[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Tommy-G

well, drop in the bucket I suppose

Nine months for the kid isn't enough if you ask me.

[Tommy-G]

Originally Posted by Esteban

Nine months for the kid isn't enough if you ask me.

I meant the money....but Correct, none of it is fair for the families loss

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Tommy-G

I meant the money....but Correct, none of it is fair for the families loss

They charge people younger than him as an adult.

[IsleOfMs]

Originally Posted by spazzyfry123

Is dad getting blasted here because he bought his son a Lambo SUV?

He could have bought him a Tahoe and the son still is the one making the decision of skinny pedal usage. I agree that it's a questionable decision, but it's a crime to buy a kid a quick vehicle?

I agree. I'm seeing so much internet-rage on this thread. And so little empathy. Not asking anyone to empathize with the driver, but condemning the father is either myopic or just rage addiction.

How many people see a car they can't afford and then think/say how "that car isn't worth it"? I hear that crap all the time. $200k for a car seems excessive if you make $200/yr but it probably wasn't excessive at all to this man. Now imagine you could write that check without a moment's thought and then imagine you have kids and how fun it would be to shower them with nice things.

I hear you typing angrily "it's about the speed, not the money" but I reply "How many $200k cars aren't powerful and fast?"

1) People with money aren't bad people for spending it on their kids.
2) There's not one car on sale today that isn't capable of doing 110mph.
3) That lambo had better tires, suspension, and brakes than 98% of cars out there.

If my kid was going to use poor judgment behind the wheel I'd rather he be in a car which was uber competent at evasive maneuvers than a typical teen sh** box.

Saying if you buy your kid a fast car you are on the hook for his bad decisions is 100% the same as saying the parent should go to jail if the kid buys drugs that kills someone just bc the parent gave him the allowance he used to buy the drugs.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by Esteban

They charge people younger than him as an adult.

Just found this on the web so it looks like recently the law has changed:

"For over a decade, 14- to 17-year-olds could face adult charges in the state of California through Proposition 21 of "The Juvenile Justice Initiative." However, in February 2021, a unanimous decision by the California Supreme Court put an end to the harsh measures, which led to overcrowded prisons and developmental ..."

[floridaorange]

Originally Posted by bmwspice

I agree. I'm seeing so much internet-rage on this thread. And so little empathy. Not asking anyone to empathize with the driver, but condemning the father is either myopic or just rage addiction.

How many people see a car they can't afford and then think/say how "that car isn't worth it"? I hear that crap all the time. $200k for a car seems excessive if you make $200/yr but it probably wasn't excessive at all to this man. Now imagine you could write that check without a moment's thought and then imagine you have kids and how fun it would be to shower them with nice things.

I hear you typing angrily "it's about the speed, not the money" but I reply "How many $200k cars aren't powerful and fast?"

1) People with money aren't bad people for spending it on their kids.
2) There's not one car on sale today that isn't capable of doing 110mph.
3) That lambo had better tires, suspension, and brakes than 98% of cars out there.

If my kid was going to use poor judgment behind the wheel I'd rather he be in a car which was uber competent at evasive maneuvers than a typical teen sh** box.

Saying if you buy your kid a fast car you are on the hook for his bad decisions is 100% the same as saying the parent should go to jail if the kid buys drugs that kills someone just bc the parent gave him the allowance he used to buy the drugs.

No.

[leopard print]

Originally Posted by bmwspice

I agree. I'm seeing so much internet-rage on this thread. And so little empathy. Not asking anyone to empathize with the driver, but condemning the father is either myopic or just rage addiction.

How many people see a car they can't afford and then think/say how "that car isn't worth it"? I hear that crap all the time. $200k for a car seems excessive if you make $200/yr but it probably wasn't excessive at all to this man. Now imagine you could write that check without a moment's thought and then imagine you have kids and how fun it would be to shower them with nice things.

I hear you typing angrily "it's about the speed, not the money" but I reply "How many $200k cars aren't powerful and fast?"

1) People with money aren't bad people for spending it on their kids.
2) There's not one car on sale today that isn't capable of doing 110mph.
3) That lambo had better tires, suspension, and brakes than 98% of cars out there.

If my kid was going to use poor judgment behind the wheel I'd rather he be in a car which was uber competent at evasive maneuvers than a typical teen sh** box.

