Todd Carney caught Drink Driving!!

[adamkungl]

all this sh*te aside, adankungl you didnt answer my question,yes or no
would you hold the same relaxed view if repeat offender todd carney
had injured or killed your mum,nan,sis,wife or children and then blew
a low-range reading?an honest yes or no will surfice

ridiculous hypothetical. We would then be dealing with manslaughter, not low range drink driving, obviously my opinion would be different. I would obviously be angry, however I am not sure how much blame I would place on alcohol, given that the government views .05 as a safe limit and he blew barely a scratch above that. But I would be basing that opinion on something that actually happened, not on a made up scenario.

If someone killed your mum doing 51km/h in a 50 zone, would you be ranting about speeding?

 

[TheDalek079]

Dave Shillington is a repeat DUI offender.
Dugan got arrested for careless driving whilst he was disqualified so he's a repeat offender too.

Why isn't Rothfield trying to eliminate these pests?

 

[CMUX]

I think everyone is forgetting one thing here:

How many times has he done this without being caught in the last year alone? Statiscally, it is almost an impossibility to be caught in the one and only time you may have gone over the limit in a year time...

That is hearsay and irrelevant.
How many times has Anthony Watmough or you or me for that matter sped before being caught. I have never been caught nor in all likelihood have you. I bet you have exceeded the speed limit though.

 

[Eels Dude]

all this sh*te aside, adankungl you didnt answer my question,yes or no
would you hold the same relaxed view if repeat offender todd carney
had injured or killed your mum,nan,sis,wife or children and then blew
a low-range reading?an honest yes or no will surfice

The fact is he didn't. If he did he would be charged with 'culpable driving causing death' and face a prison sentence. Similarly if someone someone drives 10kms over the speed limit and kills someone they will be charged with 'Dangerous driving occasioning death'. But that doesn't everyone driving 10ks over the speed limit every single day.

 

[RHCP]

Dave Shillington is a repeat DUI offender.
Dugan got arrested for careless driving whilst he was disqualified so he's a repeat offender too.

Why isn't Rothfield trying to eliminate these pests?

Those damn Duiders at it again. Scourge on the game, such a horrible culture.

 

[VictorTheViking]

So Canberra get lambasted by all and sundry for going to easy on him, but the roosters have no need to do anything but slap him on the wrist????

The moron deserves everything he gets, he (regardless of what other players have done), is a repeat offender, he has obviously not learn't his lesson, so what is going to get through to this guy?? Especially if a 12 month de-registration didnt.......

 

[Walt Flanigan]

That is hearsay and irrelevant.
How many times has Anthony Watmough or you or me for that matter sped before being caught. I have never been caught nor in all likelihood have you. I bet you have exceeded the speed limit though.

No you are completely right.

Drink driving is cool and Todd Carney is a trend-setter who is hard-done-by.

FMD it's actually sickening listening to you lot try and justify what he's done.

As has been pointed out, this is NOT an isolated incident and regardless of low range/high range he is not learning from his mistakes.

Obviously all the fines, suspensions and year in the wilderness hasn't been enough of a deterrent.

Honestly I don't really care what happens to him. We thankfully rid ourselves of him and he's all the Roosters problem now. I just can't believe some of the rubbish coming out of the Roosters fans mouths to defend his actions.

So much for the Roosters cleaning up their act. How can they when their own fans don't care how their players represent them.

 

[LRC]

It was purley an error in judgement..I dont think there was anything malicous or any intent or signs of arrogance.

He had a few..so what.....he went to sleep...he got up and drove....probably felt great and didnt thyink twice about it.

Who cares...let him get on the field and entertain us..thats his job...he's not driving trains or busses!

He is an adult who the scientists say are capable of driving safely with that much alcohol in his system, the law is silly stating a P plater is not capapble of it.

 

[no name]

It was purley an error in judgement..I dont think there was anything malicous or any intent or signs of arrogance.

He had a few..so what.....he went to sleep...he got up and drove....probably felt great and didnt thyink twice about it.

Who cares...let him get on the field and entertain us..thats his job...he's not driving trains or busses!

He is an adult who the scientists say are capable of driving safely with that much alcohol in his system, the law is silly stating a P plater is not capapble of it.

I think the law stating I can't punch you in the face for being so stupid is silly. I'm sure that would be a plausible excuse.

 

[no name]

ridiculous hypothetical. We would then be dealing with manslaughter, not low range drink driving, obviously my opinion would be different. I would obviously be angry, however I am not sure how much blame I would place on alcohol, given that the government views .05 as a safe limit and he blew barely a scratch above that. But I would be basing that opinion on something that actually happened, not on a made up scenario.

