Olander update (good news) | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Olander update (good news)

Status
Not open for further replies.
CTMike said:
Gonna channel my inner NelsonMuntz here : Driving without a license means he should be kicked off the team? Ok, got it.

Also, just to clarify : by crucify, I didn't mean that posters were literally nailing him to wooden planks in the shape of a cross. I mean, that would be REALLY dramatic. We are better than that.

Sorry, I really must be better about spelling things out slowly for you : go check the thread when this was first reported. The posters pontificating that TO should be kicked off for getting his second alcohol related arrest, saying that this situation was worse than if he hit a woman. Tell me who was being a little overly dramatic there. Oh wait we didn't have ANY of the facts of this and still vilified him? He wasn't actually drunk, he just didn't have a license?

Yeah, I'd say that at least deserves an "our bad".

Get some facts and come back and see me.
Expand ...


We haven't literally crucified anyone since Selvie. Then on the third day he rose again and clanged a shot from 2 feet away.
 
upstater said:
I'd like to see that shown, because as I wrote earlier, I know that the law used to be you could go on the road to train without a permit as long as you drove with a 20 year old or else someone who had a license for 4 years. Back then (1980s), you hit the road when you were 15, and you could take the test after your 16th birthday.
Expand ...

You are right and it is applicable because the requirement for a learners permit for an adult to practice driving in CT is new this year. It is not as was stated above just setting a time limit requirement for a permit as the difference. " Beginning Jan. 1, 2013, the state of Connecticut will require an adult learner’s permit for new drivers who are 18 years old and over other than those holding a valid driver’s license from another state."
 
A couple years ago (I'm pretty sure I was 23) I was driving home from playing poker at a buddy's house at around 2 am. We had BBQ'd way earlier in the afternoon and I had few beers but I hadn't drank in several hours and was sober as a duck. I spotted a cop in a gas station and instinctively slowed down. He comes flying out and pulls me over. He asks if I had been drinking and I was honest and said I couple during the day. Then he asks if I knew why he stopped and he said because "I slowed down when I saw him." He could tell I was completely sober and ending up writing me a warning for having one of my license plate lights out. And a DWY
 
upstater said:
I'd like to see that shown, because as I wrote earlier, I know that the law used to be you could go on the road to train without a permit as long as you drove with a 20 year old or else someone who had a license for 4 years. Back then (1980s), you hit the road when you were 15, and you could take the test after your 16th birthday.
Expand ...

I can't remember a time when you could get on the road without first getting a permit. I believe you that it may have been that way once, but nowadays if you don't have a permit, you are restricted to your own driveway or perhaps a private parking lot - otherwise the adult in the passenger seat gets in trouble too.

Couldn't tell you when the permit laws phased in, but if the law was the way you remember it, then anyone in college who had a junior or a senior for a friend could drive anywhere they wanted without any documentation whatsoever. All it would take is one accident with an unlicensed driver coming home from a party before people would realize that law needed fixing.
 
Gurleyman said:
I can't remember a time when you could get on the road without first getting a permit. I believe you that it may have been that way once, but nowadays if you don't have a permit, you are restricted to your own driveway or perhaps a private parking lot - otherwise the adult in the passenger seat gets in trouble too.

Couldn't tell you when the permit laws phased in, but if the law was the way you remember it, then anyone in college who had a junior or a senior for a friend could drive anywhere they wanted without any documentation whatsoever. All it would take is one accident with an unlicensed driver coming home from a party before people would realize that law needed fixing.
Expand ...

You have to remember, kids back then WANTED a driver's license, so there was little abuse. You basically got your license after going out with parents, or brothers, or maybe a friend. All my friends, at least 20 of them, got their license when they were 16. It was a rite of passage. And we all got our own cars too. Saved the money to buy beaters. A friend bought a mustang, my first car was a 70s Datsun B210 with 120k miles on it that I bought for less than $1k (which was about 3 weeks work for me painting houses). There would be no point to abusing that law.
 
Hume said:
You are right and it is applicable because the requirement for a learners permit for an adult to practice driving in CT is new this year. It is not as was stated above just setting a time limit requirement for a permit as the difference. " Beginning Jan. 1, 2013, the state of Connecticut will require an adult learner’s permit for new drivers who are 18 years old and over other than those holding a valid driver’s license from another state."
Expand ...

There is nowhere in this country that you can drive on public roads without either a permit or a license, regardless of age. Been that way a fairly long time. (On edit: turns out New Hampshire allows it - see below).

