Angels SP Nick Adenhart Killed in Hit and Run

[Jimmy!]

Just awful news. I watched the Angels game last night. In fact, one of my friends who lives in Murietta CA was texting me as I was watching the game and we were talking about how the pen had blown the lead. This morning I get up and go to my facebook page and there's a message from her telling me the kid was killed overnight. It was very strange and very sad. The drunk driver needs to pay heavily for this as do all drunk drivers who commit similar acts. If there is any good to come out of this, it might be that such a high profile example of the dangers of drunk driving may someday lead to much tougher penalties. In Ohio our drunk driving laws are a joke. These idiots need to be removed from the roads for good. With all the technology available today there has to be a way to keep a convicted drunk driver from ever getting behind the wheel again. If I had my way it would be one and done.

What a waste. What an absolute shame. I am as angry as I am saddened.

Rest in peace Nick. You pitched a whale of a game.

Drunk drivers who kill need to have the harshest penalty thrown at them. Period. This is not manslaughter. It's not accidental. How many times has it been drummed into our brains that drunk driving is dangerous and illegal? Nobody can say, "I had no idea something like that might happen!" We know. We've known for a while. Stricter laws and harsher penalties. If an example can be made that saves lives, it's worth it.

[Neon_Matrix]

Just awful news. I watched the Angels game last night. In fact, one of my friends who lives in Murietta CA was texting me as I was watching the game and we were talking about how the pen had blown the lead. This morning I get up and go to my facebook page and there's a message from her telling me the kid was killed overnight. It was very strange and very sad. The drunk driver needs to pay heavily for this as do all drunk drivers who commit similar acts. If there is any good to come out of this, it might be that such a high profile example of the dangers of drunk driving may someday lead to much tougher penalties. In Ohio our drunk driving laws are a joke. These idiots need to be removed from the roads for good. With all the technology available today there has to be a way to keep a convicted drunk driver from ever getting behind the wheel again. If I had my way it would be one and done.

What a waste. What an absolute shame. I am as angry as I am saddened.

Rest in peace Nick. You pitched a whale of a game.

Drunk drivers who kill need to have the harshest penalty thrown at them. Period. This is not manslaughter. It's not accidental. How many times has it been drummed into our brains that drunk driving is dangerous and illegal? Nobody can say, "I had no idea something like that might happen!" We know. We've known for a while. Stricter laws and harsher penalties. If an example can be made that saves lives, it's worth it.

What is even more shocking is that the driver was 22, had a previous DUI offense and a suspended license. The fact that our generation has been raised with "drinking and driving is bad" and this guy obviously ignored it shows that the teaching has to get more strict. Seriously, I am ashamed of my age group and some dumb decisions they have made.

[ProvidenceRI]

Drunk drivers who kill need to have the harshest penalty thrown at them. Period. This is not manslaughter. It's not accidental. How many times has it been drummed into our brains that drunk driving is dangerous and illegal? Nobody can say, "I had no idea something like that might happen!" We know. We've known for a while. Stricter laws and harsher penalties. If an example can be made that saves lives, it's worth it.

Drunk driving is terrible. I hope this guy gets the chair.

It's also interesting that it is legal to have bars in parts of the country where the only way to get there is by car. How many Angels fans leave games drunk in their cars?

[BBTV]

What is the difference between a drunk driver, and a drunk driver that kills someone? Luck. I'm not sure how a DUI and a DUI that results in a death can be treated any differently.

[NJTank]

The Problem is a DUI without an accident or killing someone is treated like a ticket, maybe there will be a 6 month license suspension, and if its a multiple offense there could be a short jail stay.

[BBTV]

The Problem is a DUI without an accident or killing someone is treated like a ticket, maybe there will be a 6 month license suspension, and if its a multiple offense there could be a short jail stay.

And does that make any sense to you? Of course, I'm also of the opinion that there's no difference between attempted murder and murder, but what do I know.

[NJTank]

I dont think we should throw someone in jail for 10 years for a simple DUI, (with no accident involved), but it should be allot harsher then it is now.

Right now a DUI is not a felony, its a DP in NJ, and I assume its like that in most states, perhaps if it were a felony with 6-18 month sentences you can start there.

[Jimmy!]

What is the difference between a drunk driver, and a drunk driver that kills someone? Luck. I'm not sure how a DUI and a DUI that results in a death can be treated any differently.

Replace "can" with "should" and you hit the nail on the head.

[tp49]

I dont think we should throw someone in jail for 10 years for a simple DUI, (with no accident involved), but it should be allot harsher then it is now.

Right now a DUI is not a felony, its a DP in NJ, and I assume its like that in most states, perhaps if it were a felony with 6-18 month sentences you can start there.

