[Edit -Released by Raiders] Henry Ruggs involved in a fatal car crash, "DUI resulting in death" charges expected

[TheBrownBear]

52 minutes ago, StHustle said:

 

You ever experienced being blacked out? A number of times, when I was in my early 20's I would get so wasted and wake up in my bed not remembering leaving the place I was drinking at. Car would usually be parked a little crooked but never any dings. I was blessed to never have gotten into an accident while driving blacked out. Hearing people talk about my actions while blacked out is me basically doing things instinctively. I know Buffalo roads like the back of my hand so I could easily still make my way home wasted. If I was out of town trying to go back to a hotel I woulda probably eneded up somewhere crazy or pulled a Chad Kelly (who clearly was blacked out when he entered a strangers home and sat down on their couch next to a resident)

 

I say all that to say you actually aren't able to make any sort of thoughtful decision while blacked out. And thats why you need to make the smart and responsible decision to not get blacked out in the first place...then you don't gotta worry about it. That's why their is absolutely no excuse for this sort of thing. Their was always a point where you were within the legal limit and you decided to keep drinking until you become so trashed you lose awareness of the decisions you make. Glad I grew up in time before anything bad happened that would have potentially ruined my entire future or the future of others.

Thank you.  Not sure why Mr. Weo is so hung up on my using the term blackout as an indication that the guy had seriously impaired judgment at the end of the night.  I lived in a fraternity for four years.  I lived in close quarters with my share of drunks.   People are essentially incapable of higher level thinking in that state.  They are driven by the ID and automatic behaviors at that point.  If you're heading out to drink at a bar, don't drive your damn car.  Grab an uber or taxi.  If Ruggs doesn't take his car out, this girl never gets killed and Ruggs is on the field this Sunday.  The fact that he chose to do so - well, that's the point where you question his judgment and motives (does he D&D all the time and he's just a selfish bastard who doesn't GAF?; did he not expect to drink so much?; etc.) - not after he is so drunk that making the correct decision is basically a matter of chance.

[Mr. WEO]

41 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

No, the reasonableness of denying bail is situation-dependent.

 

Yes.  But the poster was claiming high bail is a seizure, and an unreasonable one.  It's not a seizure.  Nothing is seized.  You chose to put up some money so you stay free, or you can stay in jail.  It's a voluntary deposit.

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

58 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

a blackout is experienced in retrospect.  you don't walk around "blacked out".  It's a later failure to recall events that happened while previously intoxicated.

 

No one is arguing that his judgement was not impaired.   But every drunk settling up his tab at the bar and heading for his car has the ability to call a cab.  They simply feel they don't need one.  It's not that they are "too blacked out" to even  consider a ride service.

 

DA wanted a million.

 

15 minutes ago, TheBrownBear said:

Obviously, the overwhelming responsibility for the act rests on Ruggs' shoulders.  I said in earlier posts that he should go to jail for 10 years minimum.  I have lost family members to drunk drivers and have no sympathy for the guy given his actions.  I never once tried to blame the whole thing on his girlfriend.  I merely raised the question as to her culpability in allowing him to drive in his clearly, seriously drunken state (.16 at blood draw, likely .19-.20 when he got behind the wheel - https://super.stanford.edu/alcohol-drug-info/buzz-buzz/what-bac; and you can play semantics games with me all you want, but all literature points to an individual in that state having severely impaired judgement and being a potential danger to themselves and others).  I ask that question because an innocent person was senselessly killed.  The mere fact that Ruggs' partner was in the car at the time of the accident begs the question of "why", especially since I think we all agree, or at least I hope we do, that we would not let a friend or family member behind the wheel of a car in that state.  In my mind that leaves just a few possibilities: (a) she was either mentally or physically intimidated by Ruggs such that she feared for her physical (or financial) safety if she interfered/disagreed with him; (b) she herself was too drunk to intervene or understand the severity of the situation; or (c) she just DGAF.  

 

Anyhow, I find it odd that some of you find the fact of raising that question so offensive. 

 

 

Maybe you missed that part of my post. 

 

Plus I am not "playing semantics games" when I point out "blackout" does not mean "brain dead".  

 

Who's "we"?  Friends like "us" let drunk friends drive home (with us or alone) all the time (hence this topic exists).  Perhaps "we" at TSSW are simply more virtuous than the general population.  And I'm sure she got in the car because she has done countless times after this goof got tanked up and never crashed or even got pulled over.  She was going with previous experience.  Bad choice.  But you clearly laid some blame on her for letting HIM get in the car in the first place.  If she's as inebriated as he is, why would you expect her to make a choice you are saying it was scientifically impossible for him to make?