The new law didn't change the requirement about obtaining a learner's permit to practice. You needed it before and you still do. What's different this year is that you can't just apply to take your road test whenever you want as an adult any more. You need the permit for 90 days first.
 
.-.
Gurleyman said:
There is nowhere in this country that you can drive on public roads without either a permit or a license, regardless of age. Been that way a fairly long time.

The new law didn't change the requirement about obtaining a learner's permit to practice. You needed it before and you still do. What's different this year is that you can't just apply to take your road test whenever you want as an adult any more. You need the permit for 90 days first.
Expand ...

Apparently, New Hampshire still does it the way Connecticut used to: http://www.dmv.org/nh-new-hampshire/drivers-permits.php
 
Bezzz said:
I find it funny that the breathalyzer said he wasn't drunk but a high level Division 1 National Champion athlete couldn't pass the field sobriety (coordination) test.

Dude, walk a straight line much? C'mon Tyler.
Expand ...
Ummmm, how about maybe the cop is just making up about Tyler? Ever think of that? Tyler did just fine on the field sobriety test. He got arrested by a professional trained uniformed liars who derive their power from ignormuses (not sure what the plural is of that) who mindlessly believe everything they say. Don't assume he didn't pass the field sobriety test just fine.
 
I got my license in 1985, 6 weeks after I turned 16. Never had a "learner's permit" or anything else. Practiced with my dad and took the test. Ended up taking drivers Ed at school, after I had my license, because you got an insurance break if you completed drivers Ed. Maybe that is ancient history, as some are claiming. Then again it is almost 30 years, but that was definitely the case in CT at one point. And I am far from the oldest poster on this board.
 
upstater said:
You have to remember, kids back then WANTED a driver's license, so there was little abuse. You basically got your license after going out with parents, or brothers, or maybe a friend. All my friends, at least 20 of them, got their license when they were 16. It was a rite of passage. And we all got our own cars too. Saved the money to buy beaters. A friend bought a mustang, my first car was a 70s Datsun B210 with 120k miles on it that I bought for less than $1k (which was about 3 weeks work for me painting houses). There would be no point to abusing that law.
Expand ...

I remember it the same way. We all couldn't wait until we were 16 so we could have some freedom and not wait for our parents to drive us somewhere. I hit that age in the late 80s, and had to go through the permit application and driver's Ed, then the road test. Due to being away at boarding school and not having time to do all that in short order, I actually didn't get my license until I was almost 17. Ticked me off getting a slow start.
 
.-.
upstater said:
Apparently, New Hampshire still does it the way Connecticut used to: http://www.dmv.org/nh-new-hampshire/drivers-permits.php
Expand ...

Huh. I'll be dipped. I stand corrected. Thought those laws were long gone. Even Googled a bit to be sure and saw some questions about laws in places like Arizona and Montana - they require permits. So does Texas (just checked that one based on the previous post).

I'd be stunned if it was legal last year for someone to drive in Connecticut to drive without either a permit or a license, but I'm moderately stunned that New Hampshire doesn't have permits, so perhaps I'm wrong (wouldn't be the first time). I don't know anyone in Connecticut who tried to get a license after 18, so I don't speak from experience.
 
gars44 said:
Nope. That's not true either.
Expand ...

Just as an FYI for those who are caught speeding anywhere in NY state other than Buffalo and New York City, you can hire a lawyer for $100 who will plead out your case to a parking infraction, and you don't even have to show up. Unfortunately, if you're caught speeding in the two largest cities, you have to go to something called the TVB. A private kangaroo court. You will be assimilated.
 
Gurleyman said:
Huh. I'll be dipped. I stand corrected. Thought those laws were long gone. Even Googled a bit to be sure and saw some questions about laws in places like Arizona and Montana - they require permits. So does Texas (just checked that one based on the previous post).

I'd be stunned if it was legal last year for someone to drive in Connecticut to drive without either a permit or a license, but I'm moderately stunned that New Hampshire doesn't have permits, so perhaps I'm wrong (wouldn't be the first time). I don't know anyone in Connecticut who tried to get a license after 18, so I don't speak from experience.
Expand ...

The funny thing is I tried to pick the most retrograde state I could think of, and the first that popped to my mind was New Hampshire, so I clicked, and there it was. I suppose Wyoming was next. I stayed away from the southern states because of the ID laws. Figured they would want documentation locked down. Maybe Alaska doesn't care.
 
Way back when, I was sharing an apartment in celeron with a guy who had a habit of driving after a few too many. One night he was very drunk and insisted on driving the short distance between Ted's and celeron (IIRC the issue was that he had lots of parking tickets and didn't want to get towed) so I drove in front of him to pace him and make sure he got back ok. Sure enough, a cop started following so I (without a drop of alcohol in my system) started driving erratically to take the cop's attention away from my friend. When my friend pulled into celeron the cop kept following me. I started driving normally again and he eventually lost interest. That's just my take on what happened of course. The cop may well have had another priority the entire time. Anyway, that's my hero enabler drunk driving weaving jerky movements police story. Of course I should have just taken the guy's keys away.
 
Seeing as how 25% of the cars around here in LA aren't registered (really, not an exaggeration - they don't even have plates), and that most residents drive with a technically illegal out-of-state license, what he plead to was nothing more than stupid and dumb. If he puts in the 6 AM suicides and stadiums, he gets back on the team.
 
.-.
We need hire a boneyard surgeon, one who specializes in removing polls form people's butts.

Quote of the day was the poster explaining how when it is dark outside, you see less. Fascinating observation.

I don't see why some posters go all vigilante on any reputed transgression before the facts come out. When Tyler was thought to be drunk driving that was why everyone's panties were in a bunch. Now that we know that was BS we are told that driving without a license makes this kid a war criminal. Sure the State only thought it was worth a $75 dollar fine but it seems like some posters know better. I'm waiting for a posse to form.

th

By god we'll get that unlicensed little bastard and show him some Boneyard justice!​
 
CL82 said:
We need hire a boneyard surgeon, one who specializes in removing polls form people's butts.

Quote of the day was the poster explaining how when it is dark outside, you see less. Fascinating observation.

I don't see why some posters go all vigilante on any reputed transgression before the facts come out. When Tyler was thought to be drunk driving that was why everyone's panties were in a bunch. Now that we know that was BS we are told that driving without a license makes this kid a war criminal. Sure the State only thought it was worth a $75 dollar fine but it seems like some posters know better. I'm waiting for a posse to form.

th

By god we'll get that unlicensed little bastard and show him some Boneyard justice!​
Expand ...
Throw in some silver and polish it because it better shine. Image is more important than justice.
I must see a different set of drivers then most people.
Lots of people I encounter do crazier things than TO. I bet most of them have licenses. This doesn't excuse TO. I say throw TO off the team. But only if we agree to lock up most of the worlds drivers and throw away the key.
 
Many kids today are in no hurry to get their license because they've gotten used to be driven everywhere by their parents.

The biggest change has been the law that prevents kids from driving other kids until they have had their license for a year or turn 18. Now everyone has to drive their own cars alone instead of piling 3 or 4 into one car.
 
Good for Olander. I hope he works hard, gets back in Coach Ollie's good graces, and has a productive senior season.

And yes, I was one of the many who was too tough on him.
 
Bottom line is he was driving without a license. Let's not fog the matter up with various discussions of the laws regarding learners' permits. He had no learner's permit, he didn't forget the license/permit at home, he didn't forget to renew it, etc., etc. A very poor decision by someone who seems to be making poor decisions a habit. Do I think he should be allowed to play this year? Yes. Do I think he should be punished? Yes. This kid has some issues and needs to learn to show some maturity--quickly! This is where KO will really earn his money, turning boys into men. For the most part, Coach Calhoun did a great job of that. I'm confident KO will as well. I'm also hoping TO has learned something from his mistakes. Thank God he didn't kill anybody while driving that car.
 
.-.
I realize ignorance of the law is no excuse but this whole lack of a permit is only very recent. Up until April 1st of this year a learners permit was not required for an adult to have a learners permit. Here is a quote from an article in the Hamden Patch about the "new" as of January 1st 2013 adult learner permit. "Until April 1, any adult receiving on-the-road training with a licensed driving instructor does not need an adult learner's permit."
So he might not have even been aware of the law change. Now you can say that he wasn't receiving instruction, and that can be argued. But a law that was in effect in CT for 106 years was changed within the past 5 months and Olander got caught in it. At best even with this change it was a minor offense. The fact is if on March 30th he was stopped there would be a good chance he wouldn't even be considered in violation of any law. As it is the fine was $75 which is less then many littering fines or parking in a handicapped space. Since until April of this year Olander didn't need a driver's permit to practice driving you have no knowledge of how much practice he has had. The Thank God he didn't kill anybody while driving comment really has nothing to do with it as every person that has a license now at one point was inexperienced and was on the road practicing driving, many of whom, if they were over 18, without any form of learners permit until this year.
I also wonder if Olander had let his friend that was drunk drive, and the friend did hit someone and kill them, would the headlines read "Olander abandons drunk friend to drive." Would the same people be questioning him for being with a friend that drank and not doing something to stop him?
 
