I think he's saying that Nick should not be solely responsible for what happened to his friend. Nobody forced the friend to get in the car and not wear a seatbelt. Both very stupid...

Guys back up, some of you are confused on the facts.

Nick Hogan was not above the legal limit, what you'd consider drunk. He had a tiny bit of booze in his system. Because of his age, the law is 0 tolerance. If he was of age, there would be no alcohol charge involved at all. To say that he was "Drunk" is very much a stretch.

As for a want to be race car driver, he is infact a licensed race car driver, some sort of drift something a rather. I'm not saying he's good or not but he is a licensed race driver under some sanctioning body.

Anyway, still sucks for the kid that got the worst of it.

He had a .02 Blood Alcohol Level.

That's like having a glass of wine with dinner and driving an hour later. Hardly "drunk".

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21677217/

Of course not, but that still doesn't change the fact that he didn't have one on. And if the driver was drunk, even more reason for the passenger to get the fuck out of the car.

You can't win an argument with me on DUI.. I was an MP - and I only ever ONCE busted a guy for DUI, but the assault charges were much worse, which is why he got busted for DUI. I took people home, and for damn good reason.

Why ruin a life of a young person, or any person? When the system is designed to FUCK you over, just in design.

Think about it.. Bars, clubs, hotels, restaurants, gas stations, food stores, even the Police ball, fireman fund raises, the military and veteran organizations, and the list goes on and on.. all have promos or parties, selling/serving beer and drinks - and yet.... they have no responsibility to get you home safe.. They know you are blasted - they look the other way as you walk out the door with keys in hand.

These companies and the city should all be forced to pay a tax, that will cover free public transportation for people who want to drink. Even the smallest, home bar, should be forced to do this.. For me to take a cab home it's $60 - doing so I bet would turn up a lot more cities turning dry.

Now, if you had something like this, and then you were DUI, well.. max to the limits then.

Having read more about the Hogan situation is turns out he was not above what would be the normal legal limit. His friend should have to shoulder some of the blame for his situation because he chose to get into the car. If he knew Nick had been drinking (drunk or not) that was a stupid situation. Letting him drive like an idiot and not telling him to stop and let him out is mistake number 2. Still, when you are behind the wheel you are responsible for the people in your car so he should have to shoulder the majority of the punishment/blame.

As for driving drunk. I'm sorry, but you can't blame the system or use the system as a reason/excuse for people driving drunk. I understand that people go to bars and clubs and drink and the owers/bartenders turn their back and know that these people are driving drunk. But what ever happened to personal responisiblity? If you are going to go out and drink and you know you will be drunk, why not save enough to get a cab home or arrange for a ride/driver? The reality is you don't have to drink. You don't have to get drunk. Nobody is forced to do any of this stuff. What if you went out and drank and got drunk and drove home and hit a car that had some woman and her kid in it and you killed or crippled her child? Do you just say, "hey, I was out drinking. they knew I was going to drinking and they didn't provide me a way home. So sorry." Her only sin was to be on the road with someone that chose to drink and didn't do it in a responsible way.

If it were up to me here is my punishement schedule. I'm not for ruining somones life because they made a mistake, but when your mistake puts others in danger you need to be taught a lesson.

1st offense. License suspended for 1 year. You can apply for a hardship license so you can get to and from work and to the store to get food. You get a $3,000 fine which you can pay off either in monthly payments or by working in some kind of public service. You get 1 year of probation during which you have to take the alcohol diversion class and you have to submit to random testings because you don't get to drink during that year. If you prove you can't drink responsibly you lose that right for a while.

2nd offense. License suspended for 3 years. You can get the hardship license but the only car you can drive is one of those where they have the breathalyser attached to it. You get 2 years probation and $10,000 in fines. You also get 30 days in jail. You can serve it on weekends if you wan so you can keep your job. You also have the tests and can't drink for the 3 years you are suspended.

3rd offense. License revoked for 10 years. You can't have a hardship license. You get 3 years in jail $50K in fines and 5 years probation.

This might seem harsh, but as I said, drunk driving is 100% avoidable. People act like they have no other choice. They do. Every year there are around 16,000 deaths due to drunk driving. Around 40% of all driving related deaths are from booze. People who choose to drink and drive should be treated very roughly because they are taking a lot of innocent people's lives into their hands.

omg :1orglaugh

Ouch!!!!!!!!!!!

I knew that supra would get him in trouble sooner or later.

In Arizona you get a one year mandatory inner lock on your car, lots of fines, and 10 days in jail.. first time.

Poeple make mistakes, every day, in every way.. Why is this different? Because it's a choice? Well, most mistakes are.

The reality is, people ARE forcing people to do this - without every knowing it. That is "exactly" how advertising works. If they want to make it really fair, then ZERO advertising for alcohol on tv, radio, billboards, anything.. It has been proven that advertisements influence us in unknown - upper level - psychological reason.

It's also been proven the more you push people, and say no this is bad, the more they will do it. It's far better to create a system that works with the people than against them.

Stupid kids have to learn the hard way..what a shame for his buddy though

50 drunks posting on GFY!

drink more, skid more

I believe that he is going to serve his time in the Pinellas County, FL jail but wont he be seperated from the general population being that he is a celebrity? I mean, I am sure that someone like Britney Spears (or another celebrity on such a high level as that) would not be thrown in with the general population but what about Nicks celebrity status? I mean, he is considered a celebrity but he is not THAT big of a celebrity. Anyone have any idea how that works?

kid doesnt need to drive anyhow. He can just take a damn towncar and hang out with his dads new gf. Lifes rough.

the driving ban should imposed should have been much much longer.