In California DUI is either considered a misdemeanor or a felony depending on certain circumstances. The guy who hit Adenhart had a prior DUI conviction though none of the sources are saying whether it was a felony or misdemeanor. In California generally speaking the only way to get a felony DUI is to cause injury or death to another person in the course of operating the vehicle under the influence or to have a fourth or subsequent DUI conviction within 7 years and the driver is sentenced to state prison. The later is at the discretion of the prosecutor to charge as a felony.

According to this article from the OC Register the perp was booked on suspicion of murder.

We had a similar case in Sacramento County where a DUI driver killed four people in nasty car wreck. The guy got 17 years 8 months on four counts of gross vehicular manslaughter. I think in this case though, if the prosecutors have enough evidence to get the driver for murder they will do so and maka an example out of him.

[BBTV]

I dont think we should throw someone in jail for 10 years for a simple DUI, (with no accident involved), but it should be allot harsher then it is now.

Right now a DUI is not a felony, its a DP in NJ, and I assume its like that in most states, perhaps if it were a felony with 6-18 month sentences you can start there.

You couldn't be missing the point more. The only difference between a "simple" DUI and a DUI resulting in an accident or death is simple dumb luck. Two guys get drunk. They each get in their cars and goes home. One weaves all around the road, but manages to make it home. The other weaves all around the road, but someone happens to turn on to that road and he hits and kills them. They both did the EXACT same thing - one guy just got lucky and one didn't. The crime is exactly the same.

[Jigga]

Not, it's not. The act of hitting and killing constitute a separate crime.

I appreciate the sentiment...but I can't give people the same punishment. It's just like most things in life, the outcome of the act affects the severity of the penalty...and it should.

However, the HAS to be a much harsher standard for DUI/DWI in this country. There is too much of this happening...and as a society we don't see it as a big enough deal. People are DYING!

[Gothamite]

We've danced this dance before, Vet - every single crime carries different penalties if it results in a fatality. I think that's appropriate, you don't.

Maybe we should arrest everybody who fires a gun in a private woods, but the fact is that no crime has been committed unless the bullet ends in up hitting something (or -body) it shouldn't.

I see a difference between attempted murder and murder (I also see a difference between murder in the second degree and murder in the first, which carry very different penalties in my state at least).

Similarly, I think it is appropriate to treat a standard, non-fatal DUI differently than one which results in a fatality. Doesn't mean I think the penalties for the garden-variety version ought not be very, very high.

[FiddySicks]

Angels will be wearing this patch for Adenhart

BTW, this is the 20 year old girl who was killed along with Adenhart

[BBTV]

Not, it's not. The act of hitting and killing constitute a separate crime.

I appreciate the sentiment...but I can't give people the same punishment. It's just like most things in life, the outcome of the act affects the severity of the penalty...and it should.

However, the HAS to be a much harsher standard for DUI/DWI in this country. There is too much of this happening...and as a society we don't see it as a big enough deal. People are DYING!

I guess I just have to disagree. Neither of the guys chose to kill anyone, but they chose to drive drunk, which carries a risk of killing someone. IMO the crime is the driving, the killing is incidental. I know that sounds really cold, and I don't want it to sound that way, I just don't like rewarding someone for being lucky, or punishing someone for being unlucky. To exaggerate to make a point, driving drunk = attempted murder = murder.

Two guys pull out guns and take a shot at someone. One's aim is a little high, the other's is a little low. The target slips and falls, so the one with the low aim kills him. One is charged with attempted murder, the other is charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder. Is that fair? IMO they both intended to kill the man, one just got lucky (or unlucky depending on how you look at it.)

[BBTV]

Angels will be wearing this patch for Adenhart

Never noticed the notch on their 4 before. Really looks bad.

[FiddySicks]

Not, it's not. The act of hitting and killing constitute a separate crime.

I appreciate the sentiment...but I can't give people the same punishment. It's just like most things in life, the outcome of the act affects the severity of the penalty...and it should.

However, the HAS to be a much harsher standard for DUI/DWI in this country. There is too much of this happening...and as a society we don't see it as a big enough deal. People are DYING!

I guess I just have to disagree. Neither of the guys chose to kill anyone, but they chose to drive drunk, which carries a risk of killing someone. IMO the crime is the driving, the killing is incidental. I know that sounds really cold, and I don't want it to sound that way, I just don't like rewarding someone for being lucky, or punishing someone for being unlucky. To exaggerate to make a point, driving drunk = attempted murder = murder.

Two guys pull out guns and take a shot at someone. One's aim is a little high, the other's is a little low. The target slips and falls, so the one with the low aim kills him. One is charged with attempted murder, the other is charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder. Is that fair? IMO they both intended to kill the man, one just got lucky (or unlucky depending on how you look at it.)