Hume said:
I realize ignorance of the law is no excuse but this whole lack of a permit is only very recent. Up until April 1st of this year a learners permit was not required for an adult to have a learners permit. Here is a quote from an article in the Hamden Patch about the "new" as of January 1st 2013 adult learner permit. "Until April 1, any adult receiving on-the-road training with a licensed driving instructor does not need an adult learner's permit."
So he might not have even been aware of the law change. Now you can say that he wasn't receiving instruction, and that can be argued. But a law that was in effect in CT for 106 years was changed within the past 5 months and Olander got caught in it. At best even with this change it was a minor offense. The fact is if on March 30th he was stopped there would be a good chance he wouldn't even be considered in violation of any law. As it is the fine was $75 which is less then many littering fines or parking in a handicapped space. Since until April of this year Olander didn't need a driver's permit to practice driving you have no knowledge of how much practice he has had. The Thank God he didn't kill anybody while driving comment really has nothing to do with it as every person that has a license now at one point was inexperienced and was on the road practicing driving, many of whom, if they were over 18, without any form of learners permit until this year.
I also wonder if Olander had let his friend that was drunk drive, and the friend did hit someone and kill them, would the headlines read "Olander abandons drunk friend to drive." Would the same people be questioning him for being with a friend that drank and not doing something to stop him?
Expand ...

How do you know the person in the car with him was over 21? Most college students are not. If not, he was violating the law regardless of whether he had a permit or not. Let's be real about this. He made a big error in judgement, again, and has to face up to it.
 
hthusky74 said:
How do you know the person in the car with him was over 21? Most college students are not. If not, he was violating the law regardless of whether he had a permit or not. Let's be real about this. He made a big error in judgement, again, and has to face up to it.
Expand ...

He made an error in judgment. It's looking less and less like it was a big error and it certainly wasn't the egregious error it originally appeared. I think Fishy had it right - if KO deems the suspension should be over today, great. If he deems that it should continue for awhile, that's fine too.

The error is primarily based on his failure to stay out of any trouble whatsoever given what happened last April, not the underlying offense. The whole 'he could have killed someone, won't somebody think of the children!' line of argument is ridiculous.
 
selles said:
He made an error in judgment. It's looking less and less like it was a big error and it certainly wasn't the egregious error it originally appeared. I think Fishy had it right - if KO deems the suspension should be over today, great. If he deems that it should continue for awhile, that's fine too.

The error is primarily based on his failure to stay out of any trouble whatsoever given what happened last April, not the underlying offense. The whole 'he could have killed someone, won't somebody think of the children!' line of argument is ridiculous.
Expand ...

Fine so let's let everyone go out and drive a car without a license. Who cares? It's just a piece of plastic, right? No one is saying the $75 fine isn't sufficient, though it does seem pretty lenient. However, this guy needs to get his act under control. Especially with some of the bad press (whether warranted or not) the Mens' Bball program has received in recent years. We don't need any more bad press. For better or for worse these guys are under the microscope and need to be made aware of that fact and held accountable. One thing I know, if I had been arrested for driving without a license my old man would have beaten the livin' crap out of me!
 
hthusky74 said:
Fine so let's let everyone go out and drive a car without a license. Who cares? It's just a piece of plastic, right? No one is saying the $75 fine isn't sufficient, though it does seem pretty lenient. However, this guy needs to get his act under control. Especially with some of the bad press (whether warranted or not) the Mens' Bball program has received in recent years. We don't need any more bad press. For better or for worse these guys are under the microscope and need to be made aware of that fact and held accountable. One thing I know, if I had been arrested for driving without a license my old man would have beaten the livin' crap out of me!
Expand ...
Tell me, do you ever drive 56 in a 55? Have you ever not come to a FULL stop at a stop sign? Do you realize how many people are killed by speeding? How anyone can trust you to hold a job is beyond me. You are just as irresponsible as TO! Real slippery slope once you start going 56 in a 55, too. Next thing you'll be changing lanes without signaling leading to mass chaos and death.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,348
Messages
4,566,383
Members
10,468
Latest member
ADD3LA


Top Bottom