By on May 7, 2015

mila+anjelika+dago

Nowadays it seems as you’re almost as likely to see or hear a public service announcement about the dangers of texting behind the wheel as you are about drunk driving, but there are still plenty of “drive sober or get pulled over” billboards and PSAs. Around 4:45 AM on August 14, 2013, a 22 year old Florida woman named Mila Dago driving a rented Smart car apparently ignored all of that advice and allegedly ran a red light and broadsided a pickup truck, resulting in the death of her passenger, Irina Reinoso, also 22.

Not only did she find herself charged with DUI manslaughter and vehicular homicide but now there’s a good chance she’ll be convicted because prosecutors have recently obtained a string of text messages she sent to her boyfriend that night including the self-incriminating statement “Driving drunk woo,” sent just minutes before the crash.

When police took blood from Dago almost two hours after the collision, she still had a blood alcohol level of 0.178, more than twice the legal limit in Florida. While I believe not everyone with a BAC of 0.08 is quantifiably impaired, anything close to 0.2 is bound to be pretty drunk, unless we’re talking about an active alcoholic who has developed a high tolerance for EtOH.

Prosecutors say that Dago that night and early morning was bar-hopping with friends in the midst of a less than cordial break-up with her boyfriend. The text about driving drunk was part of a series of angry messages she sent to him including one that said “I’ll be dead thanks to you,” sent around the same time. Her last text was sent just three minutes before the fatal accident (but are DUI related fatalities “accidents”?).

Dago has plead not guilty to DUI manslaughter, vehicular homicide, and two counts of DUI with damage to a person, for her passenger and for the driver of the truck who was seriously injured.

Photo: Miami-Dade Corrections.

Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, a realistic perspective on cars & car culture and the original 3D car site. If you found this post worthwhile, you can get a parallax view at Cars In Depth. If the 3D thing freaks you out, don’t worry, all the photo and video players in use at the site have mono options. Thanks for reading – RJS

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

84 Comments on “Florida Woman Allegedly Texted “Driving Drunk Woo” Minutes Before Fatal Crash...”


  • avatar
    an innocent man

    Her passenger could have sent the text. My wife sends texts all the time from my phone if I’m driving. Seems pretty easy to beat that angle. Still hope they nail her, of course.

    • 0 avatar
      VW16v

      The drunk driver was texting the boyfriend all day. Not sure if the passenger sending the text will work out to well for the driver. At any one point about 50% of drivers in South Florida are under the influence of alcohol or some for of drug. Miami is a party town.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      With a blood alcohol content twice the legal limit 2 hours after the wreck, whether she sent the text or not is probably the least of her legal problems.

    • 0 avatar
      FormerFF

      I will occasionally ask my daughter to send a text, but I’ve never given my phone to another adult, they always have their own.

      If I were sitting on a jury, and a defendant claimed her now deceased passenger had used the defendant’s phone to call or text the defendant’s boyfriend, I would not believe it

    • 0 avatar
      sproc

      I ask my wife to reply to texts on my phone all the time while I drive, so sure, it reasonable to claim the passenger sent them. However, she’d have to claim the passenger both sent them and wrote the content without her knowing. Regardless, it sounds like there’s so much evidence against her that it hardly matters for her conviction, perhaps only in sentencing if the judge has any leeway.

    • 0 avatar
      ClutchCarGo

      The problem for Dago is that the only way to establish that the passenger sent the text is to take the stand herself since the passenger died. Once on the stand she would be an easy mark for a good prosecutor.

    • 0 avatar
      namesakeone

      The text said she was “driving drunk woo”–it did not say she was a passenger. With other evidence that was probably collected–I’m sure they know if this was her phone or her passenger’s–it’s safe to say that this is her phone.

  • avatar

    In a Smart ForTwo? Make that Stupid MinusOne.

  • avatar

    She’s toast.

  • avatar
    ...m...

