Tony Stewart hits/kills fellow Dirt track driver
08-17-2014, 12:19 PM
#81
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,869
Received 6,876 Likes
on
3,488 Posts
08-18-2014, 02:12 AM
#82
AZ Community Team
Join Date: May 2007
Location: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"
Posts: 32,488
Received 7,770 Likes
on
4,341 Posts
09-16-2014, 02:51 PM
#83
Senior Moderator
CANANDAIGUA, N.Y. — A grand jury will decide whether NASCAR driver Tony Stewart will be charged in the August death of a fellow driver at a sprint car race in upstate New York.
Ontario County District Attorney Michael Tantillo said Tuesday that after reviewing evidence collected by sheriff’s investigators, he has decided to present it to a grand jury. Tantillo could have determined there was not enough evidence to support charges and dropped the case.
Stewart’s car struck and killed Kevin Ward Jr. at a dirt-track race in Canandaigua on Aug. 9. The 20-year-old had climbed from his car after it had spun while racing alongside Stewart.
Stewart issued a statement saying he looks forward to the process being completed and will continue to cooperate.
Ontario County District Attorney Michael Tantillo said Tuesday that after reviewing evidence collected by sheriff’s investigators, he has decided to present it to a grand jury. Tantillo could have determined there was not enough evidence to support charges and dropped the case.
Stewart’s car struck and killed Kevin Ward Jr. at a dirt-track race in Canandaigua on Aug. 9. The 20-year-old had climbed from his car after it had spun while racing alongside Stewart.
Stewart issued a statement saying he looks forward to the process being completed and will continue to cooperate.
09-17-2014, 06:25 AM
#84
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,869
Received 6,876 Likes
on
3,488 Posts
oh boy-in NY, a preponderance ("mere tipping of the scales") is enough to indict and the accused doesn't get to put any evidence in to counter the charge. A preponderance could be 50.1% vs. 49.9% for/against while "beyond a reasonable doubt" is 100%, i.e.-the bar is low. He could get indicted, esp. in that area of NY which is very conservative.
09-18-2014, 12:40 PM
#85
Senior Moderator
Law Experts Predict What To Expect In Tony Stewart Grand Jury - NASCAR Sprint Cup News - MRN.com
Is Tony Stewart popular in upstate NY?
A former New York prosecutor expects Ontario County District Attorney Michael Tantillo to be “fair” in presenting all the evidence to a grand jury that will determine if Tony Stewart faces charges for his role in a fatal sprint car crash last month.
Kevin Ward Jr., 20, died after he was struck by Stewart’s sprint car during a race Aug. 9 at Canandaigua Motorsports Park.
It is the prosecutor’s duty to prove that a person should be charged based on the evidence they present. They do not have to present evidence that could be favorable to the person facing charges. Unlike a trial, a defense attorney is not permitted to argue its case.
“I would suspect that the prosecutor in this situation is going to do everything within his power to make sure that this is a fair presentation of the evidence,’’ Gary Kelder, a prosecutor from 1992-98 and a law professor at Syracuse University since 1980, told Motor Racing Network.
“You want to make sure with a case that has had this type of publicity and involves people of national repute ... this is done properly. Frankly, as a prosecutor, I would say that’s how prosecutors should always behave even in a non-high profile case. Do they always do that? I don’t know.’’
Tantillo announced Tuesday that he would send Stewart’s case to the grand jury after a nearly month-long investigation by the Ontario County Sheriff’s Office. Since grand juries work in secret, Tantillo could not reveal when the grand jury would meet. Tantillo has not stated what charge he intends to request.
Kelder said that if Tantillo seeks a manslaughter charge - manslaughter in the second degree is a Class C felony in New York with a maximum sentence of 15 years - the district attorney would have to prove the “conduct of the individual was reckless.’’ Kelder noted that Tantillo could seek a charge of criminally negligent homicide, a Class E felony with a maximum sentence of four years.
Kelder said a prosecutor typically will present the evidence to a grand jury before stating what charge is sought.
