what are people looking for?
> 
> Vengeance? Punishment? Reform? Deterrence?
> 
> These two kids made a huge mistake. There was no intent to kill the cab driver.


A huge mistake? Killing a person is a huge mistake? Going so fast that you can't responsibly control your car is not a mistake. Although it's unintentional, it is not a mistake, too bad they didn't think of the impact of their actions. Frankly I think they're getting off easy for involuntary manslaughter. Maybe part of their community service should be to spend a week in a morgue, and some time explaining to other classes of students their stupid "mistake".

I have to say personally I'm a bit biased on this as one of my relatives was killed by a drunk driver.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> these incidents are symptomatic of the 'me first' mentality of many of today's youth
> there is no government plan that can ever teach these young drivers that 140 km / hour in a 50 km / hr zone is bad idea
> 
> it starts with parenting, plain and simple
> ...


This "me first" attitude is so bad in Ottawa, that the bus drivers have gotten sick of teaching kids common courtesy (ie. freeing up the front seats for elderly, those with kids, pregnant women, etc.), that they want the city to make common courtesy law. Of course some of the parents are no better, they drive like maniacs, going through red lights, stop signs, honking at pedestrians, not moving to the right and stopping when a fire truck/ambulance is coming. Too many people in a rush to get there, what, maybe a minute earlier than they would if they followed the rules.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> these incidents are symptomatic of the 'me first' mentality of many of today's youth
> there is no government plan that can ever teach these young drivers that 140 km / hour in a 50 km / hr zone is bad idea
> 
> it starts with parenting, plain and simple
> ...


This "me first" attitude is so bad in Ottawa, that the bus drivers have gotten sick of teaching kids common courtesy (ie. freeing up the front seats for elderly, those with kids, pregnant women, etc.), that they want the city to make common courtesy law. Of course some of the parents are no better, they drive like maniacs, going through red lights, stop signs, honking at pedestrians, not moving to the right and stopping when a fire truck/ambulance is coming. Too many people in a rush to get there, what, maybe a minute earlier than they would if they followed the rules.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

You know, I say we all pick up our pitchforks and torches, and go on a good ol' fashion mob attack!


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> You know, I say we all pick up our pitchforks and torches, and go on a good ol' fashion mob attack!


It wouldn't hurt to give them a few months of jail time would it??? I'd even settle for their summer vacation in jail that way they don't miss school. It might teach them something their parents obviously forgot to teach them... some respect, courtesy,... and the cost of their actions. Are we that afraid of being a little tough on our kids. Like my mom says every time this happens, send them to the army. These kids are not afraid of mob attacks... haven't you heard of swarming. Swarming never existed in my day.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Kosh said:


> It wouldn't hurt to give them a few months of jail time would it???


What is your motivation here? You seem to really want to see these kids suffer. If it wouldn't hurt, why bother with it?



Kosh said:


> I'd even settle for their summer vacation in jail that way they don't miss school. It might teach them something their parents obviously forgot to teach them... some respect, courtesy,... and the cost of their actions.


Yes, because prison teaches you those important life lessons of respect and courtesy.

I'm not sure, but a suspended two-year sentence, one year house arrest, and 150 community hours might teach them a thing or two they won't learn behind bars.



Kosh said:


> Are we that afraid of being a little tough on our kids. Like my mom says every time this happens, send them to the army.


Your bunk mate in the army isn't sharpening his tooth brush to stab you as you sleep. The cold isolation of the army doesn't push you into a world of drug addiction. You don't have to worry about dropping the soap in the shower in the army.

[ENABLE REALITY DISTORTION FIELD]


Kosh said:


> These kids are not afraid of mob attacks... haven't you heard of swarming. Swarming never existed in my day.


[DISABLE REALITY DISTORTION FIELD]


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> I'm not sure, but a suspended two-year sentence, one year house arrest, and 150 community hours might teach them a thing or two they won't learn behind bars.


Yes a grounding (and that is what this is) teaches them alot , kids got grounded for less in my day, it teaches them they can get away with murder like hundreds of other "kids". It teaches them that a person's life is worth nothing. These kids will be out and racing the next chance they get, or driving drunk. 

Stats show that most drunk drivers that kill people are treated just like these kids, give them a suspended sentence and take away their license, and then in a few months those drunks are on the street again. Just like these kids will be on the street racing the first chance they get after that year's house arrest.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> Yes, because prison teaches you those important life lessons of respect and courtesy.


