theDustyone

theDustyone 3 years, 5 months ago on DOW captures young bobcat in Steamboat

I give Steve Baumgartner huge props for capturing this Bobcat. I happened to be at the scene and I gotta tell you I thought Baumgartner was either extremely brave or extremely crazy when he didn't think twice about crawling underneath the mobile home with just him and the Bobcat with little more than a noose pole and flashlight. I was half expecting him to come back out with scratches all over his face, but he did the job unscathed and unphased. Good work Steve!

0

theDustyone 3 years, 7 months ago on Jail time dealt in alcohol crimes in Steamboat

How did this turn into a shouting match over who's the better parent? All parents have different methods and that doesn't mean that one way is better than another. What do you say about a family that has several kids and one seems to be a devil child, and the other an angel? They've both got the same parents right? I beleive that yes parents do have a responsibility to talk to there kids and make them understand the reasons why they should or shouldn't do certain activities. But what I think is even more effective than that is making absolute sure that if your kid is going to experiment (as 99% of them do) that they do it in a safe setting and are smart about it. But as much as parents want to believe that they are responsible for their kids actions, that idea is only true up to a certain age. What is true is that parents do help their kids establish their morals and give them their basic ideas of what is right and what is wrong. What is ok, and what is too risky. But aside from that I think the kids acquaintances and the people they surround themself with are more responsible for the decisions they make and the type of behaviors they partake in. This is especially true when the kids get older and being accepted by their peers becomes especially important to Kids. And the last part of the equation that I haven't heard anybody address is the pure luck (or unlucky) factor. What I mean by this is you can have one kid who is an absolute deviant who drinks all the time, does drugs, and partakes in all sorts of risky behaviour. But for some reason never gets caught and never gets hurt. Then you've got the little angel who has never touched any drugs or alcohol and is a straight A student and does everything by the book. But of course the one time she decides to experiment and has a few drinks with some friends and then slips on her steps and falls and hits her head (this is hypothetical I am not referring to the article). And whether or not the alcohol was the actual cause of her slipping and falling, it's going to be named as the cause and chances are word is going to get out about the little angel's accident and that alcohol was involved. Now all of a sudden parents around the community are going to view this girl as a bad kid who drinks alcohol and so she paid the price. Whereas the other kid that I mentioned that for some reason has never gotten hurt or caught despite the fact that he/she constantly drinks, is probably still seen as an angel in their parents eyes because they are never the wiser. So that is what I mean about the luck factor. And even though I know there are many other factors that I could talk about also that go into how teen alcohol and drug situations unfold, I think my point is clear that it's not just one reason or another why kids drink or do drugs. And usually there's a lot more to the story if someone ends up getting injured or caught.

0

theDustyone 3 years, 7 months ago on Jail time dealt in alcohol crimes in Steamboat

How did this turn into a shouting match over who's the better parent? All parents have different methods and that doesn't mean that one way is better than another. What do you say about a family that has several kids and one seems to be a devil child, and the other an angel? They've both got the same parents right? I beleive that yes parents do have a responsibility to talk to there kids and make them understand the reasons why they should or shouldn't do certain activities. But what I think is even more effective than that is making absolute sure that if your kid is going to experiment (as 99% of them do) that they do it in a safe setting and are smart about it. But as much as parents want to believe that they are responsible for their kids actions, that idea is only true up to a certain age. What is true is that parents do help their kids establish their morals and give them their basic ideas of what is right and what is wrong. What is ok, and what is too risky. But aside from that I think the kids acquaintances and the people they surround themself with are more responsible for the decisions they make and the type of behaviors they partake in. This is especially true when the kids get older and being accepted by their peers becomes especially important to Kids. And the last part of the equation that I haven't heard anybody address is the pure luck (or unlucky) factor. What I mean by this is you can have one kid who is an absolute deviant who drinks all the time, does drugs, and partakes in all sorts of risky behaviour. But for some reason never gets caught and never gets hurt. Then you've got the little angel who has never touched any drugs or alcohol and is a straight A student and does everything by the book. But of course the one time she decides to experiment and has a few drinks with some friends and then slips on her steps and falls and hits her head (this is hypothetical I am not referring to the article). And whether or not the alcohol was the actual cause of her slipping and falling, it's going to be named as the cause and chances are word is going to get out about the little angel's accident and that alcohol was involved. Now all of a sudden parents around the community are going to view this girl as a bad kid who drinks alcohol and so she paid the price. Whereas the other kid that I mentioned that for some reason has never gotten hurt or caught despite the fact that he/she constantly drinks, is probably still seen as an angel in their parents eyes because they are never the wiser. So that is what I mean about the luck factor. And even though I know there are many other factors that I could talk about also that go into how teen alcohol and drug situations unfold, I think my point is clear that it's not just one reason or another why kids drink or do drugs. And usually there's a lot more to the story if someone ends up getting injured or caught by law enforcement.