A grand jury can indict an individual based on the evidence presented, moving the matter to trial. The grand jury also can dismiss the charges. Or, the grand jury may direct the prosecutor to file a lesser charge. Should the grand jury dismiss charges, the prosecutor can come back at another time with more evidence.
By going to a grand jury, Tantillo could take the pressure off himself, said Valerie Hans, a professor of law at Cornell University and among the nation’s leading authorities on the jury system.
“One of the things I’ve learned in studying trial juries is that when you have a controversial case with high-profile defendants, sometimes it’s nice to let the jury take the blame or praise,’’ she told Motor Racing Network. “The grand jury in the Tony Stewart case might be functioning in the same kind of way ... getting the district attorney off the hot seat.’’
With a high-profile case that brought national media to Ontario County after the accident, emotions can play a role in a grand jury. Unlike a trial where a defense attorney can seek a change of venue or strike potential jurors, that does not happen with a grand jury.
Kelder said it could be a challenge.
“I would make sure that I instructed the jury that they’re to make their decision on whether to charge under any of the offenses that I give to them based on the evidence that they’ve heard,’’ he said. “Not on the basis of any emotion. Not on the basis of rumor or gossip they picked up. Not on the basis of anything they read in the newspaper.’’
Kelder said that the evidence a prosecutor may present to a grand jury can be whatever testimony has been given - Stewart has cooperated with authorities and vowed in a statement Tuesday he would continue to do so. Kelder said other pieces of evidence could include photographs and video. Ontario County Sheriff Philip Povero stated two days after the incident that they had two videos of the incident. One has not been viewed publicly.
If members of the grand jury view video, they’ll see Ward leave his car and walk down the track gesturing toward Stewart’s car before he was struck.
“You have to take the context into account,’’ Hans said. “This is actually something people are pretty good at. They look at the full context. They’ll know what happened ... the behavior of the victim and evaluate that and evaluate the entire context in deciding whether or not a criminal charge is appropriate.’’
Kevin Ward Jr., 20, died after he was struck by Stewart’s sprint car during a race Aug. 9 at Canandaigua Motorsports Park.
It is the prosecutor’s duty to prove that a person should be charged based on the evidence they present. They do not have to present evidence that could be favorable to the person facing charges. Unlike a trial, a defense attorney is not permitted to argue its case.
“I would suspect that the prosecutor in this situation is going to do everything within his power to make sure that this is a fair presentation of the evidence,’’ Gary Kelder, a prosecutor from 1992-98 and a law professor at Syracuse University since 1980, told Motor Racing Network.
“You want to make sure with a case that has had this type of publicity and involves people of national repute ... this is done properly. Frankly, as a prosecutor, I would say that’s how prosecutors should always behave even in a non-high profile case. Do they always do that? I don’t know.’’
Tantillo announced Tuesday that he would send Stewart’s case to the grand jury after a nearly month-long investigation by the Ontario County Sheriff’s Office. Since grand juries work in secret, Tantillo could not reveal when the grand jury would meet. Tantillo has not stated what charge he intends to request.
Kelder said that if Tantillo seeks a manslaughter charge - manslaughter in the second degree is a Class C felony in New York with a maximum sentence of 15 years - the district attorney would have to prove the “conduct of the individual was reckless.’’ Kelder noted that Tantillo could seek a charge of criminally negligent homicide, a Class E felony with a maximum sentence of four years.
Kelder said a prosecutor typically will present the evidence to a grand jury before stating what charge is sought.
A grand jury can indict an individual based on the evidence presented, moving the matter to trial. The grand jury also can dismiss the charges. Or, the grand jury may direct the prosecutor to file a lesser charge. Should the grand jury dismiss charges, the prosecutor can come back at another time with more evidence.
By going to a grand jury, Tantillo could take the pressure off himself, said Valerie Hans, a professor of law at Cornell University and among the nation’s leading authorities on the jury system.
