[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think there's a difference between the roads are safer with Dunn not speeding drunkingly through them with the world would be better off without him.

Kid I used to play basketball with died about 10 years ago. Good guy, got along with everyone. Had just graduated college, about to start grad school. He was coming back home from doing a favor for a family friend. He wasn't drunk or anything but driving back home at 2am he did something stupid he was speeding down an open road near his house (on the same street he lived on in fact). He wasn't going 100 mph fast, but fast enough that when he hit the speed bump he lost control of the car and veered off track and smashed right into a tree.

Are the people who drive down that road everyday safer because he's not speeding down that road trying to turn his car into the General Lee? Maybe. Is the world better off without him? I can't see how anyone can say it definitely is.

I would not consider that kid's loss as a net-negative. See my points in the post above about repetitive offenses. One-time indiscretions don't represent the same threat as a Ryan Dunn. With how often he drove over 100 mph, it was just a matter of time before he died or hurt somebody else.