    …sure, intoxicated drivers can be involved in accidental collisions just as can sober drivers, the primary difference is negligence prior to the accident…

    …i think leading with the oversized close-cropped booking photo is a poor choice for this site, as it smacks of public shaming editorial tone, but i also question whether there’s much to this story as a whole which belongs here in the first place…i suppose there’s the driver/passenger text-responsibility angle, but it still feels kind of tabloid at its heart…

    • 0 avatar
      Dirk Stigler

      Right, it’s an accident in the sense that none of the people involved intended for it to happen. One of them just made some horrendously and obviously bad decisions that foreseeably led to it.

      And I agree that I can’t see why this story is on TTAC. While tragic, there’s nothing to make it stand out from dozens of other tragic DUI incidents that happen each and every weekend in any decent-sized city.

    • 0 avatar

      Actually, I considered the tabloid aspect of this story as well as the use of the mug shot before submitting it. As for the topic not being suitable for TTAC, we’ve covered texting while driving and DUI issues before. This incident combined both issues. Regarding the choice of the photo, I needed something to illustrate the post and there wasn’t much that I could find. The mug shot didn’t need permissions or clearances and the video dates to the original accident which I thought might be confusing at the top of the story, so I went with the mug shot. If I had wanted to shame her, there would have been a caption with her name.

      To be honest, it’s not a very interesting photo but it’s what there was available.

    • 0 avatar
      Skink

      She deserves to be publicly shamed, and any decent newspaper ought to shame her. What she did was disgraceful and shameful.

  • avatar
    Ron B.

    It’s a bit difficult to see what she is doing in the Vid, but I am damn sure if I had just killed someone,especially a friend sitting right next to me ,I think I would have been pretty remorseful . The little smart seemed to come through the crash as it was designed to though. I wonder how the friend died? no seat belt?

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    “While I believe not everyone with a BAC of 0.08 is quantifiably impaired”

    It’s not really a matter of belief; it’s 0.08 for a reason, and that reason isn’t “nanny-statism” or “Overzealous lobbying at MADD”

    There are studies (double-blind and entirely reproducible) that suggest that as low as 0.05 is enough to show measurable changes in response time and (more importantly) judgement. At 0.08, most people’s judgement is definitely compromised and many see fall-offs in reaction time.

    People misunderstand why BAC is set low: it has more to do with impairment of judgement than reaction time. At 0.08 you’re more likely to do something stupid, even if you can react to it well enough.

    And since we don’t have blood-sugar trackers embedded in every human being to know their precise metabolism, setting it at 0.05 or 0.08 addresses the lower bound of problem.

    And, much as a I loath insurance companies, their own actuarial tables take this into account.

    • 0 avatar
      HerrKaLeun

      yeah the US alcohol limits are pretty high. Germany has 0.05% (and 0.03% will get you to be at fault by default if you are in an accident). Poland, Czech Republic and all Scandinavia have 0.0%. And all that strictly enforced with sobriety checkpoints etc.

      Also the punishment for drunk driving is low in the US. Especially since every other crime gets punished by much higher punitive measures. i see here in WI many multiple offenders still having licenses, or having occupational licenses.
      Do you know what happens to drunk drivers (even just above the limit and no accident) in Germany? License suspension for at least a few months (and no occupational exemption) and if they want the license back have to go through a psychiatric evaluation (at their expense) and prove they are off alcohol (with liver test and all). All pretty expensive and all while not being able to drive. Drunk driving in Germany (and assume most Europe) means you can use public transportation, cabs and bicycles. Many people i know will never ever legally drive again because they can’t stop drinking, but I think good so.
      and you wonder why drunk driving accident rate is so much higher in the US?

      and yes, this article to “too tabloid” for TTAC

      • 0 avatar
        John

        Floria has gotten pretty tough – lowered the limit to 0.80, first DUI you WILL spend the night in jail, and get a one year license suspension, plus a hefty fine. I don’t call them “accidents” any more – I call the “collisions”. Sure the people involved didn’t intend to collide, but I think 90% or more are preventable by good driving. And I don’t want to hear who was “at fault”. “At fault” is a legal construct. Most folks who aren’t legally “at fault” could have avoided colliding with good driving.

      • 0 avatar

        I agree that it’s too tabloid. It doesn’t tell us anything except that this particular young woman was really dumb and managed to kill someone.

        I suppose one might argue in its favor that we did manage nonetheless to benefit from it by having an interesting and useful discussion (Thanks B&B and esp Pch101 and Psarhjinian).

    • 0 avatar
      Detroit-Iron

      The question shouldn’t be whether someone is impaired from their own baseline, it should be are they too impaired to react well enough. I am sure even a Canadian like you with a few Molson’s in him can react faster than a 70 year old with arthritis. Or to take it to an extreme: If Lewis Hamilton and I went to the pub in a borrowed f40, and he had a few pints and I had none, it would still be safer if he drove us home. Especially if it was raining.

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        “The question shouldn’t be whether someone is impaired from their own baseline, it should be are they too impaired to react well enough”

        That’s not the point: it’s judgement, not reaction time, that usually gets people into trouble.

        One of the first signs of impairment is doing things you wouldn’t normally do because they’re stupid, even if your performance while doing them is at-par with your sober abilities (and yes, this isn’t restricted to driving—I have it to readers to make their own innuendo).

        By the time your reaction time is seriously affected, your judgement is completely hosed.

        • 0 avatar
          Detroit-Iron

          So I get to drive the f40? Sweet!

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          “It’s judgement, not reaction time, that usually gets people into trouble.”

          This is a fact that most people don’t grasp, to our detriment.

          If reaction time was the key to safe driving, then teenage boys would be the safest drivers in the world. Instead, they’re anything but. No amount of reaction time can cure stupid.

        • 0 avatar
          Dan

          That’s just semantics. Substitute judgement for reaction time, the underlying issue of relative versus absolute competence doesn’t change.

          • 0 avatar
            psarhjinian

            “That’s just semantics. Substitute judgement for reaction time, the underlying issue of relative versus absolute competence doesn’t change.”

            Competence isn’t the underlying issue at all. Even absolutely competent people make stupid decisions when impaired.

            The “Lewis Hamilton” example: even though he’s probably more competent then I am even with four pints in him, he might decide to run a red or pass on a blind curve, at which point no amount of “competency” will help you as you’ve made a damn fool decision in the first place.

            Or, to use a non-automotive example, I might be fairly competent at picking someone up at the bar, but a few pints in and I might be picking someone up that, were a sober, I would really wouldn’t have thought a good move.

            The issue with impairment is judgement, not skills. By the time your skills are impaired, your judgement is even moreso.

            I suppose you could make the argument that ability to exercise good judgement is a competency, but then I would argue back that alcohol, as a drug, specifically impairs judgement.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            It sure didn’t take long for someone to step up and prove that he didn’t get it.

          • 0 avatar
            Detroit-Iron

            @psarhjinian

            Lewis Hamilton and Jack Baruth go to a bar in JB’s V6 Accord. After a few drinks Lewis and Jack are at 0.7 BAC. The two 18 year old girls they picked up have not had anything to drink. Who should drive them back to the hotel?

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            “Who should drive them back to the hotel?”

            A sober driver.

            (Driving a race car does not compare to driving on the street anymore than running in an Olympic event compares to strolling on the beach.)

          • 0 avatar
            psarhjinian

            “Lewis Hamilton and Jack Baruth go to a bar in JB’s V6 Accord. After a few drinks Lewis and Jack are at 0.7 BAC. The two 18 year old girls they picked up have not had anything to drink. Who should drive them back to the hotel?”

            Uber.

            ETA: There’s an interesting point, there, about the inherently poor judgement of someone under 25, but since we’re arguing edge cases:

            * Any 18 year old willing to go to a hotel with a pair of older drunk guys have suspect judgement anyways
            * Jack and Lewis still shouldn’t drive. If they’re willing to take home women nearly half their age that they just met, their own judgement is iffy.

            Again, it’s probably better that everyone takes a cab. Preferably four cabs.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “After a few drinks Lewis and Jack are at 0.7 BAC.”