“One of the things I’ve learned in studying trial juries is that when you have a controversial case with high-profile defendants, sometimes it’s nice to let the jury take the blame or praise,’’ she told Motor Racing Network. “The grand jury in the Tony Stewart case might be functioning in the same kind of way ... getting the district attorney off the hot seat.’’
With a high-profile case that brought national media to Ontario County after the accident, emotions can play a role in a grand jury. Unlike a trial where a defense attorney can seek a change of venue or strike potential jurors, that does not happen with a grand jury.
Kelder said it could be a challenge.
“I would make sure that I instructed the jury that they’re to make their decision on whether to charge under any of the offenses that I give to them based on the evidence that they’ve heard,’’ he said. “Not on the basis of any emotion. Not on the basis of rumor or gossip they picked up. Not on the basis of anything they read in the newspaper.’’
Kelder said that the evidence a prosecutor may present to a grand jury can be whatever testimony has been given - Stewart has cooperated with authorities and vowed in a statement Tuesday he would continue to do so. Kelder said other pieces of evidence could include photographs and video. Ontario County Sheriff Philip Povero stated two days after the incident that they had two videos of the incident. One has not been viewed publicly.
If members of the grand jury view video, they’ll see Ward leave his car and walk down the track gesturing toward Stewart’s car before he was struck.
“You have to take the context into account,’’ Hans said. “This is actually something people are pretty good at. They look at the full context. They’ll know what happened ... the behavior of the victim and evaluate that and evaluate the entire context in deciding whether or not a criminal charge is appropriate.’’
09-24-2014, 02:29 PM
#86
AZ Community Team
Tony Stewart not charged by grand jury in death of Kevin Ward Jr.
09-24-2014, 02:41 PM
#87
Senior Moderator
marijuana
+
walking onto the track
=
Free Tony
+
walking onto the track
=
Free Tony
09-24-2014, 03:49 PM
#88
AZ Community Team
09-24-2014, 07:25 PM
#90
Trolling Canuckistan
I'd say the fact that the DEA has convinced people that weed keeps you high until it has completely left your system will help Tony in the impending civil suit (even though it's as realistic as the scenes from Reefer Madness and based on the same amount of science).
09-24-2014, 08:22 PM
#91
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,869
Received 6,876 Likes
on
3,488 Posts
The tests in NYS reveal different levels of cannabis.
09-24-2014, 09:10 PM
#92
Trolling Canuckistan
Maybe he habitually smokes marijuana cigarettes. It's pretty obvious that there are athletes who do and compete at the highest level. I doubt many if any partake before the game on game day. I would assume someone who smokes several times a week has a pretty good level in them.
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't know Kevin Ward, maybe he is nuts and smoked a doobie on the way to the track. I just have a real hard time believing someone who was serious about racing would do that.
In the end, blessing in disguise for racing. Ignorance and myths regarding marijuana have likely helped keep a racer from being prosecuted over a racing accident.
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't know Kevin Ward, maybe he is nuts and smoked a doobie on the way to the track. I just have a real hard time believing someone who was serious about racing would do that.
In the end, blessing in disguise for racing. Ignorance and myths regarding marijuana have likely helped keep a racer from being prosecuted over a racing accident.
09-24-2014, 11:13 PM
#93
Senior Moderator
I know nothing about marijuana, but I'll trust the DA and the toxicologist over your opinion on this one.
09-25-2014, 01:10 AM
#94
Trolling Canuckistan
Originally Posted by NY Times
There is a lot of debate about how best to prove that drivers under the influence of THC are too intoxicated to drive. Blood-alcohol content can be reliably tested on the side of the road with a Breathalyzer, and ample data link rising levels of blood alcohol to decreases in driving skills. The same is not true for marijuana.
THC levels must be measured from blood or urine samples, which are typically taken hours after an arrest. Urine tests, which look for a metabolite of THC rather than the drug itself, return a positive result days or weeks after someone has actually smoked. Yet most states have laws that equate any detectable level of THC metabolite in urine with detectable levels of actual THC in blood, and criminalize both. Only six states have set legal limits for THC concentration in the blood. In Colorado and Washington, where recreational use has been legalized, that limit is five nanograms per milliliter of blood, or five parts per billion.