If someone killed your mum doing 51km/h in a 50 zone, would you be ranting about speeding?

He blew .052 above his limit. It doesn't matter if you think it's right or not, it's the law.

 

[Raider_69]

rooster fans, we tried warning you about Finch, you ignored us ands regretted it

cause im a nice guy, ill issue another warning, this wont be the last todd carney drinking incident, and it wont be the last time you hear how sorry he is and how this is a wake up call he needed, it wont be the last time you hear his sob story about making his mum upset and it wont be the last time you have to wake up on a sunday morning and wonder how your going to justify this as an honest mistake and tell the LU public he deserves yet another chance...

its going to be a long dance, until the kid is sacked, jailed, killed or has some kind of legitimate epiphany (as opposed to the 100000 bullsh*t pr ones he's had so far)

this wont be the last time the bloke brings the reputation of your club down and mark my words, one day you'll grow tried of it, regardless of his talent.

 

[LRC]

I think the law stating I can't punch you in the face for being so stupid is silly. I'm sure that would be a plausible excuse.

Some people deserve to be punched in the face sometimes...the law states you cant do it but I dont support that law or many others....a lot of laws are silly or can be defended..this one with DUI for P Platers as opposed to non Ps is a contradiction and makes no sense.

Why cant a P-plater have the same blood alcohol limit as non p plater??
I can to a degree understand it for a first year driver but if i have experience and age on my side..why should it matter...if I drove for many years without alcohol related incidents then why should it change if I have to go on my Ps for other reasons (speeding etc)

So does the law actually mean that you are less capable if you have 0.5 but you can get used to it once you get experienced a bit.

Clearly the law states that a person of experience ( 1 year on Ps) and age (18) is capable.. Carney is of age and experienced (he is a goose, but thats a different story).

Maybe the law should be that no driver can have alcohol in their system!!! Then this would make more sense.

 

[giggity giggity]

adamkungl in all honesty i would be very upset if my mother was killed
by a drink driver or speeding driver,more so if the speeding driver had a history
of such offences i would be very upset,but then again im not
on here posting defences for repeat speeding offenders ,where your on here
posting defences for a repeat drink driver,so your veiw changes obviously when it affects you personally,where my view does not change.

you say that todd unknowingly drove his car over the limit,do you know todd
personally do you? i think not.todd knew/knows what the rules are yet he
chose to ignore them thinking he was above the law,and he thinks like that
because he has been slapped on the hand one to many times,which i think alot of the posters are trying to get at.

To say that we would be dealing with manslaughter and not low-range D.U.I. is
balone mate ,he would be charged with high-range drink driving resulting in manslaughter ,the reason i say high-range is that he was 5 times over the legal "P"
plate limit,you can do all the math you like but this is fact .He WAS just over the
limit for responsible drivers like yourself and i ,but we all know that todd is not responsible which is why the judge granted him a licence but only "P"s

mate im not going to get a sh*te slinging match with you about this ,but you
sound so much like myself 3 yrs ago till i realised i could not stand up for him
anymore .

im not having a shot at your club or todd as a player ,i was and always will be a RUGBY LEAGUE FAN of todds,BUT WHEN IS ENOUGH IS ENOUGH ?being the reigning
dally m medallist and a freak of a league player does not exempt him from societies laws,it also doesnt matter if he played for you guys or gymea gorillas ,the law is the law and his rap sheet is his rap sheet. So take your rooster jumper off and those todd carney glasses as well and ask yourself the same question mate.cheers

 

[Eels Dude]

Some people deserve to be punched in the face sometimes...the law states you cant do it but I dont support that law or many others....a lot of laws are silly or can be defended..this one with DUI for P Platers as opposed to non Ps is a contradiction and makes no sense.

Why cant a P-plater have the same blood alcohol limit as non p plater??
I can to a degree understand it for a first year driver but if i have experience and age on my side..why should it matter...if I drove for many years without alcohol related incidents then why should it change if I have to go on my Ps for other reasons (speeding etc)

It's funny how the law works sometimes. All P platers have a blood alcohol limit of zero.

A red P-plater loses their licence automatically if they speed. Wheras a green P plater has 7 demerit points up their sleeve.

A P-plater aged under 25 can only take 1 passenger in their car, a P plater aged 25 or over is not restricted at all.

An L-plater aged 25 years or over doesn't have to keep a log book. An L-plater under 25 has to complete a log book with 120 hours or so.

Obviously the reason why P Platers now have a zero tolerance level is because of their lack of experience, and the fact so many teenagers are more likely to drive a bit crazy, hence why we have Provisional licenses in the first place.

