Tragedy in Texiz.

[LoyalFan]

Had this relayed to me by a most respected basser:

"A three-year-old boy and a man in his 20's are in the hospital after a
boating accident in Guadalupe County."

here we go....

The boat crash happened just west of Seguin, on Lake Placid. People said
there was such a loud bang, people knew something was wrong.

"We had people across the street, which isn't on the lake, coming
running over here because they heard the sound," said Jim Monkerud who
witnessed the accident.

"We weren't sure what it was, we thought somebody might have hit a
dock," said Monkerud.

But it wasn't a dock. Two boats had collided.

"We ran down," said Monkerud. "You could see blood in the water and
people yelling and screaming, so we called 911."

"It looked like the boat that was pulling a tuber struck the back end of
the boat that was pulling out of the slip," said Game Warden Kevin Frazier.

The collision caused two people to be airlifted to University Hospital.
The three-year-old had head injuries and the man was on the brink of
losing his arm.

Fraizer said the driver of the boat had been drinking and has been
charged with intoxication assault with a vehicle.

The three-year-old has been transported to a hospital in Fort Worth. The
man in his 20's ended up losing his arm and is still in critical
condition at University Hospital.

End Story

For the (hopefully) few here who think it ain't fishing (or, God forbid, hunting,) without a few brewskis; Is this enough to wake you up?
If not, how about the incident on Canyon lake two weeks ago?
A guy fell off the tube his blitzed buddy was towing him on. Said drunk buddy circled to pick him up. The prop got him. Dead in the water. Buddy charged with Intoxication Manslaughter and BUI. Frankly, in both cases, I'd prefer they be charged with Murder Two.

LF
Fisherman and Hunter

[olevetonahill]

Dayum Bro
Years ago the lakes wernt so congested I guess.
But If Ya kill some one No matter the Vehicle Ya need to pay the Max

[olevetonahill]

Oh and a Caveat thats a TRAGEDY No matter what state your In .:mad:

[LoyalFan]

Oh and a Caveat thats a TRAGEDY No matter what state your In .:mad:

Roger that. I've read accident reports from all over the map, including those occurring in salt water and foreign countries. Makes me angry, makes me sick.

Out.

LF

[Okla-homey]

A while back, some fellers in OKC tried to pass a bill that required BWI busts on Oklahoma lakes result in assessments of points against the offenders' DL. It didn't pass. Methinks the boating crowd has a lot of stroke in the capitol.

I happen to know of a guy who slammed another boat while slammed himself on a local lake. The guy was acquitted of negligent homicide of the guy in the other boat who died. Strangely, at the same trial, the slammed slammer was found guilty of misdemeanor "leaving the scene of an accident" because he split after the collision. That resulted in a $45 fine. IOW, the prosecution didn't prove it was his fault the guy died, but there was no doubt he split the scene.

There must be something about boats that make people think its okay to cruise at high speed on busy, boat filled lakes while drunk. Mind you, these same people probably wouldn't drive a mile to the Quickie Mart for a slurpee while that drunk, but they'll certainly take the wheel of a powerful powerboat and scream along and think nothing of it.

I think it must have something to do with the fact they don't get hammered by the law for doing so if they are caught, even in some cases (like the one above) when they kill someone.

[AlbqSooner]

The problem is, and I saw it in Florida quite a bit as well as in Oklahoma, you don't have to be licensed or in any manner trained to operate a boat. You simply walk into a dealer, say I like dis kinda boat, plop down some cash, and launch.
Since waterways don't have marked lanes or traffic signals, it is imperative that each boater know the rules of boating as far as who has the right of way. It is equally important that each boater know the proper procedure for passing an oncoming boat, overtaking a boat from the rear or either side. Unfortunately, with sufficient cash, one can climb into the equivalent of a Ferrari and take off down the road not knowing something as basic as that it is appropriate to drive in the right lane on a two lane road.
Mix in a bit of booze, a few jet skiers and a couple of sailboats and it is a recipe for this kind of tragedy.

[Viking Kitten]

A while back, some fellers in OKC tried to pass a bill that required BWI busts on Oklahoma lakes result in assessments of points against the offenders' DL. It didn't pass. Methinks the boating crowd has a lot of stroke in the capitol.

I happen to know of a guy who slammed another boat while slammed himself on a local lake. The guy was acquitted of negligent homicide of the guy in the other boat who died. Strangely, at the same trial, the slammed slammer was found guilty of misdemeanor "leaving the scene of an accident" because he split after the collision. That resulted in a $45 fine. IOW, the prosecution didn't prove it was his fault the guy died, but there was no doubt he split the scene.

There must be something about boats that make people think its okay to cruise at high speed on busy, boat filled lakes while drunk. Mind you, these same people probably wouldn't drive a mile to the Quickie Mart for a slurpee while that drunk, but they'll certainly take the wheel of a powerful powerboat and scream along and think nothing of it.

I think it must have something to do with the fact they don't get hammered by the law for doing so if they are caught, even in some cases (like the one above) when they kill someone.