County is the worst, next to the holding tank. This is cause county is the "limbo" of the system. Most people are awaiting trial and are antsy. Also, many gangbangers etc. try to make a rep. here before going to prison for the long haul. So more crap happens. Jail isn't as bad, usually people sentenced under a year and low level crimes like child support, dui etc.
Prison (state) is better than county. Everyone chills out cause they know their time and just want to do it and get out. You'll get your occasional race riots, retribution attacks, and stuff. But most are politics like anything else could have most likely been avoided. Federal prison is the easiest. Usually white collar crimes.

P.S. Holding tank fucking sucks cause thats where all the drunks are pissing on themselves and crack heads are starting shit.. :2 cents:

tough lesson but justified in his case

You could see something like this coming with him. Not that I really followed the show but he came off as an increasingly arrogant little twerp. Still, wouldn't wish it on anyone. I am sure we all did some stupid shit when we are young, and got away with it ok. I guess he just started doing it to often, as I am sure this wouldn't of been the first time.

this kid puts the douche in douchebag

Well, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I don't know you or much about you, but you said you were an MP and I respect anyone that has served this country (plus you have a pretty cool blog too:) ) but I don't think anyone is being forced into anything. I understand advertising is meant to make you want to buy something because you think it will give you the life that the ad portrays, but advertising doesn't FORCE you to do anything. To me saying that seeing ads on TV, papers, billboards or wherever forces you to go out and drink and drive is absurd. I will agree that it is easy to to. You go to a bar or a club and it is very easy to be over-served. Plus if you are bar hopping they have no idea how much you have drank. You could have done 5 shots 10 minutes ago and then walk into their bar and they serve you 3 more and you are none the wiser. So people go out and getting served too much is very easy and then they decide to drive home. To me it is no different than if I decide to shoplift something or if I decide to drive 100 mph or if I decide write a bad check. I may get away with it, I may not, but doing it was my decision and my decision alone and if I get caught I should be punished accordingly and in the case of DUI (and I guess the case where I am doing 100mph) I am actively putting other people in danger when I do this.

Also about the punishment, I was just going off of what typically happens in my state. Here in Oregon you get a DUI and often you don't even lose you license. You go to a class, pay a fine and get to keep it, or you lose it for 90 days. You have to get caught 3-4 times before anything real harsh starts to happen.

I do agree that in a lot of cases the more you push people away from something the more they will want to do it and booze is a prime example of that. We have such a taboo about booze. Most people I know when they turned 21 went out and got hammered. Sure most people have had booze before that age, but usually not much and not that often. It is such a taboo that they celebrate getting to do it by over doing it. I think if parents were more open with their kids and let them have some wine every now and then or shared a beer with them on their terms it would help ease off that taboo and make it so that it wasn't such a big deal. That is how it was in my house and I never even had a drink on my 21st. I do drink occasionally, but even when I was in my early 20's it didn't have the allure to me a lot of other people felt because it wasn't something I was denied and I didn't feel like I had to make up for lost time with. The same can be said for sex. If you look at the parts of the country where they only teach abstinence in the schools you will see that those areas have the highest rate of teen pregnancy and STD as well. The more you tell the kids not to screw, the more they screw, only they don't use protection.

Talking about advertising and its effect on society is a fascinating topic I could discuss for hours. All that said, I still think, in the end, people make choices for themselves. We have free will and if we choose the wrong thing and that wrong thing could harm other people there should be some pretty strict consequences.

What Paris did was more like "Hotel Check-in".

Would it help his buddy out? He already feels like shit, what good does putting him in jail do... :2 cents:

I think it sends a message. Sure 8 months and 2 years probation is nothing to laugh at, but he is young and on TV and kids look up to him and his family. They may not think what he got is that bad. If he got more, say the max which was 3 years it would have really sent the message that this type of thing is not tolerated.

Feeling like shit is not a punishment. Im sure if he got off without jail time he would feel alot better so it serves him right. he has been speeding through very tight traffic conditions at crazy rates of speed many times before this happened without learning his lesson. His buddy will never get a second chance and he should not as well.

that sucks

prison isnt a joke

Shit happens,fuck it,lol

Thanks and Thanks :)

I'm not a materialistic person, and you don't sound like you are either. And that would be why ads don't effect us.

The majority of the population love material things, will cry over them, would die over them, would kill over them. Every day they 'want' or 'need' something. Advertisements effect these people, in every way, good and bad.

I have read a lot of studies, where the subject doesn't know what's going on, but he is getting blasted with some type of ad, or drives by types of ads, themes, or whatever it is.

Then the person is told to act how they feel, or draw, or they may go through tests..

And ... every one of them that I have read proves that advertising effects you without you even knowing about it. This isn't for everyone or exactly the same for everyone.

When I read about these studies, the people that get effected the most, always 'seem' to be the materialistic people. To me, Nick is at the top of the chart for materialism so he would be influenced far more than most of us.

The ads don't have to make you want to drink - but they can make you feel like superman without you even knowing it. And that is just as dangerous.

He deserves it!

I've always had the same thought. Why does Paris bother driving? I fucking hate driving, if I had that much cash someone would be carting my ass all over town.

Very true about materialism. I know people that spend every dime they make and they spend on it on junk. It they start making an extra $100 a month, they will go out and spend it. I have always thought that people who are very materialistic have some kind of self esteem issues and they need to buy these things in order to feel good about themselves or in order to justify their success or even existence. It is an interesting subject for sure.