THC levels must be measured from blood or urine samples, which are typically taken hours after an arrest. Urine tests, which look for a metabolite of THC rather than the drug itself, return a positive result days or weeks after someone has actually smoked. Yet most states have laws that equate any detectable level of THC metabolite in urine with detectable levels of actual THC in blood, and criminalize both. Only six states have set legal limits for THC concentration in the blood. In Colorado and Washington, where recreational use has been legalized, that limit is five nanograms per milliliter of blood, or five parts per billion.
Like I said, maybe he smoked a joint on the way to the track, yeah then he's impaired. If he smoked the night before, there is no way the marijuana in his system impaired him in any way.
09-25-2014, 05:51 AM
#95
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,869
Received 6,876 Likes
on
3,488 Posts
A grand jury in NYS has 23 people who vote to indict, "no-bill" or recommend a lower offense. In addition, the State police and the defense accident reconstruction expert apparently agreed Ward's conduct on the track caused his own demise. I don't think it was entirely about pot and having been a former smoker of pot, esp. while competing free-style skiing, it seemed to help not hinder my ability. 
Anyways, here's the article:
On Wednesday morning, a prominent accident reconstructionist from a Chicago suburb laid out for an Ontario County grand jury what he determined had preceded the death of Kevin Ward Jr.
The consultant, Gary Wayne Cooper, had dissected videos of the fatal accident, greatly slowing them down to try to re-create the fateful and fatal steps Ward had taken, and the on-track reactions of NASCAR driver Tony Stewart.
Not long after the presentation, the grand jury decided not to criminally charge Stewart.
Cleared: Tony Stewart will not face charges in on-track death
"We ... had testify one of the forensics experts who had of course taken all of the videos, broken them down into separate frames of seconds, and thoroughly broke everything down to the point where you more clearly could see precisely what happened — the distance and time factors, the physics of the accident," said Rochester attorney John Speranza, who, along with the Indianapolis law firm of Voyles Zahn and Paul, represented Stewart.
The Indianapolis firm contacted Speranza, a longtime area defense lawyer, shortly after the Aug. 9 accident at the Canandaigua Motorsports Park. Speranza agreed to serve as local counsel for Stewart.
DEMOCRATANDCHRONICLE
Transcript: DA Michael Tantillo presents findings of grand jury in Tony Stewart case
Both the State Police and the defense expert reconstructed the accident, Speranza said.
The defense reconstruction determined that there was only 1.3 seconds between the time one car passed Ward, who was walking on the track, and when Stewart's car struck Ward.
"Essentially (Ward) was caught up in that large rear wheel" of Stewart's car, Speranza said.
Also, Speranza said, Cooper decided that Stewart's car had not struck Ward's earlier, as many had surmised. Speranza said he did not know whether the State Police reconstruction also reached that conclusion, but clearly the grand jury — having heard both versions — determined that Stewart did not respond unreasonably while driving.
"We did a complete independent investigation with a private investigator," Speranza said. "We interviewed probably 10 to 20 witnesses, many of them of course the same witnesses that the police had interviewed."
The grand jury was also likely swayed by the evidence that Ward had used marijuana and was driving in what District Attorney Michael Tantillo said was an "impaired" state, Speranza said.
On Wednesday afternoon, about an hour after Tantillo announced the grand jury decision, Speranza spoke with Stewart by telephone. Stewart was pleased with the grand jury decision, but cannot shake the fact that a 20-year-old died at the racetrack, Speranza said.
"He's still extremely upset about this," Speranza said.
GCRAIG@DemocratandChronicle.com
Twitter.com/gcraig1
Anyways, here's the article:On Wednesday morning, a prominent accident reconstructionist from a Chicago suburb laid out for an Ontario County grand jury what he determined had preceded the death of Kevin Ward Jr.
The consultant, Gary Wayne Cooper, had dissected videos of the fatal accident, greatly slowing them down to try to re-create the fateful and fatal steps Ward had taken, and the on-track reactions of NASCAR driver Tony Stewart.
Not long after the presentation, the grand jury decided not to criminally charge Stewart.
Cleared: Tony Stewart will not face charges in on-track death
"We ... had testify one of the forensics experts who had of course taken all of the videos, broken them down into separate frames of seconds, and thoroughly broke everything down to the point where you more clearly could see precisely what happened — the distance and time factors, the physics of the accident," said Rochester attorney John Speranza, who, along with the Indianapolis law firm of Voyles Zahn and Paul, represented Stewart.
The Indianapolis firm contacted Speranza, a longtime area defense lawyer, shortly after the Aug. 9 accident at the Canandaigua Motorsports Park. Speranza agreed to serve as local counsel for Stewart.
DEMOCRATANDCHRONICLE
Transcript: DA Michael Tantillo presents findings of grand jury in Tony Stewart case
Both the State Police and the defense expert reconstructed the accident, Speranza said.
The defense reconstruction determined that there was only 1.3 seconds between the time one car passed Ward, who was walking on the track, and when Stewart's car struck Ward.
"Essentially (Ward) was caught up in that large rear wheel" of Stewart's car, Speranza said.
Also, Speranza said, Cooper decided that Stewart's car had not struck Ward's earlier, as many had surmised. Speranza said he did not know whether the State Police reconstruction also reached that conclusion, but clearly the grand jury — having heard both versions — determined that Stewart did not respond unreasonably while driving.
"We did a complete independent investigation with a private investigator," Speranza said. "We interviewed probably 10 to 20 witnesses, many of them of course the same witnesses that the police had interviewed."
The grand jury was also likely swayed by the evidence that Ward had used marijuana and was driving in what District Attorney Michael Tantillo said was an "impaired" state, Speranza said.
On Wednesday afternoon, about an hour after Tantillo announced the grand jury decision, Speranza spoke with Stewart by telephone. Stewart was pleased with the grand jury decision, but cannot shake the fact that a 20-year-old died at the racetrack, Speranza said.
"He's still extremely upset about this," Speranza said.
GCRAIG@DemocratandChronicle.com
Twitter.com/gcraig1
09-25-2014, 07:18 AM
#96
AZ Community Team
Maybe he habitually smokes marijuana cigarettes. It's pretty obvious that there are athletes who do and compete at the highest level. I doubt many if any partake before the game on game day. I would assume someone who smokes several times a week has a pretty good level in them.
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't know Kevin Ward, maybe he is nuts and smoked a doobie on the way to the track. I just have a real hard time believing someone who was serious about racing would do that.
In the end, blessing in disguise for racing. Ignorance and myths regarding marijuana have likely helped keep a racer from being prosecuted over a racing accident.
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't know Kevin Ward, maybe he is nuts and smoked a doobie on the way to the track. I just have a real hard time believing someone who was serious about racing would do that.
In the end, blessing in disguise for racing. Ignorance and myths regarding marijuana have likely helped keep a racer from being prosecuted over a racing accident.
09-25-2014, 07:22 AM
#97
AZ Community Team
The big evidence to me was the video analysis from two video's with different angles which showed Tony was driving fairly straight. Analyst superimposed grids on the video and did frame by frame analysis to show direction as well as various speed playback. That was probably the main factor in finding Stewart not being charged.
09-25-2014, 08:34 AM
#98
AZ Community Team
Maybe he habitually smokes marijuana cigarettes. It's pretty obvious that there are athletes who do and compete at the highest level. I doubt many if any partake before the game on game day. I would assume someone who smokes several times a week has a pretty good level in them.
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't know Kevin Ward, maybe he is nuts and smoked a doobie on the way to the track. I just have a real hard time believing someone who was serious about racing would do that.
In the end, blessing in disguise for racing. Ignorance and myths regarding marijuana have likely helped keep a racer from being prosecuted over a racing accident.
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't know Kevin Ward, maybe he is nuts and smoked a doobie on the way to the track. I just have a real hard time believing someone who was serious about racing would do that.
In the end, blessing in disguise for racing. Ignorance and myths regarding marijuana have likely helped keep a racer from being prosecuted over a racing accident.
Ten other drivers banned from NASCAR for substances
09-25-2014, 12:34 PM
#99
Senior Moderator
Tantillo is a district attorney, not a scientist. He knows what someone tells him and there is quite a lot of debate around the topic, the toxicologist is a lab worker, he runs tests and says what he found. The fact that you say "I know nothing, I'll trust these guys" means you have no actual experience to base your opinions on or scientific data to back them up, nothing but blind faith.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/he...uana.html?_r=0
Like I said, maybe he smoked a joint on the way to the track, yeah then he's impaired. If he smoked the night before, there is no way the marijuana in his system impaired him in any way.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/he...uana.html?_r=0
Like I said, maybe he smoked a joint on the way to the track, yeah then he's impaired. If he smoked the night before, there is no way the marijuana in his system impaired him in any way.
09-25-2014, 02:35 PM
#100
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,869
Received 6,876 Likes
on
3,488 Posts
^^^ that is true about the DA making those kinds of statements but the weird thing is, DA's usually blow smoke up their own ass on a criminal matter involving the person accused, not the victim.
09-25-2014, 02:39 PM
#101
Senior Moderator
09-25-2014, 03:18 PM
#102
Trolling Canuckistan
From the beginning I've said Stewart shouldn't be prosecuted. I'm glad he isn't being prosecuted. Having a good amount of personal knowledge about marijuana, it's effects, and how your body metabolizes it, I find it humorous that a main factor in the lack of prosecution is that the kid smoked weed.
Read the article I linked to and see what scientific studies have found about people who drive while high. Nothing about that data would suggest that you would want to do it on a race track if your goal was driving fast. People who smoke weed are more like the pace car driver, driving slower than everybody else wants to go.
Again maybe I'm wrong and the kid is real stupid and smoked the before the race. It just seems highly unlikely and there is no test that can prove post mortem that he was "high". If you look into it, there isn't even a test that can prove you are high on weed when you are alive. This is a problem for law enforcement as it is become legal for use medically and for recreation.
Anyone who has ever used marijuana knows, it's in your system weeks after it's effects are long gone. The toxicology report can't prove he was high only that has used previously.
09-25-2014, 03:26 PM
#103
Trolling Canuckistan
09-25-2014, 03:37 PM
#104
Trolling Canuckistan
Pros who are "high" during the event are most likely on amphetamines like Adderall (which is an Attention Deficit drug). That's a different drug entirely as it truly is a performance enhancer improving concentration and reflex time.
NASCAR drivers can be banned for over the counter allergy and cold medications.
09-25-2014, 05:36 PM
#105
Senior Moderator
You're missing my point. I'm not denying they have a reliable test that shows he has used marijuana previously. I'm saying there is no test that shows he is currently under the influence of marijuana (meaning he is high on marijuana).
From the beginning I've said Stewart shouldn't be prosecuted. I'm glad he isn't being prosecuted. Having a good amount of personal knowledge about marijuana, it's effects, and how your body metabolizes it, I find it humorous that a main factor in the lack of prosecution is that the kid smoked weed.
Read the article I linked to and see what scientific studies have found about people who drive while high. Nothing about that data would suggest that you would want to do it on a race track if your goal was driving fast. People who smoke weed are more like the pace car driver, driving slower than everybody else wants to go.
Again maybe I'm wrong and the kid is real stupid and smoked the before the race. It just seems highly unlikely and there is no test that can prove post mortem that he was "high". If you look into it, there isn't even a test that can prove you are high on weed when you are alive. This is a problem for law enforcement as it is become legal for use medically and for recreation.
Anyone who has ever used marijuana knows, it's in your system weeks after it's effects are long gone. The toxicology report can't prove he was high only that has used previously.
From the beginning I've said Stewart shouldn't be prosecuted. I'm glad he isn't being prosecuted. Having a good amount of personal knowledge about marijuana, it's effects, and how your body metabolizes it, I find it humorous that a main factor in the lack of prosecution is that the kid smoked weed.