No prison teaches you to respect your freedom and respect others, and teaches you how easily this freedom can be taken away. After a couple of years in prison they'll learn this and get a second chance, something the victim doesn't get to do.




guytoronto said:


> I'm not sure, but a suspended two-year sentence, one year house arrest, and 150 community hours might teach them a thing or two they won't learn behind bars.


Not really a big deterrent for others that street race, let mommy and daddy throw some money at the problem and it'll all go away. 




guytoronto said:


> Your bunk mate in the army isn't sharpening his tooth brush to stab you as you sleep. The cold isolation of the army doesn't push you into a world of drug addiction. You don't have to worry about dropping the soap in the shower in the army.


I think someone watches too much television, please enlighten us with some Canadian prison murder statistics. And I guess everyone who goes to jail is either a murderer or a drug addict too, who says these kids don't already have a drug problem. But I guess street racers don't have the same sterotypes that prisoners do eh.

What if this was a gun that someone was just shooting off and accidently hit and killed someone? I don't see driving 140km down a street as any different.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Kosh said:


> Yes a grounding (and that is what this is) teaches them alot , kids got grounded for less in my day,


Hmm...I bet you had to walk uphill to school, both ways, in 6 feet of snow, all year round, with sandpaper as shoes in your days.



Kosh said:


> it teaches them they can get away with murder like hundreds of other "kids". It teaches them that a person's life is worth nothing.


Yer darn right! We should introduce them to PMITA prison, where they'll learn the value of life every day as they try to stay alive.



Kosh said:


> These kids will be out and racing the next chance they get, or driving drunk.


Oh yes, of course, please, tell us more oh soothsayer.



Kosh said:


> Stats show that most drunk drivers that kill people are treated just like these kids, give them a suspended sentence and take away their license, and then in a few months those drunks are on the street again. Just like these kids will be on the street racing the first chance they get after that year's house arrest.


Hmm...so alcoholism, which is a disease, which causes a lot of people to drive drunk, is apparently just like street racing!


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> Yer darn right! We should introduce them to PMITA prison, where they'll learn the value of life every day as they try to stay alive.


Doesn't sound any different that what the average driver has to put up with everyday with these kids on the road. And again how many people get murdered in our prisons yearly?



guytoronto said:


> Hmm...so alcoholism, which is a disease, which causes a lot of people to drive drunk, is apparently just like street racing!


I guess you haven't heard of adrenaline addiction.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cach...iction&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us&client=safari


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

It's funny how a spammer deserves the death penalty and these kids deserve a slap on the wrist.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> *Crown to appeal deadly driving case*
> 
> TORONTO STAR PHOTOS
> Alexander Ryazanov and Wang-Piao Dumani Ross pleaded guilty to dangerous driving of causing death after they crashed into a taxi on Mt. Pleasant Rd.killing the driver.
> ...


TheStar.com - News - Crown to appeal deadly driving case


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

What kind of sentence is the crown looking for?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

while watching tv news this a.m. i heard that the judge ruled that the 2 offenders were NOT racing even though they were clocked at 140 km/hr. on a 50 km/hr. road
and of course their "driving" led to the death of a taxi driver just minding his own business

ya gotta think they had better start drug testing judges


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

Hate to see what speeds they would have been at if they actually were racing. Maybe the Judge is a speed demon himself.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

JumboJones said:


> Hate to see what speeds they would have been at if they actually were racing. *Maybe the Judge is a speed demon himself.*


I think you got it 1/2 right.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MACSPECTRUM said:


> ya gotta think they had better start drug testing judges


Better yet, elect them so we can rid ourselves of this type of judge.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

SINC said:


> Better yet, elect them so we can rid ourselves of this type of judge.


i don't want elected judges, lest they become politicians and we end up in wars for nothing

better to have oversight
i think that's what appellant court is for, isn't it?


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

SINC said:


> Better yet, elect them so we can rid ourselves of this type of judge.


Get y'er pitch fork! I got some torches. We'll deal with this ourselves!


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> Get y'er pitch fork! I got some torches. We'll deal with this ourselves!


Wow, you always come up with the good ideas.


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

> I got some torches. We'll deal with this ourselves!


