MADD wants Wimmer suspended if convicted

H

Happy29

Guest
A Mothers Against Drunk Driving [MADD] executive said that NASCAR should suspend Nextel Cup rookie Scott Wimmer if he is convicted of driving while impaired. Scott Wimmer was arrested Jan. 31 on suspicion of driving while impaired. "I realize (racing is) driving on private property. But still, it's sort of saying, 'It's OK to go out there and drink and drive,' " said Cheryl Jones, vice president of field operations for MADD national. Wimmer faces a preliminary court hearing Wednesday after being arrested Jan. 31 in High Point, NC. Jones, who lives in Charlotte, said a first-time offender should expect to receive only a "slap on the wrist" from North Carolina courts if convicted. A multirace suspension, she said, is "just something I think NASCAR needs to look into" if Wimmer is convicted. She said she realizes racing is Wimmer's livelihood. "But he could have taken someone's life away from them," Jones said. "It's a serious crime." NASCAR vice president of communications Jim Hunter said that officials will wait for the courts to rule on Wimmer's case before deciding what additional punishment, if any, he will face from NASCAR
 
MADD is as bad as PETA about trying to worry about other peoples business. I agree it is a serious crime but it is really none of their business. :angry:
 
Absurd to think that MADD is trying to influence Nascar and the Court system.
Now all we need is the NRA and ACLU involved.
 
Originally posted by kat2220@Mar 10 2004, 10:49 AM
Absurd to think that MADD is trying to influence Nascar and the Court system.
Now all we need is the NRA and ACLU involved.
Click to expand...
Kat, why would the NRA want to get involved? :huh:
 
Going off-topic, my post has nothing to do with Wimmer's situation but:

Theyre a special interest group that wants to run the country, like the liberal ACLU and MADD, the NRA is their right wing counterpart. Personally, I dont want any of these groups getting involved because it would offend some people on one end of the political spectrum and another end of the political spectrum, it'd fare better if they just stayed out.
 
Originally posted by bowtie@Mar 10 2004, 07:33 AM
MADD is as bad as PETA about trying to worry about other peoples business. I agree it is a serious crime but it is really none of their business. :angry:
Click to expand...
you got it bowtie................. :angry: :angry: agree with you 100 percent.....
 
I don't remember all of the details and I'm too lazy to go look them up, but they didn't find Wimmer at the scene did they? They found him at his house. Hiding. Behind the bed. They can't prove he was driving while impaired. He could have chugged a 5th of Jack once he got home. If that is the case a competent lawyer (notice I didn't say good because the only good lawyer, well you get the point) will get that portion dismissed. Now leaving the scene of an accident is another thing. But, he is at least used to that. Just look at how many accidents he causes on the track that he leaves.
 
Damn I wish they would get off Scott's back for once. He made a mistake... we all know that, HE knows that.. can we not forgive, forget, and move on? Good lord, I would love to slap these little "groups" sometimes...

If I piss on the road, it turns to ice, and someone wrecks... what are they gonna do? Take me to court and try to get my bladder cut out?
 
Originally posted by Guido+Mar 10 2004, 12:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Guido @ Mar 10 2004, 12:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--kat2220@Mar 10 2004, 10:49 AM
Absurd to think that MADD is trying to influence Nascar and the Court system.
Now all we need is the NRA and ACLU involved.
Click to expand...
Kat, why would the NRA want to get involved? :huh: [/b][/quote]
NRA or ANY group that lobbies for citizens rights, no matter what.

Today is Scott's 1st court date and he is expected to enter no plea. The case will probably be continued.
 
Still don't understand your original statement Kat seeing that the NRA has nothing to do with DWI cases.

Now, the ACLU I understand.
 
Originally posted by slick-nick@Mar 10 2004, 02:26 PM
Damn I wish they would get off Scott's back for once. He made a mistake... we all know that, HE knows that.. can we not forgive, forget, and move on? Good lord, I would love to slap these little "groups" sometimes...

If I piss on the road, it turns to ice, and someone wrecks... what are they gonna do? Take me to court and try to get my bladder cut out?
Click to expand...
Scott has to answer for his CHOICE to drink and drive and leave the scene of an accident that resulted in property damage.

Scott is a really nice guy. But he screwed up!

I don't believe that MADD or any other organization needs to be involved with this case. The appropiate action should be taken by the judge and Scott should not be an exception to the law.
 
I urge everyone to join DAMM: Drunks Against Mad Mothers. ^_^
 
MADD has a right to offer thier opinion, even if it is interpreted as an attempt to influence the outcome of a criminal charge. Isn't that what each is already doing by offering thier opinion here?? By comparison, these posts and opinions are no different than the approach taken by Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.

As a high profile personality in a widely recognized sport, Scott Wimmer has a greater responsibility than most of us. He is expected to set an example.

MADD has taken on the task of educating people about the dangers and consequences of driving drunk. It is a serious business. In order to push the message, MADD must make thier voice heard whenever and wherever they can whether it be in schools or the media.

Many MADD supporters know the saddness of losing a family member, relative or close friend to a drunk driver, then suffered when the courts give a lenient sentence. I wonder how many readers and posters have experienced the same scenario???
Driving drunk is similar to accidentally shooting someone with the exception a different weapon is used.

In every choice we make, we should know our limits and be prepared to accept FULL responsibility for the consequences of those choices.

The sad part in this case is, Scott Wimmer was involved in an accident and ran away then hid, a cowardly and less than mature reaction. He was not willing to take responsibility for his choice and actions.

Legally, Scott Wimmer is not guilty of anything until convicted in a court of law. Ethics and morality are other issues.

MADD is guilty of offering an opinion about the legal charges and possible outcome of those charges in the same way any of us would in championing a cause we feel strongly about.

MADD is not the guilty party here.

Okay, Old Whizzer is off his horse, for now. End of lecture.

Three cheers for MADD !!!!!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom