Drunken driver goes airborne, crashes into Kearns living room, police say

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • neece Logan, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:55 a.m.

    wow the comments that Alcohol and guns should be outlawed... What a narrow minded comment. I did a test. I set my gun on my nightstand when I left for work. The mail man came to the house as well as the as well as the meter reader and my Gardener and not once did that gun move get off the table or go out in public and kill one single person. Guns do NOT kill people anymore than SUV's kill people. it is the person behind it. However I could with that gun if I so chose. It is ME who will be behind the SUV or any other car wheel if I decide to drink and drive. If you know you are going to drink, driving shouldn't even be an issue. The minute you get behind that wheel you are choosing to put others at risk. It is as responsible as me leaving my weapons loaded laying around where there is children. It is called responsibility. I keep my weapons safe. I do not drink then get behind the wheel for the same reason.

  • Tamerlessa West Valley, UT
    July 31, 2014 3:19 p.m.

    An added comment on mine. My 5 year old went into the house yesterday and came out telling my dad that the bad lady needs to apologize. When is that going to happen?

  • Tamerlessa West Valley, UT
    July 31, 2014 3:18 p.m.

    My dad was very lucky that he was not hurt. Stider303 I agree, I am not impressed with her mom's comments as well. My parents house is a wreck, my dad is doing better...but..... I want her taken care of as far as the law will allow. My dad has forgiven her, he just wants his house back to order. I drink. But I do not drive and I do not drink to the point of drunkenness. There is a point when as adults we need to know our limits.

  • K Mchenry, IL
    July 30, 2014 5:36 a.m.

    Nowhere did the mom, of an adult, say that she is sorry and that is enough. As if that even matters. I'm sure driving and liberty and money will be consequences. The biggest that she drove into a house.

    The woman did not get that drunk because she drank before receiving her dinner. Utah laws are ridiculous.

    What I find interesting is how on earth is someone who has been drinking capable of being able to tell if they are not impaired to drive. All cars should have breathalyzer to start with. Like someone said, the consequences are the same for the person who did it intentionally and the person who didn't mean it. A car is a lethal weapon. You may not drink the next person to buy your vehicle may. They should also have a mechanism to cause them to not overheat when parked and turned off and a little less sound and vision proofed so people walking past can tell if a child was left inside.

  • CP Tooele, UT
    July 30, 2014 4:18 a.m.

    Anytime someone is drunk and gets behind the wheel it's not by accident, it's on purpose. I am glad that this drunken driver didn't land on this man and severely injure him or worse. Thank you Bountiful Guy for your comments. I also believe it's intentional not by mistake.

  • IRS Agent PROVO, UT
    July 29, 2014 9:09 p.m.

    @ Chris B.

    If beer or mixed beverages serve the same purpose as rootbeer or lemonade, then you should be content with consuming it without alcohol. Drinks can be made with the same flavor and taste as beer, etc. without any alcohol content. The reality is that they are not consumed for the same purpose. They are consumed for the buzz that the drinker gets, and sense of euphoria and disconnection from reality that they feel. How often do you see someone consume root beer or lemonade to the point of vomiting? Any other argument is disingenuous at best, as there are plenty of non-alcoholic alternatives already available on the market.

  • Strider303 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 29, 2014 8:39 p.m.

    Interesting arguments aside, the driver drove while impaired, the reasons do not matter. Major property damage occurred from that action and compensation needs to be made to the victim.

    The driver needs to be punished as per the law.

    I am not impressed with mom's enabling comments.

  • Cinci Man FT MITCHELL, KY
    July 29, 2014 5:24 p.m.

    I see the correlation between this incident and guns very clearly. When someone commits a crime and a gun is present, the consequences are more severe than if the gun were not there, even if the gun was not used. When someone commits a crime and alcohol or drug impairment is present, the consequences should be greater than if there was no impairment. If you are going to be drunk, you ought to do it in the privacy of your home, not in public where innocents can be more likely victims to your irresponsible conduct. And yes, being drunk in public endangers the innocent public.