 

Putting any blame on her isn't necessarily offensive, but it's clearly inconsistent with the argument you are struggling to make about being "blackout, brain dead drunk".

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I'll put this up front: agreement first

 

10 hours ago, TheBrownBear said:

Anyhow, the whole point of my post was to say that he shouldn't be driving himself out for the night if he intended to drink...period.  That was the decision that set the wheels in motion that led to this tragedy.  I know most people can be responsible and moderate their intake, but its way too easy for many people to have one too many or lose their handle on their alcohol intake in the moment.  I've seen it over and over again, which is why we see so many drunks on the road.

 

 

On this, I believe everyone here agrees with you, and also points out that this guy had many more resources than most - $$ to pay a private driver, driver services provided by his team and his union, Uber/Lyft/Taxi, Phone-a-friend etc.  Of course he shouldn't be driving himself out to drink.  Period.

 

But others have pointed out that for a guy driving a souped up fancy car, getting buzzed and then driving it fast in the wee hours was probably one of the attractions of the evening, and that it's quite possible he had done this multiple times before with no problems (or maybe even a cop who pulled him over, saw who it was, and followed him home with a warning or nothing)

 

10 hours ago, TheBrownBear said:

Well, that's an awful lot of projecting on your part.  So, now you're just assuming she was abused?  I guess it's possible she was afraid or somehow coerced - guy was carrying after all, but that's a pretty big leap to make.  I myself, when there is no information to suggest otherwise, choose to assume that the adults in this situation are autonomous and are responsible for their actions.  We know she chose to get in the car with an extremely drunk individual ( I dunno, maybe she was in worse shape than him?).  And if she was that drunk, then yes, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that she too lacked the cognitive awareness to make the correct and unselfish decision to call for a ride.  (Same thing applies if she was truly afraid of him).

 

This is actually funny.  I'm assuming nothing.  YOU are.  You write "Also, why didn't his GF step in and at least attempt to stop him from getting behind the wheel in that state?  She admitted to the cops that they had been drinking all night.  She is not blameless either.", thus shifting blame for the actions of a Grown-Ass Man to his GF for failing to control him.  You have no idea what his GF might have said or done, but you're just assuming she didn't step in and try to stop him

I used the word "Sometimes when" indicating something that happens in some situations, not necessarily in this - as in "Sometimes when men abuse their WAG we hear (not saying this is you), "she knows how he gets when he's drunk, why did she get in his face like that?"  like it's her fault she got clocked"

 

No, son, I'm not assuming anything.  That's why I used the word "Sometimes".   My point is that women get blamed two ways - by you, for failing to stop a guy (when you don't know what she did or didn't try), and then, in cases where the woman did try to stop the guy and got abused for it, by people who blame her for getting in the face of a guy who potentially may get physical when he's drunk (note the use of the word "potentially" and "may" here, K?)  A guy who your words describe as a "brain dead feral creature", no less.  Yeah, Shawty needs to get in his face and control him then. 🙄

 

Not assuming - just pointing out the Damned if you Do, Damned if you Don't aspect for the woman.
 

 

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

Was anyone else surprised at his BAL of .16?  I assumed it would be higher.  

 

The mean BAL (1999 DOJ numbers) for arrests resulting in parole was .18 for men and .22 for women.  For those who did time it was .19 and .25.

 

 

Edited November 5, 2021 by Mr. WEO

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, Bubba Gump said:

 

Sounds like he is/has been a heavy drinker for awhile. Some regular Joe social drinker falls off the stool way before pounding 18 drinks. He knew he was lit, but he thought, no problem, do it all the time. JMO. I think he was prolly in what they call a "brownout". What happens just before you blackout.

 

Is that known?  18 drinks?  Sheesh.  Maybe some of them were for other people?

[Mr. WEO]

5 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Is that known?  18 drinks?  Sheesh.  Maybe some of them were for other people?

 

There's no way 18 drinks happened.  Not with a .16--even after an hour or 2 from his last drink.  No one cranks out that much ADH/ALDH

Edited November 5, 2021 by Mr. WEO

[Hapless Bills Fan]

58 minutes ago, TheBrownBear said:

Obviously, the overwhelming all the responsibility for the act rests on Ruggs' shoulders. 