            .7?! I would be surprised if they could functionally do anything.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            “The “Lewis Hamilton” example: even though he’s probably more competent then I am even with four pints in him, he might decide to run a red or pass on a blind curve, at which point no amount of “competency” will help you as you’ve made a damn fool decision in the first place.”

            I don’t know about that. To me, Lewis has always come across as someone with a triple-digit IQ. Are there really people who drive more aggressively after drinking? I’d think any reasonably intelligent person would do the opposite. All of my friends seem to drive more sedately after a few drinks and/or tokes, despite our tendencies toward very spirited driving while completely sober.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Booze compromises vision, depth perception and reaction time. While drunk, you won’t see things as they are, nor will you respond to them appropriately.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            That’s exactly why any reasonable person would drive conservatively and devote extra attention to the task while impaired by drugs, alcohol, medication, tiredness, medical conditions, old age, inexperience, etc.

            In my opinion, the driver should be completely responsible for assessing the risks of driving and dealing with the consequences of his or her decisions.

            Just like any other driver who causes a fatality, this woman has demonstrated that she is grossly incapable of safely operating a vehicle and should never be allowed to drive again, regardless of any contributing factors.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            A reasonable person would avoid getting that intoxicated.

            If you’re that drunk, then you can’t help what you’re doing. The world isn’t as you see it, and you will make the wrong choices based upon your inaccurate perceptions. You see it incorrectly, and you respond to it incorrectly.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            Is 0.05% really “that intoxicated”?

            “If you’re that drunk, then you can’t help what you’re doing.”

            I suppose that’s the standard line that people use to avoid personal responsibility for their actions while drinking, but I never bought it. I believe that, if anything, alcohol brings out your true self. I’ve never known anyone who was fundamentally different while under the influence of alcohol, though certain traits become exaggerated.

            0.08 to 0.10 seems to be a reasonable range for limiting driving. But I don’t agree that a person driving in that state is anywhere near as negligent as a sober driver responsible for even a minor fender-bender.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Alcohol creates a physiological response that does not allow for safe driving. It’s not an excuse, it’s just a fact, which is why we have statutory limits for DUI.

            If you’re as drunk as the person in this article allegedly was, then there is no reasonable way to drive nor are there allowances that can be made to compensate for that lack of control. The only appropriate alternative for someone who is that drunk is to avoid driving, period.

            In most cases, 0.05 is not presumed to be DUI in the US.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            0.05% is where they’re starting to invoke harsh penalties on drivers in many provinces in Canada. Saskatchewan is an exception, so far.

            I’ve only operated a vehicle at a level of impairment comparable to that of Ms. Dago on one occasion, as a university student many years ago. I ended up drinking far more at the party than I expected, so I started walking home at the end of the night. But that was difficult and cold in the middle of winter, so I went back and slowly drove my car home. Normally an absurdly aggressive driver in those days, it was obvious to me that I was too impaired to be driving on busy roads at my usual speeds. So I stuck to residential side streets. I was careful at every uncontrolled intersection, obeyed every stop sign, and I doubt I ever exceeded 20 mph. Probably one of the least hazardous drives I’ve ever done. It’s hard to imagine how a person could crash driving that conservatively.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            I am willing to bet that your perception of your driving performance did not match the driving itself. At that level of intoxication, you can’t accurately perceive how you are doing.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            I’ve already won that bet. I made it home safely and without damage. So my perception that I could accomplish that held true.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            This illustrates why driver training doesn’t work.

            It is possible to provide someone with a variety of factual information, studies and statistics that support a consensus among researchers that something is true.

            But then someone will invariably have an anecdotal experience that he will then use to “prove” that the facts are inaccurate.

            It is possible to drive like s**t and not die each time. As a matter of fact, it is quite possible to drive in said fecal fashion on repeated occasions and not suffer the consequences…for awhile.

            However, that one event that did not kill or maim you does not change the fact that the odds of crashing are much higher when drunk than when sober or that alcohol causes physiological effects that are fairly predictable.

            Just as winning the lottery once does not prove that everyone can win the lottery, one’s inaccurate perception of a dangerous act does not prove that the action was safe.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            I didn’t say anything to deny the accuracy of your information. I simply responded to your empty rhetoric with my own. Or did you really want to make that bet, hire a panel of judges, and then travel back in time to watch my driving performance and analyze my perception of it?

            It is true though; I don’t care about your statistics. I care about personal freedom and the ability to make my own choices and suffer the consequences of my choices. But I’m stuck in a system without real freedom or consequences.

            The one thing the studies lack is perspective. Of course a person is capable of driving better while completely sober. I don’t even play racing simulators after a couple beers. It’s no fun to do something that poorly. There’s no longer any joy in the precise control of your inputs and the vehicle’s reactions so you might as well just relax and enjoy the music. Driving on public roads in a calm and legal manner requires so little physical and mental ability that even most elderly people can do it safely because they understand and accept their limitations.

      • 0 avatar
        seth1065

        Detroit Iron,
        An interesting thought that I had never thought of. And Yes TTAC really no reason for this to be here. Your not the NY Post.

    • 0 avatar
      tresmonos

      I’m glad you posted this. Ronnie almost seemed to be discounting legal BAC limits, which is something not to be discounted on a public forum.

      • 0 avatar
        Detroit-Iron

        Why not?

      • 0 avatar

        Legal BAC limits are subject to debate, just like everything else.

        If tomorrow, everyone in America who drinks and drives stopped, I suspect there’d be a cash flow problem in municipal and county governments.

        It seems to me that a lot of the impetus for reducing the legal limit from 0.10 to 0.08, along with the institution of sobriety check lanes in some states had to do with generating DUI infractions (and other infractions, in the case of check lanes) for people whose actual driving didn’t indicate impairment.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          And you’ve read what research on the subject?

          There is a lot of data on DUI, and some level of impairment begins prior to 0.08.

          It’s fair to debate the approach to enforcement. But the science doesn’t provide much room for argument about what booze does to driving ability (and it isn’t good.)

          • 0 avatar
            S2k Chris

            “There is a lot of data on DUI, and some level of impairment begins prior to 0.08.”

            “Impariment” might, but I’ve seen no studies (yes, I’ve read quite a few) that suggest that drivers with a .08 have a higher incidence of crashes. Most studies suggest the accident rate starts to go up at about .12, which is why the .1 limit made some sense.

            Personally, I can only support .08 as a limit if it was used as some sort of “minor DUI” rate, which is analogous to a speeding or texting while driving ticket (~$100 here in IL). Treating a “kinda sorta impaired who poses little statistical danger” .08 driver and a .2 doing 100 down the wrong side of the highway driver as both under the “DUI umbrella” makes no sense. We need a tiered DUI system, with harsher penalties for aggravated DUI (say .12-.15+) and softer penalties for .08-.11 or so.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            “Compared with drivers who have not consumed alcohol, the risk of a single-vehicle fatal crash for drivers with BAC’s between 0.02 and 0.04 percent is estimated to be 1.4 times higher; for those with BAC’s between 0.05 and 0.09 percent, 11.1 times higher; for drivers with BAC’s between 0.10 and 0.14 percent, 48 times higher; and for those with BAC’s at or above 0.15 percent, the risk is estimated to be 380 times higher”

            http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa31.htm

        • 0 avatar
          psarhjinian

          “Legal BAC limits are subject to debate, just like everything else.”

          Yes, but one side of the debate has the preponderance of facts on it’s side.

        • 0 avatar
          Master Baiter

          “Legal BAC limits are subject to debate, just like everything else.”

          You’re right. 0.08 is about two beers. I’m certain that I’m a better driver on two beers than my wife is stone cold sober.

          If “some level of impairment” is the standard, no one wearing eye glasses, and no one over the age of 60 would be allowed to drive, as I’m sure these factors produce “some level of impairment.” After all, airline pilots face mandatory retirement at age 60.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            You bring up an interesting point on eyeglasses/contact use while driving. Proportionally I would imagine the number of drivers who may drink/do drink is greater than those requiring eyeware, and due to the effects of alcohol the consequences are more severe.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            It’s not a particularly interesting point because some people must wear glasses, but nobody needs to booze it up.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            The point was tolerated impairments.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            We tolerate things that are inherent to being human and can’t be fixed. There is a difference between a physical condition and voluntary impairment.

