http://www.abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=3211898
Here is exactly what's wrong with today's society. We have St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Josh Hancock, who was killed while drunk in an auto accident, and even though he was drunk as I said that isn't stopping his father from suing the Restaurant that served him, the tow-truck that he hit and the driver of the stalled vehicle that the tow-truck was hooking up.
I'm sorry no one told Hancock to start drinking. It's also Hancock's OWN RESPONSIBILITY to know if he is impared to not drive. People need to accept responsibility for their actions but look at the lack of example at the top for that.
6 comments:
I agree with you about taking personal responsibility. How many taxpayer's dollars will have to be spent because of the litigation?
However, I don't believe it was right for you to add in the comment about examples by those at the top. It almost sounds like you are contradicting your own statement - that is; be responsible, don't blame others for your own actions.
Looking at the top meant when was the last time Bush accepted responsibility for anything. He hasn't and it spreads on down the line.
Bush has said many times he has never made any mistakes. It's not a contradiction it's a statement of fact.
Okay, so you were wrong in your initial post. Apparently Josh Hancock died because Bush, according to you, doesn't accept responsibility for anything.
So Hancock's father should be suing George Bush.
No if you read my post (which I wonder) I said Josh Hancock died at his own choosing when he choose to drink and drive. His father instead of accepting that fact decided it wasn't his son's responsibility. I said how society in general doesn't accept responsibility starting with your president who has been quoted saying he has not recalled making any mistakes. Tell me any of this is wrong and prove it.
It seems whenever I interject a little humor, you always respond with an accusation that I didn't read your post or something similar.
Humor aside then, let's look at your initial post. The first paragraph and half of the second is all about how Josh Hancock's father is ignoring the fact that his son acted with utter irresponsibility and is blaming (in the form of a lawsuit) his son's death on the restaurant that served the alcoholic beverages. (Incidentally, he is also suing the towing company of the truck that was hit.)
This was all fine and consistent with the the title of the post and the theme I felt you were trying to convey (that is in taking responsibility for one's actions).
Your final comment, however, is inconsistent with this theme. I know you didn't mean it that way but in an indirect way, you were saying that since you perceive a lack of personal responsibility at the "top", that some of the blame belongs there. Otherwise, why make that comment at all?
Post a Comment