PEOPLE, PLEASE STOP FOR SCHOOL BUSES!!!!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Hatin Since 87

    Bacon Hater
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 31, 2018
    11,534
    77
    Mooresville
    #1 Not always.

    #2 Punishment is based both upon results and intent. Horrible results, no intent versus; bad intent and bad, but not as horrible results.

    4 years makes sense to me. I don't see what is gained by a longer sentence.

    While I understand that the intent wasn’t there, and IANAL, but to me intent only means so much. I know that isn’t how the law works, but as gun owners we all practice this mentality. I may not intend to shoot somebody while cleaning my firearm, but if it happens it was caused by stupidity and negligence, and if somebody is killed because of my stupidity and negligence I 100% expect the worst sentence possible. In this case not 1, but 3 children died due to somebodies negligence. Imo 4 years is a slap on the wrist. These were kids that had their whole lives ahead of them, lost, because somebody couldn’t wait 60 seconds. If my firearm shoots somebody and kills them while cleaning it, and kills 1 single person, an adult, I’m likely to get more time than she did. That’s not a good system.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,756
    149
    Valparaiso
    No one gets convicted of murder and gets the sentence of a murderer with a clearly accidental shooting. In fact, it is often not even charged. This is no different.
     

    Denny347

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    13,434
    149
    Napganistan
    #1 Not always.

    #2 Punishment is based both upon results and intent. Horrible results, no intent versus; bad intent and bad, but not as horrible results.

    4 years makes sense to me. I don't see what is gained by a longer sentence.

    No one gets convicted of murder and gets the sentence of a murderer with a clearly accidental shooting. In fact, it is often not even charged. This is no different.


    iKKR7HK.jpg
     

    Trigger Time

    Air guitar master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 98.6%
    204   3   0
    Aug 26, 2011
    40,112
    113
    SOUTH of Zombie city
    Social Media FB pages around the Rochester area are filled with lots of nasty, uninformed and frankly ignorant comments. FWIW, I think both sides are a bit unhinged. I think this lady and her family will need to relocate. The mother of the deceased children physically attacked her after the sentencing and was arrested for misdemeanor assault (I think that was the charge) and was led off in handcuffs. I hear she was released during the wee hours of the morning.

    Unfortunately, this incident likely will not really change anything. People still ignore the stop arms, busses still stop on the "Wrong" side of the road.
    I dont blame the mom. I think the penalty would be well worth it for me.
    If someone killed my kids a *****slap would be the very best result they could hope for.
     

    nra4ever

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    25   0   0
    Dec 19, 2011
    2,373
    83
    Indy
    So if the mother kills the killer of her children by the math she should only get 1.3 years. Is that right???? Wow 1.3 years appears to be the value placed on a human life as far as prison.
     

    jasonh31

    Marksman
    Rating - 66.7%
    2   1   0
    Feb 8, 2013
    163
    16
    North Manchester
    The mother is a complete P.O.S. who had very little to do with these children before their death. Now she's trying to cash in. Hell she even had a speeding ticket in a school zone after the accident.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,756
    149
    Valparaiso
    So if the mother kills the killer of her children by the math she should only get 1.3 years. Is that right???? Wow 1.3 years appears to be the value placed on a human life as far as prison.

    ...so now we circle back to the intent discussion....but you knew that.....
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,541
    113
    Fort Wayne
    This is one thread I didn't except to see all spring.


    And I guess I always thought, bus stops, then you cross. I don't recall there being an extra step.
     

    WebSnyper

    Time to make the chimichangas
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Jul 3, 2010
    15,666
    113
    127.0.0.1
    NTSB: Schools share blame for Rochester crash that killed 3 children


    https://www.theindianalawyer.com/articles/ntsb-schools-share-blame-for-rochester-crash-that-killed-3-children


    ...was it common knowledge that the bus driver signaled the kids to cross? I must have missed it.

    Interesting.

    Not that I am one to blame the schools for the actual action of the person who took the direct action to blow through a school bus with its signals on, the lack of having tried to take preventative steps does seem to have contributed. Basically one of those things where taking every precaution possible because people are just stupid, is warranted.

    I'm guessing this will play into a civil lawsuit against the schools? (I haven't kept up with the story after some it happened if this already happened).

    Again, while I am not one to point the finger at people beyond those who took the actual action, this quote kind of hit me:

    The school corporation issued a statement saying it “has implemented a transportation safety review committee” that meets regularly.

    Well thank goodness they now have a committee and it is meeting regularly. That would certainly make me feel better if I had kids riding buses in that system.


    And they may have actually made some changes, but seems that would have been what you wanted to get out there, though again could just be bad reporting.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,756
    149
    Valparaiso
    I always wondered why people assume only 1 person can be at fault for anything or why there being more than 1 person at fault somehow makes a person who does a criminal act less guilty. Civil law reflects the idea of applying percentages of fault to each entity that is negligent, but criminal law reflects the idea of holding everyone who committed a crime 100% accountable.

    I don't know if anyone but the driver who hit the kids was negligent, but what is the purpose of having the bus driver signal the kids when to cross if it's not so another set of eyes is looking to see if it is safe?
     

    Clark & Addison

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 28, 2019
    128
    28
    Gibson County
    NTSB: Schools share blame for Rochester crash that killed 3 children


    https://www.theindianalawyer.com/articles/ntsb-schools-share-blame-for-rochester-crash-that-killed-3-children


    ...was it common knowledge that the bus driver signaled the kids to cross? I must have missed it.

    I am a teacher that has my bus license and will occasionally sub for route drivers. While there is no law that drivers have to signal kids to cross the street, it is a recommended practice. It was part of our training when I got my license. I can tell you that some of the drivers I cover have done a better job of training their riders about this than others have. Even when unloading kids, I tell them to wait for my signal before crossing the road.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,857
    113
    North Central
    This makes some sense to me.

    However, contributing to the cause of the crash was the Tippecanoe Valley School Corp.’s inadequate safety assessment of school bus routes, resulting in a prevalence of bus stops that required students to cross high-speed roadways, the NTSB said.

    My reading is that the drivers legal team was able to show that the school district had, and the NSTB determined to be too many situations where children had to cross highways rather than pick them up on the curb side. And if a juror I could be persuaded to agree with this...


    The agency also found there was no clear policy established by the district for school bus drivers to follow in determining when it was safe to signal students to cross a roadway.

    The school system has created a perfect storm with the stops that cross highways and then having the driver signal the kids to cross.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,756
    149
    Valparaiso
    I am a teacher that has my bus license and will occasionally sub for route drivers. While there is no law that drivers have to signal kids to cross the street, it is a recommended practice. It was part of our training when I got my license. I can tell you that some of the drivers I cover have done a better job of training their riders about this than others have. Even when unloading kids, I tell them to wait for my signal before crossing the road.

    ...which is the the issue. The bus driver apparently signalled them to cross, they started to and got killed. As far as I can tell, the kids waited for the signal.
     

    Sigblitz

    Grandmaster
    Trainer Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Aug 25, 2018
    14,605
    113
    Indianapolis
    I'm reading here the bus driver sees the approaching vehicle and waves the kids across the path of the approaching vehicle. I would prefer bus drivers wave the kids across after traffic has stopped.

    Walk your kids to the bus stop in case they are urged to cross before traffic has stopped.

    I think it was the perfect storm. 3 people could have prevented it. One was absent and two contributed.

    I am glad they are finally addressing one of the roots.
     
    Top Bottom