Fatal Car Accident in Minooka

Fatal Car Accident in Minooka

There are 37 comments on the 1340 WJOL story from Feb 23, 2010, titled Fatal Car Accident in Minooka. In it, 1340 WJOL reports that:

The Will County Coroner's Office is reporting that a 19 year old Minooka man died last night due to a crash in Kendall County.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at 1340 WJOL.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
DontDUI

Wheaton, IL

#1 Feb 23, 2010
You think people would learn not to drink and drive especially after multiple violations. That poor kid was hit head on by a drunk with multiple offenses! My sympathy to the families of the kids.
Pam in Minooka

Minooka, IL

#2 Feb 23, 2010
My sympathy and prayers go out to his family. What a horrible tragedy!
Michael

Newark, NJ

#3 Feb 23, 2010
What a shame. Drink at home and stay there! To think, had I not stopped at the Jewel in Plainfield that could have been me, my wife and my 19 month old son.
Minooka Dude

Wilmington, IL

#4 Feb 24, 2010
Maybe if the driver of other vehicle didn't have marijuana in his system, he could have reacted quicker to the drunk idiot.
stoneddrunk

Hanover, PA

#5 Feb 24, 2010
I feel sorry fot the kid that died the other one was stoned out of his mind
DontDUI wrote:
You think people would learn not to drink and drive especially after multiple violations. That poor kid was hit head on by a drunk with multiple offenses! My sympathy to the families of the kids.
Michael

Newark, NJ

#6 Feb 24, 2010
Minooka Dude wrote:
Maybe if the driver of other vehicle didn't have marijuana in his system, he could have reacted quicker to the drunk idiot.
STFU. You are an idiot. I suppose you think you could have averted an accident in the split second it took to collide. Oh...you are fricken superman and impervious to drunk drivers traveling in the opposite direction at 65 mph! The marijuana had nothing to do with it jagoff
stoneddrunk

Hanover, PA

#7 Feb 24, 2010
you need to find out more about the story the kids had more dui then the old man nice dui and not even 21
DontDUI wrote:
You think people would learn not to drink and drive especially after multiple violations. That poor kid was hit head on by a drunk with multiple offenses! My sympathy to the families of the kids.
Tom

Lemont, IL

#8 Feb 24, 2010
This was the drunk drivers third offense.. The kid driving could have had pot in his system from a week ago...
Minooka Dude

Wilmington, IL

#9 Feb 24, 2010
The Herald reported that the other driver was "cited with two misdemeanor counts of driving under the influence of intoxicating drugs after hospital tests also reportedly found cannabis in his system." Apparently, there was enough in his system to be cited with an offense.
I don't claim to be a superhero with who can avert accidents due to being clear headed, but I do put myself at a distinct advantage of those who do drink or take performance debilitating substances. For that, I'm an idiot?
Tom

Lemont, IL

#10 Feb 24, 2010
There is no measurement system for pot, it's like nicotine it's in you system or not. The bottom line is the drunk drive caused the accident and killed an innocent kid. To think that you have an advantage being sober versus high. Tons of sober people get killed by drunk drivers every year. Where is the advantage to that!
Minooka Dude

Wilmington, IL

#11 Feb 24, 2010
Um...reaction time?
Michael

Newark, NJ

#12 Feb 25, 2010
You are assuming that reaction time is reduced while being under the influence of marijuana and there has NEVER been a study that would indicate that this is a factual assumption. That you would make the claim the kid is equally responsible for this accident because he got stoned at some point prior to the accident is what makes you an idiot. The drunk driver is at fault, period. I have used marijuana in the past and I can tell you unequivocably that I would rather be on the road with a stoner than a drunk any day of the week and twice on Sunday. I call you an idiot because you felt the need to admonish the kid and place blame on him when you clearly have never smoked the pot and therefore have no experience on the matter to even comment on it in an educated manner. Reaction time??? What's your reaction time dude? Has it ever been measured against some statistical data? Are you quicker than a 19 year old kid? How would you know what his abilities were? Drunk drivers can do damage to anyone who crosses their path, it could have been anyone headed opposite the drunk and the results would have been the same: accident. The question that should be asked is were the occupants of the car wearing seatbelts, that is the biggest factor in survival of such a crash.
Minooka Dude

Wilmington, IL

#13 Feb 25, 2010
There have been multiple studies--many cited in the link of posted below. I did NOT make that claim. I said that MAYBE he could avoid the DRUNK IDIOT. I did not say that he was equally responsible, those are words you've put into my mouth.

I would argue that my 41 brain is sharper than a stoned or drunk brain half my age. While I have not had my reaction time measured, I have also not had an accident since I was 16 years old.

But you're right, we should all get stoned and drive. Seems like a valid argument.
======
From the NIDA web site...

Heavy marijuana use impairs a person's ability to form memories, recall events (see Marijuana, Memory, and the Hippocampus), and shift attention from one thing to another. THC also disrupts coordination and balance by binding to receptors in the cerebellum and basal ganglia, parts of the brain that regulate balance, posture, coordination of movement, and reaction time. Through its effects on the brain and body, marijuana intoxication can cause accidents. Studies show that approximately 6 to 11 percent of fatal accident victims test positive for THC. In many of these cases, alcohol is detected as well.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/ResearchReports/mari...
Michael

Newark, NJ

#14 Feb 25, 2010
The key to your study is the very last line: many of these cases alcohol is detected as well. That blows your theory that the marijuana is the cause out of the water. Your study is also done by the government. The same government who just got caught lying about global warming studies. So yeah, I believe their opinion.

I never suggested everyone get stoned and drive. Now you are putting words into my mouth.

I drive 100000 miles a year and haven't had an accident since I was 15. Statistically I should have had many accidents.

