I am not exactly sure what I want to be when I grow up, but I just found another thing to take off the list of prospective careers. I have decided that I do not want to be a Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge.
On Monday, Michael Johnson, not the athlete, but a current Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge had to decide what to do with an 89 year old man, George Weller, that has been convicted on 10 felony counts of vehicular manslaughter. Yes, that means he ran over and killed 10 people. In the process he managed to injure about 63 more.
The kicker is that he has never expressed remorse for what he did. At the scene of the accident witnesses claimed that Weller said, "Why didn't you get out of my way?" This is at the same time that there was a dead body draped over the windshield of his car and rescuers were trying frantically to help a horribly disfigured woman who had been dragged by the vehicle.
So, what do you do? Do you send some old man on his deathbed to prison to die there? Reports indicate that he is ailing and was unable to attend the sentencing. If you do, people might call you cruel and say you gave him a death sentence. Then, if you do not, what kind of message does it send about the elderly and the responsibility they have for their actions.
I really cannot find an answer I am 100% comfortable with. The problem is the decision goes farther than this one guy. It makes you think about who we allow to drive. There is always a big hub-ub made about teenagers and when they should be allowed to drive, but what about the other end of the spectrum?
I can see how you shouldn't punish all elderly because one man who "learned to drive in a Model-T" makes a wrong turn, and can't remember which pedal makes the horseless carriage slow down, but how do you decide who is too old to drive. Where is the line and how is it measured?
Thoughts?
posted by Shannon Smith @ 11/22/2006
3 Comments
Links to this post
3 Comments:
well, they make you pass a driving test to ensure that you can drive before you get behind the wheel, but there is clearly a point at which the "down slope" begins as it pertains to your ability to drive safely.
i guess the most difficult thing for me to figure is where this down slope begins. its probably not the same with all people, but then again not everyone is on the same plane during the first test at 16... or 18 ... or whatever age these youngsters are beginning to drive these days. (okay so maybe i'm too young to say "youngsters")
maybe it wouldn't be unwise to test the driver again at age 50 and again at 60 and so on. sort of like a "liscence renewal" program to try to filter out the people who really shouldn't be allowed to wield a 2,000 pound "weapon".
note: the "not feeling any remorse" thing is another topic all together, but it think it speaks to some sort of psychological malfunction. maybe not one that effects his driving ability directly, but is none the less concerning.
Here is my take on this... it doesn't matter where you draw the line, unexpected tragic events are still going to happen. You make and educated guess and then adjust that guess a little later and so on and so forth. It is simply a guess so it will never be right but as different tragic events occur society is going to want a change. As far as the punishment... that's all just personal preference that is often the result of a person's life path. A person like me who has, relatively speaking, had a rather uneventful life is going to think differently then a person like a good friend of mine who has had all sorts of horrible things happen in her life. Doesn't matter which person is right or wrong, it is all about which side creates the bigger scene. In this case if the elderly where to start rioting and throwing their Depends out in the streets (poor attempt at humor) then chances are things will go in favor of the elderly man. If the families of the victims were to do the same then it all boils down to which side can cause more trouble. It seems that laws were intended to protect people and not so much punish them. What that means to me is that all individuals committing the same crime should not be treated the same. That may not sound unfair but in my mind it is. Something like this could have happened to anyone not just an elderly man. Think of how many ways the human body can malfunction and lead to something like this. What if I blacked out behind the wheel due to physiological reasons? It was an accident, not my fault, should I go to jail. I don’t think so. Should I be behind the wheel of a car? No way, not until my problem is fixed. What happens to a pilot who blacks out due physiological reasons, crashes a plane, and everyone dies but him. Does he go to jail? I am not sure that he does. Should he? I don’t think that he should.
I thought it was interesting how the story line from Grey's Anatomy was so close to this story from the news.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home