Another day, another Cardinals legal issue (front office)

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I don't think I've seen anyone defending Keim?

As far as Minegar goes, I'm not a fan of destroying anyone's life for first time offenses like this (as far as I know, it is his first offense). You start taking everything away from someone who may have a substance abuse issue, and you put them in a situation where they may just continue to abuse.

If he killed someone would your tune change? The danger he created is exactly the same in both scenarios. It is pure luck that he didn’t.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

22 years ago? Not sure what you all have as a level of tolerance on this. I don't drink at all, so I really don't have a context.

You would’ve thought he learned his lesson. He wasn’t 10 years old.

 

[Solar7]

If he killed someone would your tune change? The danger he created is exactly the same in both scenarios. It is pure luck that he didn’t.

No, it wouldn't.

There is a wide difference between intentionally trying to kill someone and an ill-advised and wreckless decision that eventually had an ultimate price. Sorry, it's how I feel.

 

[blindseyed]

No, it wouldn't.

There is a wide difference between intentionally trying to kill someone and an ill-advised and wreckless decision that eventually had an ultimate price. Sorry, it's how I feel.

So if someone you love is stabbed and killed you be pissed but if that same person killed them while driving drunk you wouldn't be that mad because "I'm not a fan of destroying anyone's life for first time offenses like this"..?

 

[Solar7]

So if someone you love is stabbed and killed you be pissed but if that same person killed them while driving drunk you wouldn't be that mad because "I'm not a fan of destroying anyone's life for first time offenses like this"..?

I'd be mad but I would understand they are two fundamentally different things.

Same as I wouldn't be as mad at someone for speeding and causing a death as I would be as someone shooting someone and causing a death.

This is getting far away from the point of this thread, though.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

No, it wouldn't.

There is a wide difference between intentionally trying to kill someone and an ill-advised and wreckless decision that eventually had an ultimate price. Sorry, it's how I feel.

How about someone drunk at a shooting range?

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I'd be mad but I would understand they are two fundamentally different things.

Same as I wouldn't be as mad at someone for speeding and causing a death as I would be as someone shooting someone and causing a death.

This is getting far away from the point of this thread, though.

Man do I hope there aren’t a lot of “understanding” people like you. And that’s not meant as a personal jab at you, but rather a legitimate concern of mine. It means the levity of drunk driving just isn’t taken seriously enough. Actually, on second thought, I guess there are a lot that “understand.”

 

[Solar7]

How about someone drunk at a shooting range?

Again, drunk is wildly different than getting a DUI.

My best friend in college got a DUI blowing under the legal limit and being the guy who was responsible for everyone who wasn’t. But there were zero tolerance laws since he wasn’t 21. Three months separated him from “good to go, move along sir,” and tent city.

There’s degrees of things. I’ve told this story here already in a similar thread.

I think you would find whether it involves booze or not though, I’m more of the kind of person who thinks the consequences aren’t really driven home well enough. Most people aren’t really cognizant of the consequences of the law until it happens to them or a close friend/family member.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

My best friend in college got a DUI blowing under the legal limit and being the guy who was responsible for everyone who wasn’t. But there were zero tolerance laws since he wasn’t 21. Three months separated him from “good to go, move along sir,” and tent city.

So, the so-called designated driver was an underage drinker himself? Are we supposed to feel sorry for him? SMH.

 

[AZCB34]

These days, if you are heading out to knock back a drink or two take an uber there so you don't have to make the decision to drive home. Minnegar is a ass just like Keim and should be given no leeway...like Keim was.

Word on the police report is he almost hit someone on a motorcycle.

 

[b8rtm8nn]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Dayman]

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

What an idiot. He is extremely lucky he only got a DUI.

No word on any sort of punishment yet?

 

[az jam]

Cards need to let him go.

 

[JeffGollin]

I think we're transitioning from one life-style to another.

For a long time, overdrinking - regardless of consequences - was considered a "fun loving" norm. Offenders were considered colorful wild-things" that added fun and merriment to any family's book of legends.

Times change. T-boning an SUV and wiping out an entire family is no longer considered "cute."

But when dealing with DUI, substance-abuse etc, there still is the tendency to treat fun-loving Uncle Charley (who took out a light-pole near the Interstate) as "colorful" instead of dangerous.

It's not easy bucking ingrained traditions. Think of it as "we know more now - time to change the way we roll."

 

[Brak]

He's LIT!!

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[wit3card]

why you would drive under this circumstances is beyond me ... :/

 

[Yuma]

why you would drive under this circumstances is beyond me ... :/

Impaired thinking.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Again, drunk is wildly different than getting a DUI.

My best friend in college got a DUI blowing under the legal limit and being the guy who was responsible for everyone who wasn’t. But there were zero tolerance laws since he wasn’t 21. Three months separated him from “good to go, move along sir,” and tent city.

There’s degrees of things. I’ve told this story here already in a similar thread.

I think you would find whether it involves booze or not though, I’m more of the kind of person who thinks the consequences aren’t really driven home well enough. Most people aren’t really cognizant of the consequences of the law until it happens to them or a close friend/family member.

Agreed. Most people won’t care about consequences until felt directly or seen up close and personal.

 

[Mainstreet]

Cardinals suspend Ron Minegar a minimum of 6 weeks without pay per report.

The Arizona Cardinals have suspended Ron Minegar, the team's executive vice president and chief operating officer, for a minimum of six weeks without pay, The Republic has learned.

Minegar was arrested on suspicion of DUI in Chandler on Aug 10, according to Chandler police.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/spo...-minegar-6-weeks-after-dui-arrest/2134701001/

 

[Brak]

Apparently they still haven't released his BAC? After seeing him on video at the scene, I gotta believe it was an astronomical number. Hopefully we find out at some point.

 

[Garthshort]

Brak, why?

 

[slanidrac16]

Brak, why?

Not important to me either.

 

[Sandan]

I think we're transitioning from one life-style to another.

For a long time, overdrinking - regardless of consequences - was considered a "fun loving" norm. Offenders were considered colorful wild-things" that added fun and merriment to any family's book of legends.

Times change. T-boning an SUV and wiping out an entire family is no longer considered "cute."

But when dealing with DUI, substance-abuse etc, there still is the tendency to treat fun-loving Uncle Charley (who took out a light-pole near the Interstate) as "colorful" instead of dangerous.

It's not easy bucking ingrained traditions. Think of it as "we know more now - time to change the way we roll."

US is still decades behind Europe on this

 

[cardsfanmd]

Apparently they still haven't released his BAC? After seeing him on video at the scene, I gotta believe it was an astronomical number. Hopefully we find out at some point.

He didn’t blow.

 

[Shane]

He didn’t blow.

So???