  • Nan BW ELder, CO
    July 29, 2014 5:18 p.m.

    I agree with the person posting who questioned why guns came up in the discussion. Why indeed? I think the issue is alcohol and irresponsibility. I have a close friend whose son-in-law was killed when a drunk driver ran into his home. The drunk driver then ran away and his wife claimed their Jag had been stolen. I think that guy was even more at fault than the woman who ended up parked in the living room and acknowledged she was at fault. However, DUI should be a serious offense no matter what the circumstances. I think laws could be harsher, and should be.

  • Bountiful Guy Bountiful, UT
    July 29, 2014 5:13 p.m.

    Eliot. Just as one gets punished for committing a felony using a gun with a more serious consequence than if the gun were not used, anyone driving while drunk or impaired should be given more serious consequence than one who drives while not impaired. You can make up all the "what ifs" you want, the principle is the same. Driving while intoxicated is a crime and deserves more serious consequences than one who is not impaired. If we don't get these irresponsible persons off the road, innocent people will continue to be victims of those who can do nothing more than say, "I'm sorry, I should not have been driving while intoxicated." If my drunk friend swerves off the road and there is no pedestrian, it is the same as if there were a pedestrian. His action was the same in both cases. Someone innocent can die from such criminal behavior. Luck should not lessen the punishment. Driving drunk is the crime. Perhaps when you lose someone close by the actions of a drunk driver, you'll understand. It doesn't happen the first time they drive drunk. Get them out of the drivers seat before the tragedy.

  • midvale guy MIDVALE, UT
    July 29, 2014 4:51 p.m.

    The only thing more ridiculous than the incident itself is the line of reasoning here and everyone's inserting their own agenda into this response thread. DUI is prosecuted aggressively in Utah. Since there is of this amount of property damage she will receive an enhanced charge. Rest assured, this will cost for a minimum of $5000-$10,000 just to handle the legal issues let alone the actual damage she will be required to pay for.

  • Eliot Genola, UT
    July 29, 2014 3:16 p.m.

    Suppose your drunken friend on a Friday night swerved off the road and onto a sidewalk, narrowly missing a pedestrian. Should he be charged with a crime as serious as attempted murder?

  • No One Of Consequence West Jordan, UT
    July 29, 2014 2:45 p.m.

    The purpose of alcoholic beverages (as well as certain legal and illegal drugs) is to affect mood and provide an escape from life's pressures.
    The purpose the automobile is to transport people and their possessions.
    The purpose of firearms is to defend lives and property.

    All three can kill. Their use should never be combined and society should impose appropriate consequences for their misuse resulting in harm; just as for misusing kitchen utensils, sporting goods, tools, hands, rocks and sticks.

    But I have to wonder, what brought firearms into the discussion about an intoxicated driver and the damages she wrought?

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    July 29, 2014 2:14 p.m.


    Your argument is just too easy to shoot down. An SUV has a worthwhile purpose. Alcohol and guns don't. Alcohol only does one thing: Inebriate. Guns only do one thing: Shoot.

    @Chris B

    Not even close. Root beer and lemonade rehydrate, something humans need to do to survive. Alcohol actually dehydrates.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    July 29, 2014 2:08 p.m.


    "Perhaps you can elaborate on what valuable human purpose alcohol serves"


    Alcohol consumption can calm the nerves, increase circulation, lighten mood, facilitate social interaction and enjoyment, and enhance the dining experience with many fine cuisines: cheeses, chocolates, pastries, meats, and more.

    Wines, beers, hard ciders, mixed drinks, all were invented and continue to be developed as part of a long, rich, intercultural culinary heritage that is as old as, and complimentary to, religion itself as well as family values.

    In our LDS culture the positives aspects of alcohol consumption are denied, misrepresented and demonized, mostly out of fear that "drinking" will be too attractive for our youth and even adult members to resist, resulting in "sin".

    But in the early Church this was not the case. Jesus and the Apostles all "drank", as did the Prophet Joseph and all of the early Brethren for many years! They all recognized the value of alcohol when properly used.