As it stands, you are guilty of BWI in Oklahoma if you are found to have a BAC of .10 This year, the fine folks at the Capitol attempted to change that to make it mirror the DUI laws in Oklahoma, meaning you'd be guilty if you had a BAC of .08, there would be sanctions against the DLs you mentioned and additionally you'd be guilty if you had actual physical control of the boat. (APC)

As it happened, I was there the day that bill was debated in the Senate. The problem they had with it was the APC part. In Oklahoma, you can be charged with DUI if you are sleeping in your car with the engine turned off, IF the keys are on your person. The keys are said to give you actual physical control whether you are "driving" under the influence or not.

So while debate was happening, the bill's author was asked if he realized that under his law, if somebody had their boat parked in a cove for the day, and was sitting in the boat drinking they could be charged.

The author answered, "well, they can't do that to somebody in a car." To which a bunch of other senators replied, "oh yes they can."

The dude didn't even know what was in his own bill.

Not to mention the thorny legal issues that might come up by going after somebody's DL when you are not required to have one when you operate a boat.

Now mind you I am not suggesting it's okay for some drunk mofo to endanger people with his or her boat, and that there shouldn't be tougher sanctions. Heavy duty fines would certainly be an option. I'm just saying the bill that didn't pass this year failed because it was a piece of crap.

[Okla-homey]

As it stands, you are guilty of BWI
So while debate was happening, the bill's author was asked if he realized that under his law, if somebody had their boat parked in a cove for the day, and was sitting in the boat drinking they could be charged.



I don't have a problem with that scenario. Number 1: if a drunk guy is sitting in a boat that is away from its home dock, slip, whatever, it stands to reason at some point, said intoxicated boater will fire up the Evinrude and head somewhere else. Number 2: Drunk on a boat, alone or with other drunks, is dangerous.

[StoopTroup]

VK...

That senario where a guy didn't know what was in his bill....

That right there is what is not only wrong with our legal system but also wrong with our politicians.

If these guys and girls we elect want to help change the way folks feel about them...they are going to need to be held accountable for crap they write and vote on.

I don't mean accountable by not being re-elected either.

Citizens are held to laws based on ignorance of the law is no excuse...lawmakers should be held liable for any negligence they create when writing laws/bills or even voting for bad laws/bills.

Of course we would probably need to start paying them more or the whole process would turn even uglier than it is now.

Anytime I hear about these folks who don't read the fine print...it floors me.

[soonerboomer93]

um, I'm pretty sure you can be charged with DUI if you're sleeping in your vehicle and your keys are on your person or in the ignition in most states.

I gotta go with homey and I don't see a problem with that.

[Viking Kitten]

In my opinion "Driving Under the Influence" should mean "DRIVING under the influence." The APC statute, in my view discourages common sense, as in "I'm too impaired to be driving, so I should pull over until I sober up, but I don't want to be a sitting duck for cops, so I'll just keep driving." I seriously doubt anyone ever killed anyone else while asleep in a parked car, so somebody who does that shouldn't be charged alongside someone who actually endangers lives while driving drunk.

[Okla-homey]

In my opinion "Driving Under the Influence" should mean "DRIVING under the influence." The APC statute, in my view discourages common sense, as in "I'm too impaired to be driving, so I should pull over until I sober up, but I don't want to be a sitting duck for cops, so I'll just keep driving." I seriously doubt anyone ever killed anyone else while asleep in a parked car, so somebody who does that shouldn't be charged alongside someone who actually endangers lives while driving drunk.

puhleaze. All professional drunks know all you gotta do to avoid that pickle is 1) park and 2) throw your keys into the bushes.

then, the next day, when you wake up, find your keys.;)

[JohnnyMack]

So if a cop drives by at 3 in the morning, sees you passed out in your car he should just let you sleep it off? What happens if you startle awake 45 minutes after the fuzz leaves you be and you slam it in gear to get home quick?

[Okla-homey]

So if a cop drives by at 3 in the morning, sees you passed out in your car he should just let you sleep it off? What happens if you startle awake 45 minutes after the fuzz leaves you be and you slam it in gear to get home quick?

Ding-ding. We have a winnuh! That scenario you posited is precisely why the statute reads the way it does.

[Viking Kitten]

So if a cop drives by at 3 in the morning, sees you passed out in your car he should just let you sleep it off? What happens if you startle awake 45 minutes after the fuzz leaves you be and you slam it in gear to get home quick?

Notice I didn't say such a person wasn't guilty of public drunkenness and shouldn't be charged with that crime. What I said was that at the point in time when the driver actually drives the car is when the charge of DRIVING under the influence should occur.

As far as the throwing the keys in the bushes, well you're right Homey, that's what the professionals do. I'm talking about the average guy who is trying to do the right thing by pulling over. That was the intent of the handful people I've run into who have faced DUI charges when they weren't actually driving.

[SoonerInKCMO]

Number 1: if a drunk guy is sitting in a boat that is away from its home dock, slip, whatever, it stands to reason at some point, said intoxicated boater will fire up the Evinrude and head somewhere else.


I gotta go with homey and I don't see a problem with that.

Ah, yes - the 'Minority Report' approach to prosecuting crime.

