Props to the Timberwolves for having some guts.

Yup, absolutely. And it isn't even remotely unusual for a head coach to get to pick his assistant staff.

 

Phooey. Most teams let the head coach pick his own staff.

Besides, how is letting a coach pick his own staff constitute letting the "inmates" run the asylum? I guess the doctor shouldn't run the asylum either.

 

The head coach already runs the asylum.

Apparently Paul Allen didn't want Rick back because he's pretty alcoholic. But the main reason was that management still had a good opinion of McMillan. Plus, in this town, you make any change, you got the Oregonian on your back.

 

I always find it interesting that people who drink and drive are vilified (and rightly so) but all the other idiots who are sober and nearly kill me every day with their cars are not. You know how many accidents occur on the freeways every day from morons who switch lanes going 70 miles an hour without signaling? Think about a freeway with 5 lanes and everyone cutting in and out of traffic to save 2 minutes off their commute. Or reading their text's while driving. How about locking those mother fuckers up too. And they do it intentionally. Personally I see no difference.

OK I am off my soap box.

 

Let's just say I "cruise" when I drive. I'm not one of those guys who is at a red light and stomps on the gas when it turns green only to stop again at the next light. I am the guy who never hits reds. I do have a V8 and will use it from time to time, I am an aggressive driver when I need to be, but around town I'm pretty chill. The other day, driving down Sandy thru Hollywood and this supped up racing Subaru was tailgating me and swathing lanes and speeding all over the place just to end up stopped at the next red. Then it would turn green and he'd start all over again...... cutting people off, weaving in and out of lanes. Then we get on I-84 at 39th...... He stabs off on to the freeway and I am behind him. This is when I usually hit the gas, on the freeway. This fool merges and decides he's going to drive 45-50 on the god damned freeway. I was shocked...... he acts like Mad Max on surface streets and Driving Miss Daisey on the fucking Interstate! Was so blown away by this, I slowed down and watched him....... 50 all the way to the Fremont bridge. Don't understand some people!

 

He had two in a five year span and was not even thirty. On the second one he was not pulled over for erratic driving, but only because of a tip from a private investigator.

Bad? Yes.
Unforgivable? Absolutely not.

 

Agree that DUI is bad, but how much punishment?

 

When people ask this question, they're generally thinking of the typical situation where someone gets pulled over after having a few drinks, blows a .08 and is charged with DUI. The line of thinking goes that, hey just a few years ago that wouldn't even have been a chargeable blood alcohol level. The guy (or lady) would probably have made it home without any problem if the cops hadn't happened to be there. Why should they get hit with a big fine and other penalties? What's wrong with this line of thinking is that it presumes that you're going to make it home without a problem, but it overlooks the horrible consequences of those times when you don't make it home without a problem. That same blood alcohol level will get you charged with vehicular manslaughter if you happen to be involved in an accident where someone is killed. In Oregon, that can get you up to 10-20 years in prison. Something to think about next time you've had a few too many and think you can make it home without a problem.

 

That is all true as far as it goes. The critics of the current system are pointing out that .08 isn't particularly inebriated. It is a legal line in the sand that was moved due to a campaign launced by an advocacy group that are not legal scholars, not scientists, not doctors.

.08 is so low, that now people that take any of hundreds of prescription medications; have a cold; have alergy flare up; some late shift workers; some jetlagged folks; etc. are functionally equivalent to those that blow right at or close to .08. That does not even include the entire spectrum of "distracted drivers" where texting has been shown in tests to be significantly more imparing than a .08 reading, and having an intense hands-free conversation (on average) is about the same as .08. Should we throw the book at everbody?

These were people that wanted blood - and they got it.

Most legal scholars had been pointing out for years before and continuously since, that the key way to reduce alcohol related traffic deaths is to keep repeat offenders off the road.

There is little evidence that focusing on a wider group of population (a bigger net) and treating them all equally harshly is the most effective use of resources. At this point, it has become a HUGE source of revenue generation for many local governments. They won't give it up now.

But in terms of public policy, isn't it more effective to spend 80% of your time and money focusing on the 20% of alcholics who cause the fatal crashes, then the opposite - which is the current MADD based policy?

 

E_Blazer, I think the diversion program is perfect for a first offense with that option only available once. Indiana has it available again if it is completed successfully and not for sure about Oregon. Second time it should result in losing your drivers license for a year plus jail time and the third time resulting losing your license for life plus more jail time. Just my opinion though.

