Ryan Dunn #1 troll us/eu

[Dramatized]

you arent making any sense. there is no next time for Dunn, he's dead.

children and other people will continue to die in dui accidents....but thats a moot point in this case b/c he didnt do it. and like i said before there has been no toxicology report that ive seen, for all we know he was under the legal limit - tweeting a picture with a beer doesnt mean you're trashed. driving at 110mph at 3am is dangerous enough sober

I don't think you got what I meant - Dunn is dead, but if he wouldn't he would still be driving drunk. Yes, there is no proof yet, if Ryan wasn't drunk at all then it's shame on me, you won. But at this very moment we can only assume.

i would question why there was a child driving a car at 3am, but other than that i could care less. enough of your hypothetical children though

Since when do you have to drive a car du get run-over?

you already said im so fucking cool and badass though

Oh I forget 10 yo's haven't l2 sarcasm, soz bro

oh thats weird cuz you were calling him a fucking brainless piece of shit and other such names just a bit ago. strange way to show your love and respect of him and giving condolences to his F&F

I loved Ryan as a stuntman/entertainer. What I don't love about him is that he totally flips and drives into a tree, killing himself and his buddy. His family and friends did not do anything wrong, no need for them to feel more sorrow than they have to.

 

[lindenkron]

.... other people will continue to die in dui accidents....but thats a moot point in this case b/c he didnt do it.

I'm sorry, but I'd seriously have to slap you if you were stood next to me right now. So because he happened to not hit someone this time, or any previous times for that matter, and other people drunk drive as well, that makes everything all right? I'm sorry Falkor, that's BS. Using other people's continuing stupidity as an excuse is low and unacceptable.

 

[Falkor]

I don't think you got what I meant - Dunn is dead, but if he wouldn't he would still be driving drunk. Yes, there is no proof yet, if Ryan wasn't drunk at all then it's shame on me, you won. But at this very moment we can only assume.

from a quick google search dunn only had 1 dui from 2005 and it was cleared from his record after having no other violations for a certain amount of years. so i think its fair to assume he wasnt constantly drinking and driving - or at least he was good at avoiding being pulled over

however in the us theres this innocent until proven guilty thing. so until theres a record he was over the legal limit you shouldnt be assuming anything other than he was driving recklessly

Since when do you have to drive a car du get run-over?

touche. so the child wouldnt have to be driving, but what was he doing out at 3am

Oh I forget 10 yo's haven't l2 sarcasm, soz bro

mifault you should turn 11 and learn it then

I loved Ryan as a stuntman/entertainer. What I don't love about him is that he totally flips and drives into a tree, killing himself and his buddy. His family and friends did not do anything wrong, no need for them to feel more sorrow than they have to.

it doesnt make sense to say you love and respect someone while also calling them a fucking brainless whatever, jumping to conclusions about drugs and alcohol, making crazy hypothetical situations up, etc. how does that show any respect/love towards him or his family

I'm sorry, but I'd seriously have to slap you if you were stood next to me right now. So because he happened to not hit someone this time, or any previous times for that matter, and other people drunk drive as well, that makes everything all right? I'm sorry Falkor, that's BS. Using other people's continuing stupidity as an excuse is low and unacceptable.

not hitting an innocent bystander doesnt make everything alright - its still not wise to drive while intoxicated. however there is no point in coming up with retarded hypothetical situations that did not happen. and again, we dont even know if he was legally drunk. he could have just as easily lost control of the car sober at 110mph at 3am. he could have been avoiding a deer or a pot hole or something and lost it.

 

[Inkobah]

Judging is OK to an extent. We make judgments about people all the time that are just fine and dandy. Take for example, if a guy in a panel van rolls up and tells you he's got puppies in the back and asks you to get in, you'd make a judgment that it would not be OK to get in the van. You're living in the circumstance and know that it's not acceptable in USA (and would assume the same for EU - though in Romania it might be acceptable) for men in panel vans to ask you to get in their van, and therefore it's perfectly acceptable and reasonable to make that judgment. There's a ton of examples out there like this.



That's not what you're doing though. Comments like "He deserved to die", "One less loser in the world", "Good Riddance to that idiot", etc. fail from the beginning. These statements aren't built on any sound evidence. Sure we know he died and killed his passenger and it was really dumb, but that's all we know right now. Judgmental comments like I've mentioned assume that you knew the person, know their thoughts and heart, and know their intentions. I'm sorry to tell you that none of you knew Ryan Dunn and can't make judgments about his heart, intentions, etc. He made a mistake, that much is clear. But as I've already said, we all make mistakes - some big and some small. Don't jump to conclusions and assume you know all about him.



And btw, I know most of you here are under age and probably haven't had a sip of alcohol (unless you get into your parent's liquor cabinet), but alcohol seriously impairs your judgment. He wasn't thinking clearly. So you mean to tell me that in one moment in which he was impaired, his heart, thoughts, intentions, etc. can be judged? Come on...if that's how you want to play then I'm gonna start perma-banning people on the slightest offense of the CoC (since you seem to be arguing that in 1 instance a person's entire being can be judged). Show some grace, will ya?



-Ink



P.S. I know it's great to throw in hypotheticals into any argument but unless it happened your hypothetical is still hypothetical and has no bearing into an argument over something that actually happened.

 

[Dramatized]

from a quick google search dunn only had 1 dui from 2005 and it was cleared from his record after having no other violations for a certain amount of years. so i think its fair to assume he wasnt constantly drinking and driving - or at least he was good at avoiding being pulled over

however in the us theres this innocent until proven guilty thing. so until theres a record he was over the legal limit you shouldnt be assuming anything other than he was driving recklessly

So - he has been sentences for DUI twice, I do not know wheather he was good at avoiding cops or whatsoever. Twice is two times too many.



And why can't I assume things? This forum is for speculating too, we're here to discuss. If we knew everything there wouldn't be anything to discuss, wouldn't it?

touche. so the child wouldnt have to be driving, but what was he doing out at 3am

The child was searching for aliens, they only appear at night.

mifault you should turn 11 and learn it then

Rofl, you're like 30 yr old and as immature as me.

it doesnt make sense to say you love and respect someone while also calling them a fucking brainless whatever, jumping to conclusions about drugs and alcohol, making crazy hypothetical situations up, etc. how does that show any respect/love towards him or his family

Let's get this straight, you seem to have a hard time to understand. I think he is a fucking dick/brainless piece of shit for driving drunk, he's as much worthy as a rapist in my eyes. "Crazy hypothetical situations up"... so a child has never been ran over by a drunk idiot? My friend got ran over when he was 7, died instant. But you prolly don't care 'bout that anyways.

not hitting an innocent bystander doesnt make everything alright - its still not wise to drive while intoxicated. however there is no point in coming up with retarded hypothetical situations that did not happen. and again, we dont even know if he was legally drunk. he could have just as easily lost control of the car sober at 110mph at 3am. he could have been avoiding a deer or a pot hole or something and lost it.

And you've brought up the same useless arument three times in the same reply.

 

[Dramatized]

That's not what you're doing though. Comments like "He deserved to die", "One less loser in the world", "Good Riddance to that idiot", etc. fail from the beginning. These statements aren't built on any sound evidence. Sure we know he died and killed his passenger and it was really dumb, but that's all we know right now. Judgmental comments like I've mentioned assume that you knew the person, know their thoughts and heart, and know their intentions. I'm sorry to tell you that none of you knew Ryan Dunn and can't make judgments about his heart, intentions, etc. He made a mistake, that much is clear. But as I've already said, we all make mistakes - some big and some small. Don't jump to conclusions and assume you know all about him.

I haven't seen much of "he deserver to die"-comments in this thread, all we discussed was simply if the views of You, and the other people that defend his right to drive drunk would change if there was a complete unknown stranger in the car. Ryan was a douche for driving drunk, but we're all douchie som times.



So Ink, what's a misstake? (you still haven't replies to that yet).

And btw, I know most of you here are under age and probably haven't had a sip of alcohol (unless you get into your parent's liquor cabinet),

"Don't jump to conclusions and assume you know all about him"

but alcohol seriously impairs your judgment. He wasn't thinking clearly. So you mean to tell me that in one moment in which he was impaired, his heart, thoughts, intentions, etc. can be judged? Come on...if that's how you want to play then I'm gonna start perma-banning people on the slightest offense of the CoC (since you seem to be arguing that in 1 instance a person's entire being can be judged). Show some grace, will ya?

I've getting waste-ass drunk, my friends aswell, almost everyone I know have done that sometime. I don't know anyone that have driven intoxicated. Alcohol is no excuse, except for the weekest and most cowardly.

-Ink



P.S. I know it's great to throw in hypotheticals into any argument but unless it happened your hypothetical is still hypothetical and has no bearing into an argument over something that actually happened.

That made no sense, sorry. That's like saying: Yeah, sure you were shooting inside the mall with your shotgun and no-one was killed, so stop making up hypotheticals that anyone could have gotten killed.

 

[lindenkron]

And btw, I know most of you here are under age and probably haven't had a sip of alcohol (unless you get into your parent's liquor cabinet), but alcohol seriously impairs your judgment. He wasn't thinking clearly. So you mean to tell me that in one moment in which he was impaired, his heart, thoughts, intentions, etc. can be judged? Come on...if that's how you want to play then I'm gonna start perma-banning people on the slightest offense of the CoC (since you seem to be arguing that in 1 instance a person's entire being can be judged). Show some grace, will ya?

Inkobah.. I don't know if this is just an American attitude towards responsibility, but claiming that being intoxicated liberates you from responsibility is straight out idiotic and I'd expected more someone like you. The guy was not intoxicated when he started drinking, and responsible people know whether or not it's a good idea for them to drink. People that get aggressive when they drink should not drink, because it ends up with them beating their wives. Hence; Don't drink if you're the kind of person that cannot handle to drink. It is STILL A JUDGEMENT CALL. I'd never get in a car and drive regardless how hammered I might be, it's not even crossed my mind because it's carved so deep into my being that it wouldn't even seem like a good idea even when I'm intoxicated.



There is no excuse for drunk driving, and I for one do not appreciate people trying to cover it up with somewhat half excuses as to who and what you can or cannot judge. You can judge him for the action he did, simple as. What it sounds like to me - what you guys are saying is - that it's okay to do something slightly idiotic as long as it doesn't hurt anyone... It's just a matter of time (Murphy's law) before someone does get hurt from people being reckless.



It is very simple: There's no excuse for getting into a car and drive drunk. There's no excuse for exceeding set speed limit (They are there for a reason). Now, if he was not intoxicated, and was going as the speed limit stated, then his death is indeed sad. But something tells me he was not, or chances are that he would still be alive.



As I mentioned in a previous reply, the guy lived for the rush, the adrenaline, on the edge... he had it coming to him, just a matter of time. I cannot judge if he was a good human being in general, but it's still his call, his judgement, his choice, his fault.



/thread.



Edit:

That made no sense, sorry. That's like saying: Yeah, sure you were shooting inside the mall with your shotgun and no-one was killed, so stop making up hypotheticals that anyone could have gotten killed.

I was going to say something along these lines as well. I guess it's a European attitude that doing reckless things regardless of whether or not anyone gets hurt is still unacceptable.

 

[Falkor]

So - he has been sentences for DUI twice, I do not know wheather he was good at avoiding cops or whatsoever. Twice is two times too many.

i said he had one, did you find a source that said he had gotten another?

And why can't I assume things?

you can assume anything you want. but why would you want to assume the worst about someone you proclaimd to love and respect. how is that logical at all

The child was searching for aliens, they only appear at night.

well thats just reckless, he should have stayed away from the road. his parents should have stopped him as well

Rofl, you're like 30 yr old and as immature as me.

so wait, am i 11 or 30 i guess either is cool

Let's get this straight, you seem to have a hard time to understand. I think he is a fucking dick/brainless piece of shit for driving drunk, he's as much worthy as a rapist in my eyes. "Crazy hypothetical situations up"... so a child has never been ran over by a drunk idiot? My friend got ran over when he was 7, died instant. But you prolly don't care 'bout that anyways.

i could care less about your dead ex-friend. i do think its absolutely fucked you think someone driving over the limit is on the same level as a rapist

the crazy situation wasnt that no kid has ever died as a result of drunk driving, the crazy hypothetical situation is treating dunn as if he did that when he did not

And you've brought up the same useless arument three times in the same reply.

which logical argument are you claiming is useless

I was going to say something along these lines as well. I guess it's a European attitude that doing reckless things regardless of whether or not anyone gets hurt is still unacceptable.

well thats strange b/c people in the eu sure do drink a lot. and do other drugs. and whats the autobahn again

those are all reckless things regardless of whether or not anyone gets hurt

 

[Dramatized]

i said he had one, did you find a source that said he had gotten another?

But, then again, I assume he would have been convicted for drunk-driving this time aswell (I know he's dead but w/o).

you can assume anything you want. but why would you want to assume the worst about someone you proclaimd to love and respect. how is that logical at all

I assume the most logical and realistic, can't hate on me for that.

well thats just reckless, he should have stayed away from the road. his parents should have stopped him as well

It's a pity.

so wait, am i 11 or 30 i guess either is cool

Let's say something inbetween.

i could care less about your dead ex-friend. i do think its absolutely fucked you think someone driving over the limit is on the same level as a rapist

the crazy situation wasnt that no kid has ever died as a result of drunk driving, the crazy hypothetical situation is treating dunn as if he did that when he did not

I know you wouldn't care for my ex-friend, and yeah - we have differnt views on this. I don't think I will convince you and I don't think you will me.

which logical argument are you claiming is useless

About everything you've said this far, since the day you were born.

 

[Inkobah]

I haven't seen much of "he deserver to die"-comments in this thread, all we discussed was simply if the views of You, and the other people that defend his right to drive drunk would change if there was a complete unknown stranger in the car. Ryan was a douche for driving drunk, but we're all douchie som times.



So Ink, what's a misstake? (you still haven't replies to that yet).





"Don't jump to conclusions and assume you know all about him"









I've getting waste-ass drunk, my friends aswell, almost everyone I know have done that sometime. I don't know anyone that have driven intoxicated. Alcohol is no excuse, except for the weekest and most cowardly.







That made no sense, sorry. That's like saying: Yeah, sure you were shooting inside the mall with your shotgun and no-one was killed, so stop making up hypotheticals that anyone could have gotten killed.

Don't misunderstand. I'm not defending his right to drive drunk. My argument is that it's unfair to make sweeping judgments about his entire being on this incident (especially with the limited info we have atm). I just prefer to give the benefit of the doubt instead of assuming worse case scenario. My comments about under age was a reflection of the age thread going about in which most posters were under age (plus I have access to many of your birthdays - /evillaugh). And yes it would be reasonable to assume that under age people are NOT and should not be drinking (even though I know it happens). But that's another issue...



My comment about hypotheticals is that it's ridiculous to use a "what if" as a backing to your argument...because it didn't happen, and it'd be impossible to know "what if" in any situation.

Inkobah.. I don't know if this is just an American attitude towards responsibility, but claiming that being intoxicated liberates you from responsibility is straight out idiotic and I'd expected more someone like you. The guy was not intoxicated when he started drinking, and responsible people know whether or not it's a good idea for them to drink. People that get aggressive when they drink should not drink, because it ends up with them beating their wives. Hence; Don't drink if you're the kind of person that cannot handle to drink. It is STILL A JUDGEMENT CALL. I'd never get in a car and drive regardless how hammered I might be, it's not even crossed my mind because it's carved so deep into my being that it wouldn't even seem like a good idea even when I'm intoxicated.



There is no excuse for drunk driving, and I for one do not appreciate people trying to cover it up with somewhat half excuses as to who and what you can or cannot judge. You can judge him for the action he did, simple as. What it sounds like to me - what you guys are saying is - that it's okay to do something slightly idiotic as long as it doesn't hurt anyone... It's just a matter of time (Murphy's law) before someone does get hurt from people being reckless.



It is very simple: There's no excuse for getting into a car and drive drunk. There's no excuse for exceeding set speed limit (They are there for a reason). Now, if he was not intoxicated, and was going as the speed limit stated, then his death is indeed sad. But something tells me he was not, or chances are that he would still be alive.



As I mentioned in a previous reply, the guy lived for the rush, the adrenaline, on the edge... he had it coming to him, just a matter of time. I cannot judge if he was a good human being in general, but it's still his call, his judgement, his choice, his fault.



/thread.



Edit:



I was going to say something along these lines as well. I guess it's a European attitude that doing reckless things regardless of whether or not anyone gets hurt is still unacceptable.

This is a good argument Lind. I don't see myself in disagreement with you. His impairment does not liberate him from responsibility. I was only mentioning his impairment because we all make mistakes - some of which are probably just as big as this one and we're still alive (though I'll admit that it's hard to compare mistakes). I just think we need to be slow to jump to judgments about his entire being. There's a lot unknown and it's unfair to make sweeping judgments without all the facts.



Now if they reveal that he was speeding and/or was intoxicated (above the legal limit) we can fairly conclude that his decision to drive that way was dumb and reckless...no more, no less. But we'll just have to wait for that info.



-Ink

 

[Dramatized]

Don't misunderstand.



My comment about hypotheticals is that it's ridiculous to use a "what if" as a backing to your argument...because it didn't happen, and it'd be impossible to know "what if" in any situation.

We aren't putting "what if" in any situation. Would you disagree when I say that driving drunk many times is united with death of innocent ppl? I can't see why you're taking so much offence of this, sure it didn't happen, but what of an argument is that?

This is a good argument Lind. I don't see myself in disagreement with you. His impairment does not liberate him from responsibility. I was only mentioning his impairment because we all make mistakes - some of which are probably just as big as this one and we're still alive (though I'll admit that it's hard to compare mistakes). I just think we need to be slow to jump to judgments about his entire being. There's a lot unknown and it's unfair to make sweeping judgments without all the facts.