0

theDustyone 3 years, 8 months ago on Deal is made in Steamboat alcohol incident

Even after writing all of that I have not even touched on what my true feelings are behind this case. And that is we need to preach more personal responsibility in this country, and especially in this town, instead of always trying to pass the buck and blame your mistakes on someone else. I know this may sound a little insensitive, so if I offend any of the friends or family of the victim I apologize as that is not my intention. I just feel like in situations like these, we as humans get so consumed with emotions, that we feel like we have to blame or punish someone in order to feel vindicated. I mean let's be honest with ourselves here for a second and realize that although some (not all) of the alcohol she might have consumed may have never been accessible to her had she not come out to the defendants house that night. But from there he did not force her to drink the alcohol, he did not tell her "hey I think it would be a good idea if you tried to pee of the balcony." And for those who argue that it was only because she had been drinking that she thought it was a good idea to pee off the balcony. That might be a valid argument if a) she had never had a sip of alcohol before, and therefore had no idea as to how it might effect her. and b) If she hadn't already been drinking before she arrived out to the defendant's house. So ultimately, it seems more like the defendant was the wrong age, at the wrong place, at the wrong time. And now he's going to be pay the ultimate price. And if this is the type of rational we're using in these types of cases, then I feel like we should start charging bartenders for drunk driving accidents.

0

theDustyone 3 years, 8 months ago on Deal is made in Steamboat alcohol incident

With all that said here is the problem I have with both the justice system and with the way we as community think. Whenever someone gets hurt or wronged in our society (especially when the incident is going to cost money to reconcile) we always look for justice. Although, I think a better word than justice would be "vengeance." Because both you and I and everybody who will read this knows that similar acts like this occur every weekend in every State in the US. The only difference is, not every weekend does a girl end up in the hospital in a coma as a result of it. So all of a sudden when someone gets hurt, our attitude turns into somebody better go to prison for a long long time for this! And if you don't believe me I'll prove it to you: Not even a month later this exact situation occurred where a party with 30-40 underage teens was busted after someone called the cops because a girl was passed out in her car with a BAC of .284. Several adults and young adults were present at this party and did nothing to stop the consumption of alcohol by minors. So what's the difference? Oh well nobody got seriously hurt at this party, and therefore no tickets were given out and nobody was charged with anything!!! You call that justice? By the way here is a link to the story if you would like to read it yourself: http://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/20...

So if the Police department is going to pretend to take a hard stance on underage drinking and create penalties harsh enough to hopefully prevent future offenders from committing the same crime. Then at least be consistent and fair in your practice of the policies.

0

theDustyone 3 years, 8 months ago on Deal is made in Steamboat alcohol incident

Wow Really? What ever happened to taking a little personal responsibility? Of course I am deeply saddened by what happened to Nastasia. I would wish that not even on my worst enemy. With that said how about we take a look at all the facts before we condemn an otherwise good hearted young adult based solely on the facts you have read in the newspaper. Because as we all know, the media very rarely gets the story right on their first, second, or third try. So I think the most glaring fact that was omitted from the story that was printed was that the victim had been drinking long before she arrived out at the premises where the accident occurred. So that brings up the first and most obvious question: Could this have happened even if she had not had access to alcohol via the defendant? Absolutely. Especially if one is arguing the point that it was her impaired judgement due to the alcohol that caused the accident. Secondly, the defendant didn't buy the alcohol for the minors, he had bought the alcohol for his Mother earlier in the night but had not yet given it to her as it was quite late at night when he returned home and didn't want to wake her. And the other kids being kids, thought that because it was sitting there that they absolutely every right in the world to drink it. By the time the defendant figured out that the minors were drinking the alcohol it was too late and the bottles had already been opened. But where the defendant's biggest lapse in judgement was, was in not immediately taking all of the alcohol away that was supposed to be for his mom. So either way a crime was committed, some alcohol was consumed by minors and whether he intentioned it to be or not, it was made accessible to them by the defendant. So in this sense yes he is guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. (continued in next comment)

0