From: lobby.dosser.mapson@verizon.net   
      
   Paul Johnson  wrote:   
      
   > Lobby Dosser wrote:   
   >   
   >> Paul Johnson  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Lobby Dosser wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> "gatt"  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> For the life of me, I just can't fathom how somebody can miss the   
   >>>>> fact that an object bigger than a friggin' building is coming at   
   >>>>> them.  The explanation on the news is that there were TWO tracks   
   >>>>> and trains going in opposite directions. Must have been my public   
   >>>>> education and all, but I still remember learning in the first   
   >>>>> grade, in GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI, to look both ways before crossing   
   >>>>> streets or the tracks.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Stop sign only. North bound freight cleared the crossing on the   
   >>>> eastern track - closest to the car. Car starts across west bound   
   >>>> and unable to see around the freight to the south bound Amtrack on   
   >>>> the western track. Zero time for anyone to do anything - car or   
   >>>> train.   
   >>>   
   >>> Far more than enough time for the car to do something.  This wasn't   
   >>> a freak accident, the car driver was obviously negligent.  I would   
   >>> argue since common sense dictates when there's two tracks and you   
   >>> can't see one of them until the first train gets far enough away   
   >>> that the driver was criminally negligent and their family owes the   
   >>> railroads bigtime for the cleanup.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> *A*C*C*I*D*E*N*T*   
   >   
   > *No such thing when it comes to getting in front of something guided   
   > by rails.*  It's not like the train's gonna swerve to hit them if they   
   > wait, or can swerve to miss them if they don't.  The driver had plenty   
   > of warning, and ignored it.  Criminal negligence.   
   >   
      
   so sue her   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)