 

FIFY

 

58 minutes ago, TheBrownBear said:

 I never once tried to blame the whole thing on his girlfriend.  I merely raised the question as to her culpability in allowing him to drive in his clearly, seriously drunken state (.16 at blood draw, likely .19-.20 when he got behind the wheel

 

No, but you did shift some of the responsibility and blame to her.   It's 100% fair to point out that every human being in the vicinity of a drunk who's about to get behind the wheel and didn't stop them could have prevented the tragedy if they tried - but it's inappropriate (IMO) to BLAME them for not doing so or to shift responsibility for anything bad that happens subsequently, to them for not doing so.

 

58 minutes ago, TheBrownBear said:

The mere fact that Ruggs' partner was in the car at the time of the accident begs the question of "why", especially since I think we all agree, or at least I hope we do, that we would not let a friend or family member behind the wheel of a car in that state.  In my mind that leaves just a few possibilities: (a) she was either mentally or physically intimidated by Ruggs such that she feared for her physical (or financial) safety if she interfered/disagreed with him; (b) she herself was too drunk to intervene or understand the severity of the situation; or (c) she just DGAF.  

 

Anyhow, I find it odd that some of you find the fact of raising that question so offensive. 

 

I don't find the above offensive at all.  It's appropriate to ask, just as it's appropriate to ask if he had any friends with him, did they try to stop him or call him a driver?

 

But they don't share the BLAME for what the guy did, nor the responsibility.  That stays with him.  I will act to protect my fellow men and women when the opportunity arises because IMO it's the right and moral thing to do - but I am not responsible for their actions if I don't (or if I try and fail) nor am I to blame for their actions.

 

You initially wrote: "She is not blameless either", which appears to be blaming her for his actions and diminishing his culpability by handing some off to her.  I dunno about offensive, but I don't find that kind of responsibility shifting appropriate.

 

Again, IMO. 

[Sherlock Holmes]

21 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

FIFY

 

 

No, but you did shift some of the responsibility and blame to her.   It's 100% fair to point out that every human being in the vicinity of a drunk who's about to get behind the wheel and didn't stop them could have prevented the tragedy if they tried - but it's inappropriate (IMO) to BLAME them for not doing so or to shift responsibility for anything bad that happens subsequently, to them for not doing so.

 

 

I don't find the above offensive at all.  It's appropriate to ask, just as it's appropriate to ask if he had any friends with him, did they try to stop him or call him a driver?

 

But they don't share the BLAME for what the guy did, nor the responsibility.  That stays with him.  I will act to protect my fellow men and women when the opportunity arises because IMO it's the right and moral thing to do - but I am not responsible for their actions if I don't (or if I try and fail) nor am I to blame for their actions.

 

You initially wrote: "She is not blameless either", which appears to be blaming her for his actions and diminishing his culpability by handing some off to her.  I dunno about offensive, but I don't find that kind of responsibility shifting appropriate.

 

Again, IMO. 

But since we are all playing "Jump to Conclusions" invented by a brilliant mind of course...what if she was all like "Baby, I want to go fast..." and encouraged him to drive at 150+ MPH? There's even the possibility she held the gun to his head...

Edited November 5, 2021 by Sherlock Holmes

[TheBrownBear]

45 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

 

Maybe you missed that part of my post. 

 

Plus I am not "playing semantics games" when I point out "blackout" does not mean "brain dead".  

 

Who's "we"?  Friends like "us" let drunk friends drive home (with us or alone) all the time (hence this topic exists).  Perhaps "we" at TSSW are simply more virtuous than the general population.  And I'm sure she got in the car because she has done countless times after this goof got tanked up and never crashed or even got pulled over.  She was going with previous experience.  Bad choice.  But you clearly laid some blame on her for letting HIM get in the car in the first place.  If she's as inebriated as he is, why would you expect her to make a choice you are saying it was scientifically impossible for him to make?

 

Putting any blame on her isn't necessarily offensive, but it's clearly inconsistent with the argument you are struggling to make about being "blackout, brain dead drunk".

 

I acknowledge that calling him brain dead or feral was for emphasis, and not meant to be a definition or a strict depiction of all blackout drunks.  And yes, this is mostly based on anecdotal evidence and witnessing the behavior of friends/acquaintances at this level of drunkenness (though also supported by the scientific literature).  If you want to pick nits with this, then fine.

 

I initially raised the question about the girlfriend's (in)actions or state of mind that evening as a completely separate point in my original post.  It was subsequently conflated in the replies.  But yes, you're right, I did specifically lay blame on her ("she is not blameless"), and probably shouldn't have in the absence of a clearer picture of what actually occurred. 