            That does not mean that I support the status quo of US approaches toward DUI enforcement. But regardless, booze and driving do not go well together.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Eyesight can be “fixed” via Lasik eye surgery. One of the reasons it is tolerated I imagine is instance of a person being vision impaired and in an accident due to not wearing proper eyewear is statistically insignificant. If somehow the instance of this were to catch up to alcohol related accidents I would think gov’t/society would have to take notice.

            I agree with you in that booze and driving do not go well together.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    Feral humans should become biodiesel.

  • avatar
    Superdessucke

    Pretty prisoners are all the rage these days. And she was preening it up pretty good in the video. If she’s an overweight minority this isn’t even in the news.

    Also, was that Smart a Car2Go? I’ve seen people flying all over Austin in these things. Since they charge by the second I think, I’m not surprised. Not Smart, IMHO.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    One person dead, one badly injured and the driver’s life pretty much screwed. DUI remains one of the best ways to screw things up royally. It’s a damn shame all around.

  • avatar
    TonyJZX

    I think this is old news.

    She got 24yrs with a non parole period of 20yrs?

    Great looking mugshot btw.

    She’ll be popular in jail. Some butch woman’s toy.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    It’s superficial (especially given the context) but I can’t help but see Natalie Portman’s pitbull-like jaw structure on this dumbkoff’s face.

  • avatar
    S2k Chris

    “Not only did she find herself charged with DUI manslaughter and vehicular homicide but now there’s a good chance she’ll be convicted because prosecutors have recently obtained a string of text messages she sent to her boyfriend that night including the self-incriminating statement “Driving drunk woo,” sent just minutes before the crash.”

    Uhh, I realize everyone is sensationalizing this story, but really? No, there’s a good chance she’ll be convicted because she was undisputably driving the car that ran a red light and smashed into a truck which she was drunk. The fact that she texted about it is a nice clickbait sidenote that the media is going crazy with, but she was likely to be convicted without the text message. Roll eyes.

  • avatar
    gasser

    Keep these folks off the road and in jail for as long as possible. They always get drunk and drive again, even without a license, and will kill another poor soul.

  • avatar
    LeMansteve

    This occurred in August 2013 and prosecutors are just now obtaining her text messages?

  • avatar
    OneAlpha

    God.

    If you’re going to do something you know is against the law (and I’m not saying Don’t, because we all have our reasons), for the thousandth time –

    DO NOT DOCUMENT IT!!!

    Prosecutors call that shit “evidence.”

  • avatar
    mikey

    We have some very tough DUI laws here, in Ontario. Over 05 and your car is impounded, your walking for three days on the first offence. It may cost you $500 to get your car back. The Ministry “drop the dime ” on your insurance company. That will cost you another 10 percent on your insurance, for 3 years. So your looking at $2500 or more.

    Over 08..? and things get real nasty. $40 K..maybe ?

    I have found a way to avoid the whole problem…Its called a Taxi cab.

    I have no sympathy for the lady. She knew she was bombed, and still went out and killed somebody,

  • avatar
    Master Baiter

    “She got 24yrs with a non parole period of 20yrs”

    Seems pretty severe to me. If this girl were your daughter, would you feel that sentence was fair?

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Society tends to be harsh on the individual and be lax when billions are stolen by many.

    • 0 avatar
      mikey

      If it was my daughter, yes, I would be very upset. Now lets ask the guy whose daughter got killed.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Why does she have to be anyone’s daughter? It’s excessive no matter who she’s related to. It’s inhumane to put an animal in a cage, but look what we do to each other. I know it’s a necessary evil, but come on, 20 years???

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        Because we (and by “we” I mean North America and parts of western Europe) by and large practice retributive justice. The United States is the most extreme in this, but it’s hardly the only example.

        It is very, very hard for a society to embrace restorative justice; it requires accepting a social contract and shared social resources that are a difficult thing to accept.