Saying if you buy your kid a fast car you are on the hook for his bad decisions is 100% the same as saying the parent should go to jail if the kid buys drugs that kills someone just bc the parent gave him the allowance he used to buy the drugs.

I somewhat agree with most of what you said. However, I think your last analogy is a little off. Using your drug reference, the parent would be buying the drugs for the child and encouraging them to use them. Not sure if that changes the perspective at all.

[tranquility]

I think it's incredible that some ppl simply don't get it. I would think that the Lambo is just used here to sensationalize the story, and maybe a very small # of ppl are jelly, but the main reason is that it is way more capable than, say, a Honda Fit travelling at those un'god'ly speeds, and if you give an irresponsible youth keys to that, then they are gonna test out all of its capabilities, vs testing out the Fit and probably just getting into a mere (less srs) accident, that's the main gist of it.

Further, the dad is obviously a dbag and hasn't even matured himself. He did great making lots of $$$$ but is irresponsible w it, and actively encouraged his son to drive recklessly like himself. I really laugh at parents who refuse to take any responsibility for their offspring...the baby comes out as a blank sheet and doesn't do evil right away, it is influenced by ppl in their lives and ofc the most influential should be their parents.

Ofc the kid is mostly responsible as he was at the wheel but the dad had contributed to his type of behavior. That is pretty much fact. In any event, right now it's just a slap on the wrist w no jail time and the insurer paying (who cares if their premiums go up)...it doesn't replace that totally innocent's person's life.

[dreamingat30fps]

Originally Posted by tranquility

I think it's incredible that some ppl simply don't get it. I would think that the Lambo is just used here to sensationalize the story, and maybe a very small # of ppl are jelly, but the main reason is that it is way more capable than, say, a Honda Fit travelling at those un'god'ly speeds, and if you give an irresponsible youth keys to that, then they are gonna test out all of its capabilities, vs testing out the Fit and probably just getting into a mere (less srs) accident, that's the main gist of it.

Further, the dad is obviously a dbag and hasn't even matured himself. He did great making lots of $$$$ but is irresponsible w it, and actively encouraged his son to drive recklessly like himself. I really laugh at parents who refuse to take any responsibility for their offspring...the baby comes out as a blank sheet and doesn't do evil right away, it is influenced by ppl in their lives and ofc the most influential should be their parents.

Ofc the kid is mostly responsible as he was at the wheel but the dad had contributed to his type of behavior. That is pretty much fact. In any event, right now it's just a slap on the wrist w no jail time and the insurer paying (who cares if their premiums go up)...it doesn't replace that totally innocent's person's life.

Nothing will replace the life lost so what do we do? Kill the kid? I mean if all we are going by is what is fair then a life for a life no?

I'm assuming there are laws for these things. I have no idea what the law says is the punishment for vehicular manslaughter, however he should be punished accordingly. I'm not sure that basing the punishment on the douchiness of the subject is a great idea. Also not saying he got the appropriate punishment because I don't know what the law is regarding this and I'm guessing neither do most of the posters on here.

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by dreamingat30fps

Nothing will replace the life lost so what do we do? Kill the kid? I mean if all we are going by is what is fair then a life for a life no?

I'm assuming there are laws for these things. I have no idea what the law says is the punishment for vehicular manslaughter, however he should be punished accordingly. I'm not sure that basing the punishment on the douchiness of the subject is a great idea. Also not saying he got the appropriate punishment because I don't know what the law is regarding this and I'm guessing neither do most of the posters on here.

I never said anything remotely close to 'killing the kid' but obviously many ppl here are not ok w this seemingly lousy judgment. Anyway, that was a side pt in my whole post, not sure why you wanna talk about this minor one.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by bmwspice

I agree. I'm seeing so much internet-rage on this thread. And so little empathy. Not asking anyone to empathize with the driver, but condemning the father is either myopic or just rage addiction.

How many people see a car they can't afford and then think/say how "that car isn't worth it"? I hear that crap all the time. $200k for a car seems excessive if you make $200/yr but it probably wasn't excessive at all to this man. Now imagine you could write that check without a moment's thought and then imagine you have kids and how fun it would be to shower them with nice things.

I hear you typing angrily "it's about the speed, not the money" but I reply "How many $200k cars aren't powerful and fast?"

1) People with money aren't bad people for spending it on their kids.
2) There's not one car on sale today that isn't capable of doing 110mph.
3) That lambo had better tires, suspension, and brakes than 98% of cars out there.

If my kid was going to use poor judgment behind the wheel I'd rather he be in a car which was uber competent at evasive maneuvers than a typical teen sh** box.

Saying if you buy your kid a fast car you are on the hook for his bad decisions is 100% the same as saying the parent should go to jail if the kid buys drugs that kills someone just bc the parent gave him the allowance he used to buy the drugs.

Per the bolded part, no. But changing what you wrote to, the parents allowed the kid to sell drugs out of the family house and helped the kid in their drug dealing business would be an issue. This is exactly what this "father" did; actively participated and encouraged the street shenanigans they did instead of taking all that money he has and taking his son to the track.

[Esteban]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

Per the bolded part, no. But changing what you wrote to, the parents allowed the kid to sell drugs out of the family house and helped the kid in their drug dealing business would be an issue. This is exactly what this "father" did; actively participated and encouraged the street shenanigans they did instead of taking all that money he has and taking his son to the track.

^^ This!

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by tranquility

I think it's incredible that some ppl simply don't get it. I would think that the Lambo is just used here to sensationalize the story, and maybe a very small # of ppl are jelly, but the main reason is that it is way more capable than, say, a Honda Fit travelling at those un'god'ly speeds, and if you give an irresponsible youth keys to that, then they are gonna test out all of its capabilities, vs testing out the Fit and probably just getting into a mere (less srs) accident, that's the main gist of it.

Back in 1992 when I was a senior in HS, a 17 y/o kid in my class took two friends with him out of the lunch. He was driving an early 1980s Civic with maybe 90hp. They were racing back to school so as not to be late to class. The driver was doing 80mph+ on a curvy 35mph road. He lost control and the car violently rolled multiple times. The two passengers were killed in the crash and the driver only got banged up a little. The driver didn't serve time, did not get a criminal record, wasn't sued by the other party's parents, etc. No one really thought twice about other than he made a really bad mistake and would haunt him for the rest of his life. He was a mess afterwards. That kid ended up going into the Marines and is now a police officer and father of two.

[antgenn]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

Flame suit on.....


Didn't she make an illegal left turn in front of him? I say that because, even though he appears to be speeding, she totally misjudged his speed and turned in front of him. Where does one draw the line for a parent being responsible for the actions of a child?

Not condoning, just a different perspective.

It's not so easy to see how long did it take from her starting to turn to the impact. From what I see it was 3.5 - 4 sec. If it's true, then the oncoming car was approximately 0.1 miles away and obscured by the left lanes traffic when she started the turn.

[dreamingat30fps]

Originally Posted by tranquility

I never said anything remotely close to 'killing the kid' but obviously many ppl here are not ok w this seemingly lousy judgment. Anyway, that was a side pt in my whole post, not sure why you wanna talk about this minor one.

Did I say you said to kill the kid? No. You (and most on here) said the punishment is too lax just a slap on the wrist and will not bring the victim back. I simply asked since no punishment will bring the person back... what would be considered a just punishment and asked if killing him would be just since it's a life for a life.

Nothing specifically to do with your post, yours was just the last one and brought up the same idea of lax punishment that most people are brining up so I replied.

[floridaorange]

Not that it matters, although it is a true Los Angeles wealthy family example... guess what Tom Hanks bought Chet Hanks, his son, when he was 16, for his car?

A PT Cruiser.

That's called practicing discretion and not giving a boy far more car than he is mature enough to handle. Hell, boys wreck cars ALL the time, especially the cars with more HP. Ask any car insurance agent what he thinks about giving a 17 yr old a Lambo and then drive around in your own lambo with him? Zero sense in that no matter how you spin it. My best friend bought an M3 at 20 yrs old with his own money, after selling Google stock his Dad gave him. It's amazing he didn't kill anyone, including us, we drove that thing like proper hoonigans, even took the exhaust off once and drove it around La Jolla at night (yes I'm ashamed of that). But we were 21 and still dumb as hell.

If you aren't raising kids, or boys for that matter, I guess I could see how you wouldn't understand, particularly if you are still young and possibly a bit spoiled. Because giving your kid a lambo, regardless or your income is like handing him a loaded gun and absolutely spoiling him.

[spazzyfry123]

I think we can all agree that it’s an…odd decision to buy your 17 year old a Lamborghini.

