this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024

161 points (98.2% liked)

News

23402 readers

4477 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

161

2 children dead, 15 people injured after vehicle crashes into building holding child's birthday party (abcnews.go.com)

submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave to c/news

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A 66-year-old suspect was arrested at the scene, police said.

Two children are dead and 15 people were injured after a woman drove her car into a child's birthday party, Sheriff Troy Goodnough said in a press conference Saturday evening.

The two children who were pronounced dead at the scene were siblings, an 8-year-old girl and a 5-year-old boy, according to police.

all 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Dasus 60 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Oh fuck.

Around 3 p.m., a woman drove a vehicle through a wall of the Swan Boat Club in Monroe County, Michigan, coming to a stop 25 feet inside, authorities said.

The 66-year-old suspect was arrested at the scene for suspicion of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, causing death and is currently being held at Monroe County Jail, according to Goodnough.

I smell chardonnay.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Drunk at 3pm? Jesus.

[+] jumjummy -12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

This is sociopathic, probably anger-fueled thinking. You don't spend enough time around people, you don't realize how imperfect and different literally everyone is, and you don't really know what their problems are; so you tend to dehumanize people who make mistakes. What happened was horrible, some people may never forgive them, but they are still humans. Not to mention that you can't trust humans in the first place to even pick the right people to punish, let alone to punish humanely. Not that punishment was ever a good response.

Or maybe you do realize these things and you'll come to your senses later.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

People are imperfect. Thats why there should be more stringent requirements for a bunch of very imperfect people to be given licenses to pilot 3 ton death machines.

I dont know if this person was drunk or texting... But i'm sure there were red flags prior to this incident.

[–] scarilog 22 points 7 months ago

This is heartbreaking. A child's birthday party.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Not excusing drunk driving, but based on the shape of the road I see how this happened. From Google maps, if the driver was coming from blanchett street there is a bend in the road right in front of the building. Here is what it looks like from street view. The driver was probably drunk and/or lost control of the vehicle and went speeding forward into the side of the building.

[–] NotAViciousCyborg 12 points 7 months ago

Looks like she thought the 2 poles in the second picture were on either side of the road and just continued in between them.

[+] [email protected] -12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

[email protected]

[–] LesserAbe 28 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Doesn't seem like an appropriate sentiment here. The woman was drunk. And I've been to Monroe Michigan, you're not going to get around using public transit.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 7 months ago (4 children)

The sentiment isn't against her car use specifically, but more the infrastructure that makes one completely reliant on a car, and doesn't give you the option to get the bus home after you've had a few drinks.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

In response to the two (and counting) Uber bros here: Uber isn't always available, especially in rural communities. Uber drivers don't always want to deal with drunks, and frankly, shit's expensive, which, like it or not, is going to keep some people from using it. The US has a really common anti-pattern of exporting systemic failures as person responsibility failings, but I'm telling you that there's a reason why our drunk driving rates are consistently and significantly higher than what you see in West Europe/Japan/etc. despite the fact that we've spent untold amount of money on enforcement and public health campaigns. It's not because Americans are uniquely irresponsible; it's because of low urban densities and car dependency. If you don't need a car to get home, then your drunk ass will just take the bus or walk. This is 100% an infrastructure problem that we've tried to solve with finger wagging, enshittified taxis, and cops, and to nobody's surprise but ours, we continue to have shit metrics on this.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Uber exists.

Lack of public transportation options are not a viable excuse for driving a vehicle drunk.

If you choose to put alcohol into your body without an “exit plan” then at no point does any other entity own that choice and the consequences of that choice.s

Yes, fuck cars, fuck the lack of public transportation and all of that.

Your point has no reason being here though.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't disagree with any of your points. I just also believe that this happens less when there is less dependency on cars. The driver is still at fault, but just blaming her doesn't prevent this from happening again in the future.

[–] ChilledPeppers 4 points 7 months ago

NJB has a video on cars hitting buildings. Pretty obviously, less people driving makes less people hit buildings. In this case it may not be the cause, but as a statistic, I would say that proper planning would help to reduce this type of accident.

[–] LesserAbe 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You're right, it would be great to expand public transit so that people always have a reliable option besides a personal car. I just don't think a comment that consists entirely of "fuck cars" is fitting regarding this particular incident.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Any time there's an anti car stance to take, somebody will show up with some pedantic nit pick about times when they're useful, and I don't think it's necessary to caveat the original point to try to get ahead of any of those people. It's not the only thing to say about this incident but I think it is valid and gets the conversation started about how car dependency is involved here.

[–] LesserAbe 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

With respect, I don't think it's accurate to say this is a nitpick. People in Monroe Michigan drive cars. This story isn't about infrastructure, it's about a drunk driver killing children. And if someone wants to make the case that robust public infrastructure would have avoided this tragedy (which may be true) they need to make the case. Not show up and essentially say nothing but "fuck the thing that people from this place require for every facet of their lives."

Someone who is familiar with the whole "fuck cars" milieu might understand what that comment is supposed to mean. But for the people I know from Monroe you might as well be speaking a foreign language. They hear "you can't have a car" and they'll lose their job and be unable to go to the grocery store.

You're having a conversation with me, which I appreciate. Saying just "fuck cars" isn't a good conversation starter, and if the goal is winning people over it starts one on the wrong foot.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

The original comment wasn't even just saying fuck cars, it was a link to a community that discusses the types of infrastructural issues that allow incidents like this to happen. You say that this story isn't about the infrastructure, but unless we talk about that, nothing will change and these things will continue to happen.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago

It's called an Uber..

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't think she woul've killed a lot of people while being drunk on a bicycle

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's beside the point.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Is it? The US tries really hard to frame its systemic failures as personal responsibility problems. There's a reason the US has significantly higher both drunk driving rates and vehicle vs pedestrian collision rates compared to the rest of the developed world. If everybody has to drive a car everywhere to do anything because that's how the system's been built, then there's going to be consequences for that. Car-based infrastructure, car-based consequences, it's not rocket surgery.

When someone loses control of a vehicle, especially the big, heavy vehicles auto makers have been pushing lately, the car-based consequences are going to be much more catastrophic than someone losing control of a bicycle or their own two feet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Build infrastructure that doesn't prioritise the car (and is consequently safer, even for drunks) and these events will happen a lot less often. Traffic calming, massively lower speed limits, banning absurdly large SUVs, and providing viable (and safe) alternatives to driving will make everyone much safer.