[AggieTool]

Seems we need to ban all activity on our public lakes unless it's bass 'fishin.:)

'Cuz you know its THOSE people that are causing all the problems.:)

[mdklatt]

if a drunk guy is sitting in a boat that is away from its home dock, slip, whatever, it stands to reason at some point, said intoxicated boater will fire up the Evinrude and head somewhere else.


This couldn't be more wrong. What if you're spending the night on the boat? Say you've dropped anchor somewhere in a cove for the evening, and you've had some beer or wine with dinner. Should the Lake Patrol haul you away for this?

[Okla-homey]

This couldn't be more wrong. What if you're spending the night on the boat? Say you've dropped anchor somewhere in a cove for the evening, and you've had some beer or wine with dinner. Should the Lake Patrol haul you away for this?

It depends. Mainly on whether we seriously want to cut back on alcohol-related boating deaths in Oklahoma. Is the guy in the hypothetical over the legal limit on BAC? If not, he doesn't have anything to worry about. If, OTOH, he's wasted, he might. Is there someone else aboard who remains sober and is capable to operating the boat safely? In my mind, this isn't the same thing as a guy who parks his RV at a campsite at a state park and proceeds to get stoned or drunk. Doing so aboard a boat that is underway is inherently more hazardous to the general boating public IMHO. If the RV guy passes out, odds are the RV is not going to swamp or drift away out into the highway if a storm blows up. Also, if the RV guy stumbles out the door and falls down, he isn't going to drown.

[mdklatt]

In my mind, this isn't the same thing as a guy who parks his RV at a campsite at a state park and proceeds to get stoned or drunk. Doing so aboard a boat that is underway is inherently more hazardous to the general boating public IMHO. If the RV guy passes out, odds are the RV is not going to swamp or drift away out into the highway if a storm blows up. Also, if the RV guy stumbles out the door and falls down, he isn't going to drown.

So being anchored is "underway"? If you're anchored correctly, you're not going to drift away in a storm. And if you do, there's not going to be anybody else on the water to run into. Is it the government's job to keep somebody from drowning themselves because they're an idiot?

[JohnnyMack]

Notice I didn't say such a person wasn't guilty of public drunkenness and shouldn't be charged with that crime. What I said was that at the point in time when the driver actually drives the car is when the charge of DRIVING under the influence should occur.


You'd most likely be charged with APC, not DUI. I don't get your problem. It's illegal to be drunk in public. Whether or not you're charged with APC or PI, what does it matter? Being passed out behind the wheel of a car or passed out on the curb are both illegal.

[sooner_born_1960]

PI doesn't count as a driving offense.

[RacerX]

People drink to ****ing much.

[jkjsooner]

In my opinion "Driving Under the Influence" should mean "DRIVING under the influence." The APC statute, in my view discourages common sense, as in "I'm too impaired to be driving, so I should pull over until I sober up, but I don't want to be a sitting duck for cops, so I'll just keep driving." I seriously doubt anyone ever killed anyone else while asleep in a parked car, so somebody who does that shouldn't be charged alongside someone who actually endangers lives while driving drunk.

I agree but I think your hypothetical isn't strong enough. Sometimes the guy doesn't pull over but merely walks out of the bar, realizes he's over the limit and decides to sleep in his car. So in this case the guy never once operated his car while intoxicated.

I grew up in a rural area. There was a bar about 2 miles out of town at a lake. Let's say you go there and get drunk. Knowing that getting a cab is impossible there, what do you do when you leave? If you sleep in your car you know you're a sitting duck. If you drive the 2 miles of country roads you know the odds are in your favor.

This stupid law just encourages irresponsibility.

Ideally the police would recognize a person is being responsible by sleeping in his car rather than driving home and at worst give the guy a PI. (I wouldn't even do that as that still would encourage him to drive home.) But, of course, too many cops out there would rather nail a guy than apply some common sense.

[Sooner_Havok]

puhleaze. All professional drunks know all you gotta do to avoid that pickle is 1) park and 2) throw your keys into the bushes.

then, the next day, when you wake up, find your keys.;)

I tie a long *** string to mine. That way when I sober up, I just pull the 25-30 feet of string back in and retrieve my keys! :texan:

[Vaevictis]

So, question.

If it's kosher to prosecute someone for APC of a vehicle while intoxicated, why not a firearm? Firearms are just as dangerous, yes?

And if that's kosher, uh, is there any way you could reasonably argue that any firearm you keep in your house shouldn't qualify for APC purposes?

[yermom]

People drink too ****ing much.

yes.

[StoopTroup]

You might not want to see what happens if you shoot and kill someone while you were drinking....unless they was trying to steal yer likker from yer house....then it's OK...I think.

[Okla-homey]

So, question.

If it's kosher to prosecute someone for APC of a vehicle while intoxicated, why not a firearm? Firearms are just as dangerous, yes?

And if that's kosher, uh, is there any way you could reasonably argue that any firearm you keep in your house shouldn't qualify for APC purposes?

Well, voluntary intox is a defense that'll take to murder 1 to murder 2. So you'll have a few less years as a "catcher" in McAlester. Which is nice.;)