One of the drivers apprehended has a long string of arrests in Hernando County.

Scott Avery, 17, of Brooksville, was riding east on Powell Road when his bicycle was struck from behind by a two-door 1997 Saturn. The driver of the Saturn fled the scene, but was later identified by the FHP as Leo Salvato, 36, of Spring Hill.

Salvato was found later and will face charges, FHP spokesman Steve Gaskins said Sunday.

Salvato has had several run-ins with the law. He has been arrested at least eight times in Hernando on charges of battery, criminal mischief, knowingly driving with a suspended license and driving while under the influence.

Hopefully they will throw Salvato under the jail this time.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/accidents/article581789.ece

With the rising costs of gas and the ongoing “global warming” hysteria making bike transportation more appealing, I’m guessing bike injuries & deaths will be on the rise. Maybe then it will become a “more pressing issue” for our lawmakers to deal with, but I doubt it.

On June 3rd, 2008 at 1:35 pm, dakine said:
soap, I take your point from sort of an emotional perspective, but 1st degree murder requires a level of intent that just isn’t going to exist in a drunk driving death. Theoretically, I guess I could envision a scenario whereby there was a degree of recklessness that would justify a 2nd degree murder charge, but that would be a pretty rare case. What you generally see is something called “vehicular manslaughter” which is sort of a lesser version of a regular manslaughter charge.

dakine,

You are taking the law as it applies and there is no argument there. No, I was not being emotional. There is intent (although it may not be the law) to do harm every time a driver drives impaired. No, 1st degree will not hold water – but it should. A car is every bit as dangerous as a gun when not used properly. The use of a gun to kill someone must be premeditated for 1st degree murder (except NY if you kill a police officer – as I understand it). I must believe that a person who is impaired makes a decision to harm others when they get behind a wheel. To plead ignorance to this is acceptable and will get you off of 1st degree (or even 2nd degree) murder. Vehicular homicide is a joke when the person knows they are impaired 9or a repeat offender). Law or not, that to me it is premeditation – IMHO.

On June 3rd, 2008 at 3:08 pm, BrianNY said:

Bingo. Like you, I am not defending the drunks who are endangering others. They need to be taken off the streets. But I do not support draconian measures of Big Brother as others espouse either. And what gets me is how the incrementality of that thinking takes more and more liberties away. MADD set out wiht a noble cause. But now is in a never ending push for more and more. Even if we gave them zero tolerance (like in most of Europe now), they would set their sites on mandatory decade sentences or some other ridiculous punishment. The org now survives just to survive. The guys at the top don’t want the gravy train to end so they continue to push for more and more. Hmmmm, sounds a lot like the race hustlers we are always complaining about. I read where the founder left b/c the organization was pushing for such drastic actions. With liberty and freedom comes responsibility. Some people are going to make bad decisions. But this is why we have law enforcement. I don’t want a nanny state regulating every single thing I do. All “for my own good”. Common sense must come in to play. Sometimes we must accept the good wiht the bad to preserve our freedoms which are slowly being taken from us.

I totally agree with Rusty on this one. There is such a thing as taking something too far.

You bring up an interesting point regarding personal responsibility and overreaction.

Like it or not, as groups like MADD keep pushing up penalties for alcohol related incidents, municipalities benefit financially, and I have seen some interesting policing in NJ.

Along the Jersey shore, bar patrons have reported undistinguished lines that cops monitor. One foot over while holding a container results in a “public intoxication” charge, leading to increasing fines and court costs.

Where I used to work, “connected” individuals used to sell “support your local police” cards for certain towns in NJ. It was explained to me that by flashing this purchased card during a pull over, the officer would immediately understand that the card holder “never drinks and drives.”

I’ve also heard accounts of police in NJ targeting lone drivers leaving bars and restaurants with the usual, “eyes appeared bloodshot, speech was slurred and the faint odor of alcohol was detected” as cause for a stop, rather than erratic driving.

An ounce of prevention can beat a pound of cure, however from what I’ve seen and heard, municipalities have been known to take things too far sometimes.

Your point being?

There is a lot of reckless driving out there, alcohol related and sober related.

It does no good to simply dismiss them (alcohol related fatalities) and point the finger at those who aren’t drunk and say shame on you.

I don’t. Part of what you quoted from me includes the qualifier, “I’m not here to defend the drunks.”

In addition, my response to rusty, 42 minutes before your comment, also included the following sentiments: “Driving drunk is the issue, and seeing the drinking practices in US restaurants, stadiums, etc., I personally believe that there are more inebriated drivers on the roads everyday then we currently assume,” and “17,000 drunk fatalities a year is unacceptable.”

Rolssk, I feel that you have misrepresented my comments. To be clear, drunk driving is irresponsible and avoidable, as are other forms of reckless driving – like speeding and weaving between lanes without signaling.

…

ightisright said:

get caught driving drunk…the police should confiscate the vehicle…does not matter who owns it…unless stolen. Anyone with a drinking problem should never have access to a vehicle.

And therein lies the problem. When I lived in Salt Lake, I had a neighbor that had a habit of drunk driving. And when his license was revoked, he just drove without a license. When I asked why they didn’t take his vehicle, I was told that because it was jointly owned by his wife, they couldn’t take it.

And one time some idiot judge gave him a limited license to commute to work and back. Which just happend to have a couple of bars in between.

I’ve never heard if he killed someone (or himself), but it’s just a matter of time.

It needs to be treated as a deliberate criminal act and not an illness with sever enforcement before it will be stopped.

On June 3rd, 2008 at 12:51 pm, BrianNY said:

At the risk of sounding like lgm…

2004 US Auto Fatalities -
Sober = 25,636
Alcohol Related = 17,000

I’m not here to defend the drunks, but the tee-totlers seem to still have a leg up on auto fatality rates in America.

Your point being? ALL of those 17,000 drunk related fatalities are preventable. I does no good to simply dismiss them and point the finger at those who aren’t drunk and say shame on you.

On June 3rd, 2008 at 12:59 pm, Texas Tiger said:

Mexico has a Bagdad Beach? Who knew?

Playa Bagdad is located at the SE mouth of the Rio Bravo. Badgdad was once a thriving port in that location. Covered it in my Texas history class.