You did say "maybe" in your first remark. I give you that. Well..."maybe" the accident would not have happened had the drunk not have been allowed to own a car.

My problem with your original statement is that you suggest the kids prior dope smoking contributed to the accident. You don't know that. You are going on the assumption that reaction time was diminished but fail to recognize that there may have been no opportunity to react to the drunk. Your original statement was short sighted and uninformed. I take offense to your making claims to which you have no direct experience. That's all.

I am certain you are not an idiot of all things, rather I expect you are very intellegent but in this particular instance...your statement was idiotic.
Moron hater

United States

#15 Feb 25, 2010
Minooka Dude wrote:
There have been multiple studies--many cited in the link of posted below. I did NOT make that claim. I said that MAYBE he could avoid the DRUNK IDIOT. I did not say that he was equally responsible, those are words you've put into my mouth.
I would argue that my 41 brain is sharper than a stoned or drunk brain half my age. While I have not had my reaction time measured, I have also not had an accident since I was 16 years old.
But you're right, we should all get stoned and drive. Seems like a valid argument.
======
From the NIDA web site...
Heavy marijuana use impairs a person's ability to form memories, recall events (see Marijuana, Memory, and the Hippocampus), and shift attention from one thing to another. THC also disrupts coordination and balance by binding to receptors in the cerebellum and basal ganglia, parts of the brain that regulate balance, posture, coordination of movement, and reaction time. Through its effects on the brain and body, marijuana intoxication can cause accidents. Studies show that approximately 6 to 11 percent of fatal accident victims test positive for THC. In many of these cases, alcohol is detected as well.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/ResearchReports/mari...
hey old and bald dude, maybe if you went to work on snow days you would get into an accident
Minooka Dude

Wilmington, IL

#16 Feb 25, 2010
My prior statement did not suggest that the kid's prior dope smoking contributed to the accident. My prior statement suggested the possibility that he MIGHT have averted the accident IF the driver was at the top of his game. I do not know if the boy was stoned or not, but merely raised the idea that we shouldn't drive if we are going to use performance debilitating drugs. On this point, we disagree.

The study regarding reaction time was actually performed by A. Ameri of the Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology of Natural Compounds, University of Ulm, German and published in Progress in Neurobiology, which the government document that I cited referenced.
Michael

Newark, NJ

#17 Feb 25, 2010
And I submit to you that had the boy been super stoned he MIGHT have been driving a little slower and thus the timing that put him in that position at that specific moment in time and space MIGHT have kept the accident from happening at all! If the boy had stopped at the BP for a soda pop he MIGHT have not been there to have an accident. To suggest that MIGHT he have not had any dope in his system he MIGHT have the power to react "quicker" is the ridiculous part of your position.

Performance Debilitating Drug? Says who? Some German scientist? Oh well then it must be true!! Of course, there is never the possibility that that study MIGHT have been performed and funded by some group whose interests MIGHT influence and sway his opinion. Because all scientists operate on fact and fact alone, like the Global Warming Council who acted on behalf of the Tree Huggers Society or whatever outfit payed for the research and slanted their findings to "fit the bill" as it were.

You have no idea what marijuana does to ones abilities. You would rather take someone elses word for it. And that's ok, but you shouldn't speculate on what YOU think is right, true and accurate when you have no direct knowledge of what marijuana does or doesn't do for a person. For every expert you could produce that supports your notion that marijuana reduces reaction time I am certain that I could produce one to refute each ascertation.

Ok Minooka Dude, here's the gig...driving a car is a dangerous proposition. Reaching for that last crumb of jelly donut could have contributed to an accident. Turning up the volume on the stereo to jam Satriani's Surfing with an alien album could have contributed to an accident. Lighting a cigarette could cause an accident. And a meteor could come crashing through ones windshield causing an accident. All of these things COULD happen whether one smoked dope or not. It's like the old question: if a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound? Well I can speculate on that but I'd rather take the chickens word for it that he came first and that the egg is responsible for all sounds coming from the forest. Know what I mean? Probably not....



Tom

Lemont, IL

#18 Feb 25, 2010
Reaction time had nothing to do with it. The police were already called about the drunk driver before the accident happened. Not to mention the fact that anyone who would blame some one other than the drunk driver is nuts. What if the kid who died was your son? Who would be at fault then? You would change your tune. They should give the drunk driver 50 years because this is his 3rd offense.. C'mon!
Minooka Dude

Wilmington, IL

#19 Feb 25, 2010
No one is blaming this accident on someone other than a drunk driver. Anyone who suggests that's what I wrote has a demonstrated ability of incomprehension.

Why are you gentlemen talking to me as though I've never experienced the effects of marijuana? I am not even against its legalization or its casual use.

What I am opposed to is the practice of using a drug--legal or illegal--and then operating a vehicle with diminished abilities. With all the distractions that were mentioned, why compound the problem by operating a vehicle under the influence?
sad mom

Plainfield, IL

#20 Feb 25, 2010
why are we concerned with arguing?? the fact of the matter is this...a young life was snatched out of the hands of his mother, his father, his brothers and his sister!!! there are people whose lives will never EVER be the same and all because the state of Illinois allowed a multiple offense SOB have his drivers license back!!! RIP NKF you will be forever in our hearts!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minooka Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Coal City and Braidwood Tornado Refief Tue POS 10
Rustic Jun 27 Just passing through 1
News Twister touches Braidwood's west side Jun 26 Carbon hill resid... 5
Shady Oaks (Feb '12) Jun 23 Matt 34
Joliet Slammers Jun 22 Terrible time 1
News Day-care worker found guilty of abusing baby (Jun '11) Jun 16 Seen It Happen 58
News Rainfall Rates Across the Chicago Metro Area Jun 16 reality is a crutch 1
More from around the web

Minooka People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Minooka Mortgages