He was so drunk he was passed out. What does he have to do for them to be disappointed in him.

"He was asleep at a stoplight, for God sakes. He wasn't hurting anyone. He has long days. The sun gets to you."

Several fans, including Dawidouski, expressed anger that La Russa was arrested.

"I was more appalled by the whole idea of him getting one," Dawidouski said. "They could have let him go. I don't think the cops needed to give him one. Follow him home. Big deal."

wow...just wow

--Cardinals fans

It's perhaps unfortunate that the only way to show any sort of support is the same way you show raving appreciation and agreement with an action, but such is the difficulty of a sunburned St Louisan on vacation in Florida when you learn one of "your own" is in a bit of a bind, and you realize his public humiliation may be far worse punishment than he deserves for the offense (not to downplay the severity of driving impaired AT ALL, of course.) What else can you do? What else should you do? Forgiveness and support. That's what you do.

You get booed for sticking with Jason Marquis well past the point of reason. You don't get booed for an out of character mistake that didn't hurt anyone but yourself and is not part of a wider pattern of similar behavior that, left unchecked, eventually will hurt someone.

It's really not out of line to applaud in this case, I think. Not that I speak for all Cardinals fans, of course.

I'm glad to see it has less to do with how much they appreciate their ballclub and more to do with their collective stupidity.

Now I can let that jealousy go.

Thanks Tony! Thanks St. Lou!

I don't accept this. You can not boo him. You can write him a letter expressing your feelings. You don't have to stand up and cheer.

The difference between him and Leonard Little is, in large part, luck.

or elected vice president

that high? Where'd ya get the number?

I try hard not to be a part of it. Kobe Bryant was a turning point for me.

On the other hand, he was apparently just barely above the legal limit, and would have been below in some states. Assuming this has never happened to him before, I'm willing to believe that he had no idea he was impaired - maybe he had his normal 2 beers, and didn't eat enough, or is getting old enough that he that's too much now, or was worn down for some other reason.

So, I'm willing to believe it was a mistake, that had he known he was impaired he would not have gotten behind the wheel. But I still don't think it was appropriate for his fans to send a "don't worry about it" message.

If the government really wants to solve this problem, they should lower the legal limit to .0000. If you've had ANY alcohol, it's illegal to drive for 12 or 24 hours or some such. That way, people will know before they start that they have a choice to drink or drive, but not both. And then make the punishment draconian, whatever the consequences.

Either that, or mandate that a breathalizer be standard equipment on all vehicles, linked to the starter.

That was Richmond, VA, of course, but still, I would suggest that sounds more like something Dodger fans would do. If they're gonna boo Jeff Kent for booting a ground ball in the first inning on opening day last year, then giving someone a standing O for a DUI seems like a stretch.

the first time was against the Red Sox in the Series...

.."have exactly one way to show that you care about his plight: stand up and applaud..." Definitely NOT agreed. Support, yes. Applaud, out of the question.

"He's not Leonard Little. He didn't recklessly hurt anyone."

Anyone DUI and affected enough to go to sleep also might doze off while moving...creating a very real chance there might have been no difference at all between Tony L. and Leonard L.--.

On the other hand (just how many hands do I have, anyway?) I've been at some LOOOOOOOONG stoplights, where I can imagine drifiting off, even stone-cold sober and after a good night's sleep. Nothing grinds my gears like timed lights in the middle of the night.

Tony and everyone else are just lucky the cops came by when they did.

Wait, I'm also reminded of this exchange...

"Duffman wants to party down with the man who sent in 10,000 Duff labels to bring me here today. I've got a bottomless mug of new Duff Extra Cold for, Barney Gumbel!"
The crowd says: "Chug! Chug! Chug! Chug! Chug! Chug!"
Barney: "I can't, I'm the designated driver!"
(Everything stops)
Duffman: Yeah that's swell, Duff wholeheartedly supports the designated driver program. ... Now! Who wants to Party!

http://tinyurl.com/25a3uz

Cheers.

My wife's sister was killed by a drunk driver on a Florida beach some years back.

He was a college student--or at least that age--and apparently well monied and connected. His lawyers worked it so he basically had no consequences; in effect, he was beyond the law. He never even apologized.

I didn't even know my wife at the time. But I've seen the great and lasting pain and other lingering effects on her family.

Folks, DUI is not someting to brush off lightly, no matter who you are. Whatever the percentage of people who actually DUI, one thing is certain--100% of those people are doing a very wrong and potentially deadly thing.

I'm not saying this is true in the LaRussa case, and that quote that Jon just added suggest it is not (several glasses of wine - he should have known), BUT it is possible for people to be above the limit and not know it (the difference between "I don't feel impaired" and "who cares, nothing's going to happen").