[TheBrownBear]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I'll put this up front: agreement first

 

 

 

On this, I believe everyone here agrees with you, and also points out that this guy had many more resources than most - $$ to pay a private driver, driver services provided by his team and his union, Uber/Lyft/Taxi, Phone-a-friend etc.  Of course he shouldn't be driving himself out to drink.  Period.

 

But others have pointed out that for a guy driving a souped up fancy car, getting buzzed and then driving it fast in the wee hours was probably one of the attractions of the evening, and that it's quite possible he had done this multiple times before with no problems (or maybe even a cop who pulled him over, saw who it was, and followed him home with a warning or nothing)

 

 

This is actually funny.  I'm assuming nothing.  YOU are.  You write "Also, why didn't his GF step in and at least attempt to stop him from getting behind the wheel in that state?  She admitted to the cops that they had been drinking all night.  She is not blameless either.", thus shifting blame for the actions of a Grown-Ass Man to his GF for failing to control him.  You have no idea what his GF might have said or done, but you're just assuming she didn't step in and try to stop him

I used the word "Sometimes when" indicating something that happens in some situations, not necessarily in this - as in "Sometimes when men abuse their WAG we hear (not saying this is you), "she knows how he gets when he's drunk, why did she get in his face like that?"  like it's her fault she got clocked"

 

No, son, I'm not assuming anything.  That's why I used the word "Sometimes".   My point is that women get blamed two ways - by you, for failing to stop a guy (when you don't know what she did or didn't try), and then, in cases where the woman did try to stop the guy and got abused for it, by people who blame her for getting in the face of a guy who potentially may get physical when he's drunk (note the use of the word "potentially" and "may" here, K?)  A guy who your words describe as a "brain dead feral creature", no less.  Yeah, Shawty needs to get in his face and control him then. 🙄

 

Not assuming - just pointing out the Damned if you Do, Damned if you Don't aspect for the woman.
 

 

 

 

What's a "Grown-Ass Man?"  I assume it's a man with a well-developed rump?  Also, I'm not your son.  😄

[without a drought]

18 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

Two cars racing a short distance in a straight line, especially from a dead stop (like at a traffic light), IS most definitely drag racing. Let's not get caught up in silly semantics for no reason. 

This is also not even close to a description of the Dareus incident.

[NoSaint]

I think we can all agree on: 

 

it would be shocking to find out this was his first drunk driving incident

 

it would be shocking to find out he never drove well over 100 before 

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

11 hours ago, Sherlock Holmes said:

But since we are all playing "Jump to Conclusions" invented by a brilliant mind of course...what if she was all like "Baby, I want to go fast..." and encouraged him to drive at 150+ MPH? There's even the possibility she held the gun to his head...

 

These things could occur.

[Allen2D̶i̶g̶g̶s̶TBD]

UPDATE:

Ruggs now faces 46 years in prison on 5 charges

 

"He has been charged with DUI resulting in death, DUI resulting in substantial bodily harm, and two counts of reckless driving, all of which are felonies. Ruggs also faces a misdemeanor charge of possessing a gun under the influence of alcohol."

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/11/05/henry-ruggs-faces-46-years-in-prison/

 

[Richard Noggin]

4 hours ago, without a drought said:

This is also not even close to a description of the Dareus incident.

Okay, so...what IS?

 

(I'm happy to be wrong, provided my wrongness is explained to me in ways that expands my haphazard understanding of a given subject. Just telling me I'm wrong isn't very useful to anyone. I didn't go back and research the Dareus/Hughes Orchard Park stupidity driving Olympics, so perhaps I'm oversimplifying...)

Edited November 6, 2021 by Richard Noggin

[Sherlock Holmes]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

These things could occur.

Especially during a Brownout...

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Allen2Diggs said:

UPDATE:

Ruggs now faces 46 years in prison on 5 charges

 

"He has been charged with DUI resulting in death, DUI resulting in substantial bodily harm, and two counts of reckless driving, all of which are felonies. Ruggs also faces a misdemeanor charge of possessing a gun under the influence of alcohol."

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/11/05/henry-ruggs-faces-46-years-in-prison/

 

 

*shudder*

[PetermansRedemption]

Obviously annoyed by this whole situation and the POS Ruggs. But also the reporting that he suffered “serious injuries”. Am I the only one who doesn’t believe injuries are serious if you get released from the hospital the same day? 

Edited November 6, 2021 by PetermansRedemption

[Ted Striker]

10 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

Obviously annoyed by this whole situation and the POS Ruggs. But also the reporting that he suffered “serious injuries”. Am I the only one who doesn’t believe injuries are serious if you get released from the hospital the same day? 

 

Surely, the injuries can't be serious.