But is it criminal?

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Back in 1992 when I was a senior in HS, a 17 y/o kid in my class took two friends with him out of the lunch. He was driving an early 1980s Civic with maybe 90hp. They were racing back to school so as not to be late to class. The driver was doing 80mph+ on a curvy 35mph road. He lost control and the car violently rolled multiple times. The two passengers were killed in the crash and the driver only got banged up a little. The driver didn't serve time, did not get a criminal record, wasn't sued by the other party's parents, etc. No one really thought twice about other than he made a really bad mistake and would haunt him for the rest of his life. He was a mess afterwards. That kid ended up going into the Marines and is now a police officer and father of two.

Not really sure of the relevancy of that example. Anyway, ya, well, I guess maybe it's a cultural thing and saying stuff like 'meh, we all do crazy stuff when we were young!'. No, not everyone. I never did any crazy crap when I was young and certainly never put anyone's life in danger. That's all great he turned his life around but unfortunately he shouldn't have screwed up that badly and killed 2 of his friends. The intent obviously wasn't there but ppl are still liable for negligence. Sucks he is living w that guilt if he has a conscience. He must've had one hell of a lawyer, that's just insane even if it was the 90s or whatever.

Originally Posted by dreamingat30fps

Did I say you said to kill the kid? No. You (and most on here) said the punishment is too lax just a slap on the wrist and will not bring the victim back. I simply asked since no punishment will bring the person back... what would be considered a just punishment and asked if killing him would be just since it's a life for a life.

Nothing specifically to do with your post, yours was just the last one and brought up the same idea of lax punishment that most people are brining up so I replied.

You can't possibly think that the punishment is sufficient? Mind you, this is not what's allowable in accordance w the law, just what seems right.

Yes, for sure nothing can replace a life, that is pretty obvious and the only thing our society can do to sorta 'compensate' is w $ and/or punishment. If you take a poll, esp knowing that the culprit (and his contributory 'dad') didn't get affected really, it doesn't seem just. Now imagine if you were the family of the deceased? No one's calling for their literal heads, just seems like the kid got a weak slap and the dad didn't even have to fork over $$$$ as the insurer (never mind whatever increase in the premiums, that's not gonna be a hit to him) did based briefly on my skimming of this thread.

[Turkish Pickle]

it's the kid being an idiot, i fail to see how the car makes a difference.

the video says he's running the light doing 100mph. you can run a red light doing 100mph in a "regular" car like a camry/accord/etc. i've done 100mph+ in a 10 year old lincoln (on mexican roads allegedly). obviously i dont run red lights, but the problem wasn't that he was driving a fast car, it's that he's driving a car like an idiot

i fail to see why the father also needs to get jail time, i get him having to pay the fine since the kid was 17 and technically isn't an adult.

also, an analogy: i really don't think you'd be at fault for providing alcohol to someone who gets belligerent after a few drinks. otherwise there would be ZERO bars across the country lmao

[wtwo3]

I think the car being a Lambo is absolutely relevant. For everyone saying a shitbox can do 100 mph too... when anyone thinks Lamborghini they think fast car. It encourages you to drive faster and explore its limits... especially in the hands of an immature kid. So yes, a shitbox can go 100mph as well, but I'd argue ANYONE would be more likely to drive aggressively if they were driving a Lamborghini simply because of the nature of the car.

[Baymen]

Originally Posted by wtwo3

I think the car being a Lambo is absolutely relevant. For everyone saying a shitbox can do 100 mph too... when anyone thinks Lamborghini they think fast car. It encourages you to drive faster and explore its limits... especially in the hands of an immature kid. So yes, a shitbox can go 100mph as well, but I'd argue ANYONE would be more likely to drive aggressively if they were driving a Lamborghini simply because of the nature of the car.

Plus a Lambo SUV does 0-100 mph in about a third of a time of Tahoe or something similar.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Baymen

Plus a Lambo SUV does 0-100 mph in about a third of a time of Tahoe or something similar.

Sure, but most high speed deadly accidents do not involve sports cars and exotic SUVs. As others have pointed out in this thread, you can easily get up to 80+mph pretty quickly on a city street. You can be just as reckless in a 2006 Silverado as you can 2022 Urus. The Urus might be traveling 20mph faster through that intersection, but in either case, the Lexus driver would likely be dead with either vehicle crashing into them.