But interestingly enough, if Todd Carney had committed this act in the US or in the UK, he wouldn't have broken the law as they have BAC limits of 0.08

 

[AlwaysGreen]

The stupid thing about this whole debate is that Carney himself has admitted he did the wrong thing. And full credit to him, at last he might be growing up. Yet certain rooster fans are defending his actions even though the man himself said he was in the wrong.

As for rothfield we all know he's a clown so why give a f**k about what he says?

 

[Eels Dude]

adamkungl in all honesty i would be very upset if my mother was killed
by a drink driver or speeding driver,more so if the speeding driver had a history
of such offences i would be very upset,but then again im not
on here posting defences for repeat speeding offenders ,where your on here
posting defences for a repeat drink driver,so your veiw changes obviously when it affects you personally,where my view does not change.

What would you you classify someone who had a history of speeding though? Currently under NSW law if you get busted doing 19ks over the speed limit 4 times in the space of 3 years you'll still hold onto your licence. If you get busted doing 9ks over the limit 12 occasions over 3 years you'll still hold onto your licence. Anyone who is guilty of either shows they have a history of speeding. Whereas as only one DUI means you have to have a history. There's not too many people out there who haven't had at least one speeding fine over the course of their driving history. So if you're going to take the angle that a second DUI equals a repeat offender that should mean anyone who gets 2 speeding fines is a repeat offender surely?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

What would you you classify someone who had a history of speeding though? Currently under NSW law if you get busted doing 19ks over the speed limit 4 times in the space of 3 years you'll still hold onto your licence. If you get busted doing 9ks over the limit 12 occasions over 3 years you'll still hold onto your licence. Anyone who is guilty of either shows they have a history of speeding. Whereas as only one DUI means you have to have a history. There's not too many people out there who haven't had at least one speeding fine over the course of their driving history. So if you're going to take the angle that a second DUI equals a repeat offender that should mean anyone who gets 2 speeding fines is a repeat offender surely?

Are you trying to say that speeding is just a serious as driving while intoxicated?

Just thought I'd clarify as I would disagree and obviously so does the law.

 

[Raider_69]

i do love all these if's
if he was in america, if he was a fully licensed driver, if he was 25, if he was a green p, if he only had a few beers, if he wasnt used to drinking, ffs :lol:

facts are, he is in australia, he is a p plater and he is so because he lost his license due to alcohol related issues, he isnt over 25, his limit is zero, it isnt 0.05 or 0.08, he knows this, every p plater in the country knows this. the reason these laws exist is because its proven people on their p's lack ideal judgement and are more of a danger to themselves and others as they are inexperienced or in todd's case, a complete f**king tool who has shown a complete disregard for the law

Forget the if's and buts, and for gods sakes rooster fans, please stop embarrassing yourself by trying to pretend this is an isolated incident. He has form and yet again the man has shown he lacks the intelligence, and judgement to be afforded the ability to drive...

Should he ever be given the right to drive again? Not imo, 10 year ban for a serial offender for drink driving, too soft imo. Ban him for life, and that goes for any serial drink driving offender. If you cant handle the responsibility of driving, you should be strip of the ability to do so.
Should he go to jail? I dont think weekend detention (similar set up to Wes Naquima) would be harsh for a repeat offender like him.
Should he be sacked? No, not yet, but surely his career is hanging by a thread
Should he be suspended? if gallop is true to current form, he should be on the sidelines from 4-6 weeks and told in no uncertain terms, one more drinking

 

[Lambretta]

The stupid thing about this whole debate is that Carney himself has admitted he did the wrong thing. And full credit to him, at last he might be growing up. Yet certain rooster fans are defending his actions even though the man himself said he was in the wrong.

As for rothfield we all know he's a clown so why give a f**k about what he says?

I don't think anyone really believes he didn't do something wrong. Of course he made a error of judgement. Even belief you are not doing wrong isn't a defence if you are proven to be in the wrong. You have to accept that you're in the wrong, put your hand up and take your punishment on the chin.

But to me, the level of vitriol about the penalties that should be levelled at the player and the club have more to do with jealousy and or what benefit other clubs can gain out of it rather than a genuine desire to provide education on an important issue.

I've stated before that I personally have had this happen to me and I would suggest that the vast majority of people here who are screaming the loudest have probably done the same themselves.

I don't have a problem with a driving ban or a fine. That's exactly what should happen. In fact I welcome the correct road authorities and Police taking strong action in that regards. They have an opportunity to highlight something that alot of people don't know about. It's important stuff.

But the punishment needs to remain completely seperate from football because if it doesn't it can set a dangerous precedent. Let's take emotion out of the equasion on both sides and look at it for what it is. Not for the potential of what people want it to be for their own private reasons.

 

[Mr Fourex]

Take his driver's licence away, fine him .......suspend him

Then let him play footy