        Dostoevsky nailed it: you can indeed judge a society by how well it treats its prisoners.

        • 0 avatar

          There was recently a very interesting article in the NYT mag about restorative justice in Norway. They do a lot of things more sensibly there than most other places.

          It would be less expensive in the long run to try to help people become better human beings than to make their lives totally miserable.

  • avatar
    Jgwag1985

    This story belongs on TTAC as much as any other (especially those about automatic door locks or automatic climate control).

    A selfish inconsiderate woman decides it is her right to get drunk, get behind the wheel of a car. Jeopardize the lives of anyone that gets her path, including herself. You can’t plead ignorance and say you don’t know how alcohol will affect you and your driving ability. You drink, don’t drive.

    Reminds me of a drunk driver that hit and killed a woman on a jogging path. Driver didn’t care. If I don’t remember it, it didn’t happen. Right. I hope this woman gets her chance to end up dead. Sick of these low life’s. She DESERVES all the negative press she get’s.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      There are over 10,000 DUI fatalities in the US per year. TTAC isn’t publishing blog posts about most of them.

      This one wasn’t particularly special. It got some attention because:

      a. There is a partial video recording of it
      b. The suspect is young and cute(ish)
      c. It involves texting, which gets people excited

      • 0 avatar
        Superdessucke

        You know why this is here, and everywhere else to be fair. Here’s my parody song, to the tune “Pretty Ballerina” by Left Banke if you want to sing along:

        They fell in love with a pretty prison diva
        With her mug shot and her big brown eyes
        She got into a crash and then she blew highly
        Was I surprised, yes, was I surprised, no, not at all

        She got booked yesterday her arraignment is tomorrow
        For a long time she will stay inside
        She’ll preen and act and pervs will really really love her

        Off the shelves the papers are moving
        Moving because of dupes like me

        (Musical intermission)

        La la la la la

        They fell in love with a pretty prison diva
        With her mug shot and her big brown eyes
        She got into a crash and then she blew highly
        Was I surprised, yes, was I surprised, no, not at all

        They’ll all w– to that teary act of pouting
        But open eyes will see she’s vain
        It was strange that TTAC would really even mind her
        But just one click and she’ll be there
        She’ll be there
        She’ll be there

  • avatar
    50merc

    It is entirely appropriate for this article to be on TTAC. Driving while impaired is a huge issue in an automobile-dependent society.

    • 0 avatar
      TonyJZX

      I think any sort of story of this nature belongs here if treated with a serious journalistic tone (Baruth gets a pass on that though).

      I mean I will leave this place post haste if we get headlines like “You’ll never believe what happens when…” or “Ten Things that Happened on Thailand Holidays…”

      you know what I mean, even proper newspapers have titles like that in an effort to ‘get’ those lucrative millenial eyeballs

      These stories are preaching to the choir. We are all largely enthusiasts, I would imagine gainfully employed with a slighty liberal tone. I can see it above that people want fair punishment but there is empathy even in non deliberate unmedidated accidents.

      We get it. We dont drive drunk.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    There seems to be two issues here.

    Driving under the influence and using a hand held device.

    With the effort expended in passive safety devices, why not electronic counter measure for these two.

    1. Drink driving. Police can detect alcohol in our breath. So, why doesn’t vehicles come with built in detectors.

    2. Cell, Mobile, Handy phones have a device that will neutralise the phone. Have the device designed so the phone can only work on Bluetooth or the equivalent.

    We have the technology.

  • avatar
    Car-los

    In any case I think that texting while driving should be punished as severely as driving under the influence of alcohol.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Carlson Fan: “The 260 may have been a little better than the granddaddy to the Most Blessed 3800 IF it was...
  • Superdessucke: Not to sound morbid but my overriding thought here is whether it will gradually lose horsepower or if...
  • brn: Yes. Biden and Trump are cut from the same cloth, but each side has so much hatred for the other side that they...
  • brn: I wish others the best of luck. For me, it’s not worth getting on yet another marketing distribution for...
  • bufguy: Cite your source for that statement. Short of natural disasters, power on the east coast is very reliable

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber