|
Flashheart
|
 |
« Reply #135 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:18:37 » |
|
its now a trending topic on twatter, going to be negative for the club...
How? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
BenTheRed
 Offline
Posts: 194
|
|
« Reply #136 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:20:55 » |
|
How?
Perception from the outside would be that we employ killers or sympathise with them  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Flashheart
|
|
« Reply #137 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:22:23 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
FormerlyPlymRed
Offline
Posts: 1944
|
|
« Reply #138 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:23:30 » |
|
I dont want him to play for our club, he wants to 'get his life back on track' do it somewhere else. It's not even like we need a keeper massively so why risk the negative headlines that will head our way?
I'm sure he didn't mean to kill those two young lads but the fact he is that he did and for me that is that, I just think of the family of those lads and what they would feel if they saw him playing for us. Not for me.
Oh and people who drink and drive are cunts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Costanza
Offline
Posts: 10645
|
|
« Reply #139 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:25:42 » |
|
I skimmed the comments on Twitter and it's mostly questioning the duration of the sentence (and a lot of spam). Not many saying how evil Swindon Town are (apart from one Millwall fan).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RWB Robin
Offline
Posts: 668
|
|
« Reply #140 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:29:30 » |
|
Just homing in on this paragraph (which, I appreciate, is just part of the point you were making), I find this way of thinking too simplistic. Life is not black & white; there are many shades of grey inbetween...so to equate driving at 34 mph in a 30 mph limit (which everyone will have done) with McCormick's crime of driving at 97 mph on a motorway with a 70 mph limit, whilst intoxicated (which very few of us, hopefully, will have), makes no sense to me at all. You would be as well arguing that stepping on an ant and killing it is no different to torturing a kitten to death. Scale does matter, and it's the scale of McCormick's stupidity, together with the tragic consequences, that sets this apart for me.
Thanks for this, Ardiles. I don't really dissent from your point; but my point is that we are all making decisions - especially where driving is concerned - that could lead to loss of life or serious injury. That is the point at issue for me. the law is quite clear - there are different levels of dangerous driving, and his was definitely the most serious. I have driven at 97mph on the motorway, but not been drunk. Had I been stopped I would have automatically have been done for dangerous driving (even if the motorway was empty), but had an accident happened (and it easily could have done for any number of reasons)and life lost it would have been upgraded.. I drive around the country a great deal, and see some absolutely crazy driving by people who are not. presumably, over the limit - they think they are good drivers presumably - but they make conscious decisions to drive in a way which causes danger and fear to other road users. i wish they got caught more often, because the process might moderate their decision-making - but not destroy their whole lives subsequently. Please dont tell me what he did was a mistake, he chose to drive, knowing that he was still pissed, he ignored pleas from friends, telling him not to drive.
I certainly would not call what McCormick did a mistake. He should face the force of the law, as he did, and he has to live with what happened. It was criminal. But all crime is serious error - some more conscious than others, and people deserve the chance to make amends and start again. If it happened again, or if he showed attitude that was inappropriate, then he should take the consequences. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 55417
|
|
« Reply #141 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:37:37 » |
|
Without wishing to defend the guy, that is exactly what happened in this situation. He went to a wedding, he drank too much, he went to bed, he got up, still over the limit and drove. He hit the family's car in the 90s.
No it isn't, he was drinking until 2am then got 2 hours sleep and drove. There was no way that he couldn't still be pissed. When he was breathalysed he was still over twice the legal limit. Very different from stopping at 11pm and getting in the car 12 hours later when it would be reasonable to assume the alcohol had gone. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DMR
|
|
« Reply #142 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:40:19 » |
|
Christ alive, the very thought of signing him is despicable. And I've got a DD conviction.
Offences aren't the same. Yes, I'm a twat, cunt etc for what I did and I couldn't care less what others think, at the end of the day I'm the one who had to lump the punishment.
My point is, that the offence isn't the same - I drove when I was pissed. So did McCormick. But I didn't kill 2 children and paralyse another. He shouldn't play for Swindon.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
@MacPhlea
Offline
Posts: 2321
|
|
« Reply #143 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:41:00 » |
|
No it isn't, he was drinking until 2am then got 2 hours sleep and drove. There was no way that he couldn't still be pissed. When he was breathalysed he was still over twice the legal limit.
Very different from stopping at 11pm and getting in the car 12 hours later when it would be reasonable to assume the alcohol had gone.
And there in lies the magic word 'assumption' - it offers no defence even if you think it is reasonable... You could still be twice over the limit after 12 hours sleep |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
LucienSanchez
 Online
Posts: 5160
Is this hospital called St. Croc of Shit?!
|
|
« Reply #144 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:41:32 » |
|
If Dave thinks it's wrong, it might just be!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
We made a promise we swore we'd always remember... no retreat, baby, no surrender
|
|
|
@MacPhlea
Offline
Posts: 2321
|
|
« Reply #145 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:44:10 » |
|
Christ alive, the very thought of signing him is despicable. And I've got a DD conviction.
Offences aren't the same. Yes, I'm a twat, cunt etc for what I did and I couldn't care less what others think, at the end of the day I'm the one who had to lump the punishment.
My point is, that the offence isn't the same - I drove when I was pissed. So did McCormick. But I didn't kill 2 children and paralyse another. He shouldn't play for Swindon.
But you could have done... so what you are saying is that we can forgive people for drink driving as long as they don't kill a couple of kids? Had he killed a couple of kids without drinking or driving then I would agree |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sippo
Living in the 80s
Offline
Posts: 15585
I ain't gettin on no plane fool
|
|
« Reply #146 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:48:25 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're gonna see some serious shit...
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 55417
|
|
« Reply #147 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:49:17 » |
|
Had he killed a couple of kids without drinking or driving then I would agree
I find this bizarre. How can drink driving be an excuse to turn him into a victim, but if he was not drink driving be worse? I might get pissed and go and stab a few people later. Hey its OK because I was pissed, everyone makes mistakes, we've all been pissed. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DMR
|
|
« Reply #148 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:49:30 » |
|
Hypothetical bollocks.
I didn't so it's irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DMR
|
|
« Reply #149 on: Wednesday, May 23, 2012, 09:50:12 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