Keep up with the times...get one of those low energy jobs...


Does anyone know how common it is for the prosecution to appeal a sentence? My impression (I emphasize impression - I am not a lawyer!) is that often it is the law itself which limits sentencing. When the prosecution appeals in a case like this it seems they are unhappy with the application of the law. Their arguments will be interesting, especially if they centre around the racing / not racing issue.

My lay interpretation is that the racing point doesn't matter too much. They were driving with total disregard for the law and common sense. If you know the area at all I am sure you will agree that half the stated 140 km/h is way too fast. Cars as weapons indeed.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

Still wondering what sentence everyone is looking for?

Should we string 'em up?


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

> Still wondering what sentence everyone is looking for?
> 
> Should we string 'em up?


I don't support capital punishment. Unless you mean just string'em up for a while...


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> Still wondering what sentence everyone is looking for?


Jail time, plain and simple, house arrest and a curfew is not an addiquit punishment for killing someone. It actually makes me sick to see the Canadian justice system to value a life that low.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> Still wondering what sentence everyone is looking for?
> 
> Should we string 'em up?


involuntary manslaughter
5 years or so should cure the car racing bug


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> Jail time, plain and simple


How much jail time? Quit being wishy-washy. What are the details of what you feel is appropriate for this situation?


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> How much jail time? Quit being wishy-washy. What are the details of what you feel is appropriate for this situation?


Sure, 5-7 years would be appropriate.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> Sure, 5-7 years would be appropriate.


How very American of you. Throwing people into a long-term jail term just for vengeance sake.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

guytoronto said:


> How very American of you. Throwing people into a long-term jail term just for vengeance sake.


the drivers killed someone by speeding at over double the legal limit in a city
25 years would be "long term"


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I agree with Spec and Jumbo here. 5 to 7 would be a good stretch.


----------



## JumboJones (Feb 21, 2001)

guytoronto said:


> How very American of you. Throwing people into a long-term jail term just for vengeance sake.


Is the air a little thick over TO today? Lafleur defrauds the gov't and gets 3.5 years, but killing someone with your car because they were driving with reckless abandon, house arrest. Something doesn't add up here, if we have to be a little more like the US and _punish_ people for their crimes then so be it. This has nothing to do with vengence, and everything to do about _punishment_ and _deterance_.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

JumboJones said:


> Is the air a little thick over TO today? Lafleur defrauds the gov't and gets 3.5 years, but killing someone with your car because they were driving with reckless abandon, house arrest.


Part of our legal system involves _intent_. Because there was no _intent_ to kill, the punishment is less severe. I really don't know how many times we have to go over the same legal lessons here.



JumboJones said:


> Something doesn't add up here, if we have to be a little more like the US and _punish_ people for their crimes then so be it.


I, for one, would prefer a society a little less like the US.



JumboJones said:


> This has nothing to do with vengence, and everything to do about _punishment_ and _deterance_.


Stiffer punishments don't deter crime. Otherwise Texas and Saudi Arabia would have the least amount of crime.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Jailing them in my view does little except put a financial burden on the tax payer.

Better a 10 year ban on driving so every day they are reminded plus lots of community service and weekend curfews.

Put em to work not 3 squares a day on the house.

Community justice is a far better deterrent.
I like the idea of that's being circulated about crushing cars that are caught racing.
Punishment to fit the crime.

I'm glad the crown appealed.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> Part of our legal system involves intent. Because there was no intent to kill, the punishment is less severe. I really don't know how many times we have to go over the same legal lessons here.


if the drivers were drunk at the legal speed limit, everyone would be calling for a stiff sentence

nobody INTENDS to kill someone if they drink too much and then drive
why is this case that much different?

at the such high speeds (almost 3x the legal limit) the consequence has to be similar to that of one who consumed too much alcohol and caused a death

house arrest for causing a death?
that's plain stupid


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

> I like the idea of that's being circulated about crushing cars that are caught racing.
> Punishment to fit the crime.


Does anyone know if a civil wrongful death suit can be brought forward in Ontario?
(eg. OJ Simpson verdict)

even crushing cars isn't that much of a deterrent
those with money can always buy another
i do like the idea of a ban on driving for 10 years and then a mandatory jail sentence should they be caught driving during the suspension 

the family of the deceased must be incensed at such a light sentence


----------