Read the article I linked to and see what scientific studies have found about people who drive while high. Nothing about that data would suggest that you would want to do it on a race track if your goal was driving fast. People who smoke weed are more like the pace car driver, driving slower than everybody else wants to go.
Again maybe I'm wrong and the kid is real stupid and smoked the before the race. It just seems highly unlikely and there is no test that can prove post mortem that he was "high". If you look into it, there isn't even a test that can prove you are high on weed when you are alive. This is a problem for law enforcement as it is become legal for use medically and for recreation.
Anyone who has ever used marijuana knows, it's in your system weeks after it's effects are long gone. The toxicology report can't prove he was high only that has used previously.
09-26-2014, 07:56 AM
#106
Senior Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 24,869
Received 6,876 Likes
on
3,488 Posts
09-26-2014, 12:13 PM
#107
Safety Car
Originally Posted by black label
I find it humorous that a main factor in the lack of prosecution is that the kid smoked weed.
Originally Posted by black label
If you look into it, there isn't even a test that can prove you are high on weed when you are alive. This is a problem for law enforcement as it is become legal for use medically and for recreation.
Originally Posted by black label
Maybe I'm wrong, I didn't know Kevin Ward, maybe he is nuts and smoked a doobie on the way to the track. I just have a real hard time believing someone who was serious about racing would do that.
09-26-2014, 01:58 PM
#108
Trolling Canuckistan
If marijuana impairment can not be accurately determined, then the only safe measurement is zero. As someone who uses no alcohol, tobacco or drugs -- and has taken hundreds of drug tests over the course of a career -- I am not willing to tolerate any level of impairment in serious endeavors.
Well, maybe there is a way to measure drug advocacy impairment, at least. The belief that professionals who use drugs will always use them responsibly, is a solid reading of "moderately impaired" on the drug advocacy scale.
Well, maybe there is a way to measure drug advocacy impairment, at least. The belief that professionals who use drugs will always use them responsibly, is a solid reading of "moderately impaired" on the drug advocacy scale.
Shall we arrest anyone who has traces of Adderall, paxil, or zoloft in their system. Should we ban people from driving who use these medications under the supervision of a doctor? Why is it that when you have a prescription for these, they are called "medication" and you are being "treated" but if bought on the black market they are "drugs" and you are an "abuser"? Over the counter benadryl makes some people sleepy, where's the field test for that so we know when to charge someone with operating under the influence? Ban allergy medications?
I never said professional atheletes who use drugs always use them responsibly. I said they use them and still compete at the highest levels (to be clear I don't mean use them shortly before the event and compete at the highest levels).
A NASCAR driver was suspended for using heroin. He admitted to using it before the race. As irresponsible as this may sound, it is more responsible than him going onto the track without doing it (obviously the most responsible thing would be not using heroin at all and driving race cars). He was an addict, heroin addicts don't actually get "high" when they use, they get back to normal and alleviate the sickness that comes from withdrawal. No doubt, he should not be racing cars and using heroin regardless of how the drug affected him at that point in his addiction but everyone on the track would have been less safe if he went out to race at 200mph while suffering from the withdrawal symptoms of heroin. (you can read Legends link to 10 NASCAR drives who were banned article).
Back to my point about Ward. Does anyone think this was the first time he ever smoked weed? He had probably been using it for some time and is well aware of the effects. I never said he would be fine to race while high, I said I doubt he would want to race while high as most studies show it would slow down his driving which is counter intuitive to winning a race.
I've also repeatedly stated that "maybe he smoked on the way to the race" and followed that with it "he would be impaired". I said I doubted that because it doesn't make sense in terms of "winning a race". I'm not sure how that became "all professionals will use responsibly" in your mind.
The ones who are moderately impaired are people making judgements and decisions when they have no facts or personal experience to base their thoughts on, just their own personal beliefs. Their lack of knowledge has impaired their ability to understand.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
4drviper
3G TL Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
0
09-23-2015 09:00 PM