When did Tony LaRussa ever score 60 points in a game?
Like him or not, Kobe is the greatest player in the game!

I recognize that. My thing is that I don't think what happened this week encourages people to err on the side of caution. I even get the sense that some found the story of him asleep at the stoplight charming.

There's still a double standard in this country about alcohol vs. other drugs - if he had pot in his car (even if he hadn't smoked it) he'd be in deep doo-doo (for lack of a better word). But, anyway, at least they did cite and book him for this.

From what I have read this morning, LaRussa acknowledges the mistake (which is really the only thing he can do). It is the few (RESTRAINING SO THAT I DON'T BREAK RULES 2, 4, and 7) people who don't think that this is a big deal that really burns me.

Righteous indignation is not a good color for anyone to wear, but neither is a flippant attitude towards something this serious. If you defend DWI as something that is overblown, talk to me after you have had a member of your family killed.

I know that most people here can't imagine drunk driving, but for many people it happens a couple times a week and is generally just one more risk they take when they go out. That doesn't make it right, that doesn't mean it should be applauded, but that is the reality. Lowering the bar to 0% would only make for more offenders, because DUIs are a logistical problem, a self inflicted one, but still. I don't know if you guys have scooter services in LA (or in Florida) but they are a cool way to solve the logistical problem of how to get home with your car when you have been drinking (a guy on a scooter picks you up, stick his scooter in the trunk and drives you home).

Below are just a few bits of data gathered over at the drunk driving sites. I was surprised to see the fatality rate in the teens as I've always heard that 50,000 people die each year from drunk driving. It seems that around 42,000 die each year from traffic accidents and that 41% are caused by drunk/drugs. This country has a huge driving problem when 42,000 die each year and it isn't just drinking. If any President since I was born took a stand and brought some leadership to the problem it would be the first I ever heard about it.
-------------------------------------
The highest percentage of drivers in fatal crashes who had BAC levels of .08 or higher was for males and drivers ages 21 to 24.
Year Deaths Drunk %
2000 41,945 17,380 41
2001 42,196 17,400 41
2002 43,005 17,524 41
2003 42,643 17,013 40
2004 42,518 16,694 39

Alcohol is closely linked with violence. About 40 percent of all crimes (violent and non-violent) are committed under the influence of alcohol. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1998)

About three in every ten Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their lives. (NHTSA, 2001)

I'm just thinking about how this sort of thing can become less common in the future, and it seems to me that neither standing ovations nor blanket condemnations are the path to a better tomorrow. And here I'm not at all arguing with you.

I'm a firm believer in institutions. Rules affect behavior. It's fine to encourage people to better themselves, but change their incentives, and you'll change their behavior.

Another way would be to keep the current hard-to-gauge standard of .08 or .10, but change the punishment - loss of license and 30 days in jail for a first offense, even if nobody got hurt - and you'll have many fewer people risking that 3rd drink. That's essentially what they've done in parts of Central Europe. The penalties are so harsh that they take the designated driver idea seriously.

What the?!
Neither did the Shoe Bomber!

No, in not making a comparison, but.. jeeze....

that high? Where'd ya get the number?

(Sorry, I don't know how to quote things correctly.)

Yes, clearly I was making up stats based on anecdotal evidence and maybe I know more people who drink, but I was referring to not 'getting' a DUI, but people who drink and then drive. Like, say 50-60% of the people at a baseball game, for instance.

Please gimme a break on the puritanical stuff. The conversation about DUI's is completely sanitized now, where it's not funny (or politically correct) anymore, like it was before (WARNING: generalization about the good old days from a 31-year old). This sort of makes a lot of people into bad people for doing something that a lot of people do or have done(I'd say 56.7%, easy).

Should one NEVER do it? I guess so. It's against the law and who's to say what exact effect a relatively low BAC would have on your driving? This is a conversation that we're not really allowed to have (notwithstanding this current conversation).

Somebody I know has recently acquired a DUI (let's say a close family member), and if one says that that person should talk to somebody who has had somebody die in a DUI-related fatality, well, I suppose there's no bridging the gap between those two people.

You know what, though? I'm really pleased that this conversation is so open. A person who perhaps doesn't always act with the best judgment just might question themselves and behave better when allowed to have their views heard. Maybe?

"Even more stunning: Vin Scully, the Dodgers' radio broadcaster in his 58th year, has 17 years more service time than the team's entire 40-man roster, which, even when assigning a year to someone like Delwyn Young – who had five at-bats last season – still adds up to only 41 years."