I'm not sure this is in effect , but I've heard that in certain states (California may be one) that if you are driving a certain amount above the speed limit, no matter the outcome, it can be considered attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon. Now if that's the case, how is driving drunk any different?

[Gothamite]

I guess I just have to disagree. Neither of the guys chose to kill anyone, but they chose to drive drunk, which carries a risk of killing someone. IMO the crime is the driving, the killing is incidental. I know that sounds really cold, and I don't want it to sound that way, I just don't like rewarding someone for being lucky, or punishing someone for being unlucky. To exaggerate to make a point, driving drunk = attempted murder = murder.

Two guys pull out guns and take a shot at someone. One's aim is a little high, the other's is a little low. The target slips and falls, so the one with the low aim kills him. One is charged with attempted murder, the other is charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder. Is that fair? IMO they both intended to kill the man, one just got lucky (or unlucky depending on how you look at it.)

Is life fair?

Ought the goal of the law be to make life fair?

[BBTV]

Not, it's not. The act of hitting and killing constitute a separate crime.

I appreciate the sentiment...but I can't give people the same punishment. It's just like most things in life, the outcome of the act affects the severity of the penalty...and it should.

However, the HAS to be a much harsher standard for DUI/DWI in this country. There is too much of this happening...and as a society we don't see it as a big enough deal. People are DYING!

I guess I just have to disagree. Neither of the guys chose to kill anyone, but they chose to drive drunk, which carries a risk of killing someone. IMO the crime is the driving, the killing is incidental. I know that sounds really cold, and I don't want it to sound that way, I just don't like rewarding someone for being lucky, or punishing someone for being unlucky. To exaggerate to make a point, driving drunk = attempted murder = murder.

Two guys pull out guns and take a shot at someone. One's aim is a little high, the other's is a little low. The target slips and falls, so the one with the low aim kills him. One is charged with attempted murder, the other is charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder. Is that fair? IMO they both intended to kill the man, one just got lucky (or unlucky depending on how you look at it.)

Is life fair?

Of course not... and I know that my "vision" will never be the reality. That's what the internet is for - spouting off ideas that have no chance of coming to fruition.

That and sharing porn.

[Jigga]

Not, it's not. The act of hitting and killing constitute a separate crime.

I appreciate the sentiment...but I can't give people the same punishment. It's just like most things in life, the outcome of the act affects the severity of the penalty...and it should.

However, the HAS to be a much harsher standard for DUI/DWI in this country. There is too much of this happening...and as a society we don't see it as a big enough deal. People are DYING!

I guess I just have to disagree. Neither of the guys chose to kill anyone, but they chose to drive drunk, which carries a risk of killing someone. IMO the crime is the driving, the killing is incidental. I know that sounds really cold, and I don't want it to sound that way, I just don't like rewarding someone for being lucky, or punishing someone for being unlucky. To exaggerate to make a point, driving drunk = attempted murder = murder.

Two guys pull out guns and take a shot at someone. One's aim is a little high, the other's is a little low. The target slips and falls, so the one with the low aim kills him. One is charged with attempted murder, the other is charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder. Is that fair? IMO they both intended to kill the man, one just got lucky (or unlucky depending on how you look at it.)

I think it's totally fair that their punishments are different. Their crimes are different. The issue that the intents are the same is one thing, but they have committed different crimes. The crimes are based on the actions as well as the results. The bullet hitting the intended target is the difference, and that's enough of a difference to constitute a distinctly different crime altogether. Most of life is based on being lucky/unlucky isn't it?

[Jigga]

Not, it's not. The act of hitting and killing constitute a separate crime.

I appreciate the sentiment...but I can't give people the same punishment. It's just like most things in life, the outcome of the act affects the severity of the penalty...and it should.

However, the HAS to be a much harsher standard for DUI/DWI in this country. There is too much of this happening...and as a society we don't see it as a big enough deal. People are DYING!

I guess I just have to disagree. Neither of the guys chose to kill anyone, but they chose to drive drunk, which carries a risk of killing someone. IMO the crime is the driving, the killing is incidental. I know that sounds really cold, and I don't want it to sound that way, I just don't like rewarding someone for being lucky, or punishing someone for being unlucky. To exaggerate to make a point, driving drunk = attempted murder = murder.

Two guys pull out guns and take a shot at someone. One's aim is a little high, the other's is a little low. The target slips and falls, so the one with the low aim kills him. One is charged with attempted murder, the other is charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder. Is that fair? IMO they both intended to kill the man, one just got lucky (or unlucky depending on how you look at it.)

Is life fair?

Of course not... and I know that my "vision" will never be the reality. That's what the internet is for - spouting off ideas that have no chance of coming to fruition.

That and sharing porn.

Sweet, whatchya got?