Road rage man gets sentenced to 3 years.
July 13, 2001 12:47 PM Subscribe
posted by msacheson at 1:00 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by geronimo_rex at 1:05 PM on July 13, 2001
Man gets sentenced to 3 years--or 21 in dog years.
posted by shylock at 1:05 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by davidmsc at 1:07 PM on July 13, 2001
At least the dog wasn't using a cell phone at the time.
posted by dws at 1:10 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by monkeyJuice at 1:12 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by revbrian at 1:32 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by frykitty at 1:34 PM on July 13, 2001
Bust me and sign me up... as long as I'm downwind.
posted by tj at 1:35 PM on July 13, 2001
See, in my world *that* is absurd. Rapists and child molesters should get plenty of jail time, but so should violent jag-offs with poor impulse control.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 1:36 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by raintea at 1:36 PM on July 13, 2001
Nor do they make it just, other sentences have nothing to do with this one. That said, I too feel that the sentence was NOT commensurate with the crime - I don't feel that the life of a human being should be worth less time than a dog under ANY circumstances. If he had killed a human being in a rage like that he could have claimed insanity, how was this any different? The guy needs psychological help not jail time...
posted by RevGreg at 1:52 PM on July 13, 2001
In any case, the very fact that this guy reached into the woman's vehicle and grabbed anything shows a problem. He decided to react in an aggressive, physical, confrontational manner over a fender bender.
I don't doubt for one second that if there had been no dog, he would've grabbed and attacked the woman. If it had been a child on her lap, we'd be having the standard argument here about the death penalty.
The guy does need psychological help, and hopefully part of his sentence will include mandatory counseling. But he also did something illegal and offensive to society, and therefore deserves the punishment of jail. He may be ill, but he's also a criminal and ought to be treated as one.
posted by Dreama at 1:57 PM on July 13, 2001
Let's say instead of tossing a dog into traffic he tossed a goldfish and its bowl into traffic. Would anyone even consider giving him six weeks? Of course not. Doing more so for an animal just because it happens to be a mammal is stupid.
(By the way, don't try the argument that a dog's life is worth more than a goldfish's life. I cried when my goldfish died.)
posted by mrbula at 2:04 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by DiplomaticImmunity at 2:13 PM on July 13, 2001
Some of the comments on this thread sound less like "This sentence is meant to properly punish and rehabilitate him so he learns his lesson while also changing his behavior so that it doesn't happen again when he gets out" and more like "Rar! Fuck him! Bad man! Hulk Smash! Graaaaar! Revenge! Mwuhahahaha!". The old thread DI linked has gems like "Disrespect for... life is a dangerous thing" followed by calls to punish the guy as harshly as possible. Not that we'd, uh, disrespect his life or anything... :) Emotional rage shouldn't be a component of justice- because when it is, it's nothing but revenge.
posted by hincandenza at 2:26 PM on July 13, 2001
Although I too am unfond of little yappy dogs (are bichon frise dogs yappy? whatever, my prejudice for miniature canines remains), I'm glad to see this bastard locked up. A person who would do such a thing really needs to be made to see that his actions have consequences. I am in agreement with those who feel that it would have been totally ridiculous to let this guy get off easy because other criminals sometimes do; what kind of justice would that be? The message sent would have been, essentially, "Yeah, so you went into a murderous rage and caused a stranger much grief and loss but it was just a dog so *shakes finger* don't do that again, mmmkay?"
But I dunno how I would feel about making the guy work in an animal shelter---on one hand, it would ostensibly be more geared toward rehabilitation than punishment, which is generally good---on the other, you don't see child abusers sentenced to work in day care centers.
posted by Sapphireblue at 2:29 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by wackybrit at 2:39 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by ljromanoff at 3:01 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by ljromanoff at 3:02 PM on July 13, 2001
The previous discussion talked about the public outcry and the reward money being out of proportion, given the number of acts of violence against humans which are slip by without a mention. I don't disagree with that. I don't even think it's particularly newsworthy (although it has proved discussionworthy IMO). That doesn't mean his actions weren't criminal. Maybe the punishment will cause him to reflect on the inappropriateness of reacting to trivial events with explosive rage before he becomes the subject of a death penalty discussion.
... then again, the clips they showed of him in court didn't portray someone who was eager to learn...
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 3:18 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by nicolotesla at 3:37 PM on July 13, 2001
Best. Closing. Ever.
posted by frykitty at 3:50 PM on July 13, 2001
As discussed earlier, thousands of animals are put the sleep each year, but this guy did it in a high-profile way and we're giving him 3 years in JAIL! It's a dog! A dog!
posted by Mark at 4:44 PM on July 13, 2001
So you're saying his road rage assault and killing of a dog is the same as being "put to sleep"..."in a high profile way"?
The scary thought is I'm sure he (the killer) also shared the "it's just a dog" line of thinking.
posted by jca at 5:15 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by jpoulos at 5:22 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by kindall at 5:36 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by clavdivs at 6:27 PM on July 13, 2001
Must invalidate. MustMust invalidate. Must invalidate. MustMust. . .
Does babyjesus have any other emotions. . .like cooing?
posted by crasspastor at 7:35 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by crasspastor at 7:39 PM on July 13, 2001
If it were my dog, let's just say I'd probably be serving some time myself - know what I mean?
Murderers, rapists, child molesters? Lock 'em up and... damn, where's the key? Oh well.
posted by owillis at 9:22 PM on July 13, 2001
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:15 AM on July 14, 2001
posted by rcade at 6:49 AM on July 14, 2001
"Calves are pretty so they will now be spared. Sheep and pigs are not that pretty, so they're still for it. Lobsters, toads and stag beetles might as well all just commit suicide now. But if it's suddenly discovered that labrador puppies and koala bears are the worst carriers of foot and mouth then the government is really in trouble."
posted by RichLyon at 12:49 AM on July 15, 2001
There's a difference between killing animals for food, killing animals to stop a disease, and maliciously killing an animal to terrorize its owner -- and endangering drivers on a fast-moving highway in the process.
posted by rcade at 6:14 AM on July 15, 2001
« Older First Webvan, Now Homeruns... | The Spiderman Teaser Trailer Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by moz at 12:52 PM on July 13, 2001