Keeping a guy from being able to keep a job is pretty harsh. I could see him being fired from being around high school kids, but the pro teams are a different story.

 

You know you're lying, we know you're lying, but everyone is so stunned into polite silence when you say that stupidity, that you just keep saying it.

 

I don't get it. So they were less of a DUI because he was under 30?

He's got an alcohol problem.

To bring up Camby getting busted with a little bit of pot and comparing it to a multiple DUI offender is silly.

 

.08 is what, equivlent to one beer? Every single one of you here (minus the non-drinkers) have driven after 1 beer; which is complete hogwash.... .08 = revenue generation to the max. and whomever was talking about the sober idiots driving on the freeway everyday not signaling and just being plain shitty drivers... I agree, the police should be going after them... with the same attention they give .08 people.

 

More like 5 beers, but it depends on your weight, alcohol content of the beer, and how fast you're drinking it.

Here's a calculator: http://www.ou.edu/oupd/bac.htm

I don't know about you, but IMO some idiot drinking five beers in an hour and getting behind the wheel of a car deserves whatever the law allows as punishment.

 

I don't have a real problem with a diversion program for a first offense as long as the program works. As far as harsh goes, how harsh is it to lose your life because some asshole is driving drunk?

 

Or someone who is texting?

Or someone who has a bad cold?

Or a trucker who is falling asleep at the wheel from overwork?

Or someone distracted by a phonecall?

Or a teenager under the infulence of peer pressure?

Or someone driving agressively?

Or someone dropping ashes from a cigaratte on their lap?

Or someone fiddling with their radio?

Or someone fiddling with their GPS?

Or someone putting on mascara while driving down the freeway? (I witnessed this in LA - twice!)

Or someone reading the newspaper while driving?

Or someone who is old and has reduced functionality, but refuses to accept it and keeps driving?

Or someone who has had a previous stroke or seizure but continues to drive despite the significantly increase risk of further events?

MOST people who are in car accidents there is no alcohol involved. MOST people who die in a car wreck do not die due to alcohol.

The U.S. has the one of the lowest automobile fatality rates in the world. So we are already safer then most. And yet some people want to fixate on one portion of the risk that does not account for even half that risk, and act like it is extremely dangerous. "Drink just one drink and drive and you are no better than a criminal".

 

Again, let me clarify, there is "drunk" and then there is "drunk".

.08 is legally "drunk" now, but the imparment and increased accident rate at the level is modest (on the order of folks talking on their cell phone while driving or those with a cold or taking allegery medication, etc.).

Accident rates START a steep upward curve on BAC's of .10 and above. The average BAC of drivers involved in a fatal accident is .17.

In other words, as stated before, most of the bad accidents are for those who are shitfaced.

 

For some reason, I am not able to quote.

In response to Mick, the comparison of the pot that Camby was carrying was in response to an earlier remark that said the Portland newspapers would go nuts if they hired Adelman because of his son's DUI's. You may not think anything of it, but Camby having an illegal substance in his car that most people believe to impair driving skills is a big deal. You obviously think differently with continually minimizing the Camby incident with "little" and magnafying Adelman's two offenses with "multiple". It would be different if this was still the Jail Blazer era and had a roster full of knuckleheads, but think it would not be as big of deal now. I also think the age when things happens does make a difference. Young people tend to take more chances and usually wise up after time.

In response to E_Blazer, there are many different forms of negligent driving that are comparable or worse to driving drunk. What if we had the chance to sign a big free agent, but then find out that he has some speeding tickets, does not have a hands free device, and texts? Are we supposed to add public villification to whatever punishment our system of law recommends?

Good example of this was Sabonis wife. Was there the same outrage to release him when his wife was getting arrested for driving drunk?

 

Sorry, but in my book you can't use other crappy behaviors to justify another. Driving impaired is driving impaired. If you fall asleep at the wheel, go off the road and kill somebody, you can go to prison for that as well. Personally, I don't think having five beers in an hour and then driving is just a minor thing. You're strapping on 2-3,000 pounds of hardware and rolling down the road at speed when you do not have full command of your body.

 

I never said that I wouldn't hire a guy who had a DUI conviction. If he's paid up whatever his penalty was and has his act together, I wouldn't hold it against him. A pattern of doing that is another thing.