Now if they reveal that he was speeding and/or was intoxicated (above the legal limit) we can fairly conclude that his decision to drive that way was dumb and reckless...no more, no less. But we'll just have to wait for that info.

The thing is that I , nor Lind, nor anyone else in this thread have been talking shit about Dunn, we've simply commented and expressed our opinions regarding driving intoxicated.



Are you and Falkor feeling pointed out?

 

[Falkor]

We aren't putting "what if" in any situation. Would you disagree when I say that driving drunk many times is united with death of innocent ppl?

what? yes you are. you keep saying he could have killed a kid or other innocent people. thats a "what if" situation b/c he didnt do it

yes it sometimes other people are killed, but it didnt happen in this case so why the hell is it relevant. owait, it isnt

The thing is that I , nor Lind, nor anyone else in this thread have been talking shit about Dunn, we've simply commented and expressed our opinions regarding driving intoxicated.

"So true. The funny thing is that everyone is like "Oh no, poor Ryan, aaaaamyyyyghoooooddd *sadface*".



PEOPLE - he fucking killed his passenger while he was driving intoxicated, he is a fucking brainless piece of shit"'

seems like talking shit about him to me. especially before we know if he was truly, legally, drunk

Are you and Falkor feeling pointed out?

no im reserving judgement until we know he was legally drunk rather than jumping to conclusions





p.s cool sig...i want one of those chairs

 

[lindenkron]

...Now if they reveal that he was speeding...

-Ink

Så smadret er døds-porschen - Kendte - BT.dk



That's his car afterwards... I couldn't find an article about it, but my mate said he was driving 190 mph in his Porsche 911 gt3 and went through four trees and impacted on the fifth afterwhich the car bursted into flames... sounds rather... reckless to me

 

[Dramatized]

what? yes you are. you keep saying he could have killed a kid or other innocent people. thats a "what if" situation b/c he didnt do it

yes it sometimes other people are killed, but it didnt happen in this case so why the hell is it relevant. owait, it isnt

"yes it sometimes other people are killed", in that case it' s relevant.











And I've already explained to you that I think he is a piece of shit for driving drunk, as much worthy as a rapist. Though I would think so if my own father got busted for DUI, eventhough I would still love him.

no im reserving judgement until we know he was legally drunk rather than jumping to conclusions





p.s cool sig...i want one of those chairs

No, you don't want your hero to have done anything stupid, that's why. I think our assumptions is legit as hell.



You buy chair my house 5 dollar cheap

 

[Sanit]

If this were youtube, I would totally thumbs up this. How about a thanks? Ugh, wheres a bankbeauty when ya need one >.<

Maybe if you had something to contribute to this website you would be given Donor status too. Unfortunately for you, you're worthless & have not provided much in your 9 month, 1170 post career here on TwinkInfo.





Mehcritkillu: If you're going to call someone a retard and/or retarded, please don't make yourself out to have an extra chromosome yourself.

 

[Falkor]

Så smadret er døds-porschen - Kendte - BT.dk



That's his car afterwards... I couldn't find an article about it, but my mate said he was driving 190 mph in his Porsche 911 gt3 and went through four trees and impacted on the fifth afterwhich the car bursted into flames... sounds rather... reckless to me

iirc it was 110mph, which is still reckless. he does seem to love speed tho, he was in the gumball 3000 twice i think

"yes it sometimes other people are killed", in that case it' s relevant.

no that has no bearing on this specific case since no bystanders were killed

And I've already explained to you that I think he is a piece of shit for driving drunk, as much worthy as a rapist. Though I would think so if my own father got busted for DUI, eventhough I would still love him.

you must not think too badly of rapists if you equate them to someone who has a dui. for starters there is a wide range of duis ranging from .081 to ridiculously high bac levels. but no, lump all those in together then throw in rapists for good measure

No, you don't want your hero to have done anything stupid, that's why. I think our assumptions is legit as hell.

ive enjoyed watching him do dumb shit over the years, but he is not my hero. i just think judgement should be reserved until we know for sure. but thats not gonna stop you from postulating on his level of drunkness, etc

 

[Rivfader]

People sometimes hit and kill people while driving sober. Ban sober driving imo.

 

[Bankbeauty]

People sometimes hit and kill people while driving sober. Ban sober driving imo.

Obviously, but stats wisely the probability of killing someone while driving sober is a lot lot lot less then driving intoxicated.

 

[Sanit]

People sometimes hit and kill people while driving sober. Ban sober driving imo.

MASD

Mothers Against Sober Driving.



I could see it catching on.

 

[lindenkron]

Living will kill you... but there's still no reason to push the process, let alone for other people :/