    The WoW became an enforced "commandment" shortly after nationwide "temperance" movements culminated in the 18th Amendment (January 16, 1920). As with so many things, the Church just followed the trends.

  • AzTim Gilbert, AZ
    July 29, 2014 1:28 p.m.

    @ Brave Sir Robin

    "Guns and alcohol should be illegal."

    Such horrible logic!

    For argument sake, suppose the home owner in this story had been struck by the "flying" SUV and killed. An out of control, speeding SUV certainly is lethal, but we wouldn't ban SUV's or make them illegal because of the death. The issue was the person operating the vehicle and the alcohol that impaired the mental and physical state of that person. The alcohol made the person and, subsequently, the SUV unsafe. A gun, like an SUV, does not impair the person operating it. How often do we see gun violence tied to alcohol and drugs?

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    July 29, 2014 1:25 p.m.

    timid sparrow,

    It serves the same human purpose that Root Beer or Lemonade serve.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    July 29, 2014 12:58 p.m.

    @I M LDS 2

    Couldn't agree more. Guns and alcohol should be illegal. But I do have one question: You said "alcohol...is designed to serve other, valuable human purposes". Perhaps you can elaborate on what valuable human purpose alcohol serves, at least in the context of consumption (i.e. not including use as a motor fuel, etc.)? If consuming alcohol serves any other purpose besides creating a high, I'm not aware of what that purpose is.

  • Bountiful Guy Bountiful, UT
    July 29, 2014 12:45 p.m.

    Eliot. May I cite a story that illustrates a weakness in what you are saying. A friend of mine spent every Friday and Saturday night drinking at bars. He always got drunk and he always drove home. Even though for 25 years, he did the same thing, he used to tell everyone that he never intended to get drunk and therefore was not responsible for the fact that he got drunk every single time. I used to scream at him that he knew full well that he was going to get drunk and could kill someone and the "I'm sorry" could never restore the life he would take. Then one day he got in a serious wreck in his drunken state and spent months in the hospital very lucky to be alive. He was especially lucky that he never killed anyone "by accident". He came to realize that every Friday he intended to drink, get drunk, and drive drunk. And every time he did that, he very likely could kill someone while impaired. Every crime committed with a gun could be rationalized away as you do. With many, it doesn't wash. It is intentional.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    July 29, 2014 12:41 p.m.

    I know what the solution is: More drinking! Come on, when are we going to legalize adulthood here in Utah?

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    July 29, 2014 12:39 p.m.

    "Alcohol is a scourge to society and should be treated as such."

    Guns don't kill people, and neither do alcohol nor cars.

    People kill people using guns, alcohol, and cars.

    What's the difference?

    Alcohol and cars are designed to serve other, valuable human purposes and only kill when abused.

    Handguns, by contrast, are designed for one purpose: to kill.

  • Balanced Salt Lake City, UT
    July 29, 2014 12:09 p.m.

    Over time, I have come to realize that the "silly laws" of Utah pertaining to the sale and use of alcohol are wise indeed. Alcohol is a scourge to society and should be treated as such. It is time for the Utah legislature to make our laws involving DUI the toughest in the nation. The first offense for alcohol related driving conviction should be 3 months in jail and if anyone is hurt by the culprit, then 6 months minimum. Yes, it will be terribly inconvenient for the perpetrator but after a few high profile cases I believe the message will be sent to anyone considering getting behind the wheel impaired. Too many innocent people are being killed and seriously injured by drunk drivers, drug abusers and pill poppers. I'm tired of reading about selfish drivers and the sad stories about the victims and their families.

  • Eliot Genola, UT
    July 29, 2014 11:41 a.m.

    She should be punished and take responsibility for the damage she caused but her actions do not constitute attempted murder. Even though she was lucky she did not kill the guy in the house, it is obvious she did not set out with the intent to kill him.

  • Bountiful Guy Bountiful, UT
    July 29, 2014 10:52 a.m.

    Well. She's sorry. That should be compensation enough even if someone had been killed. This should be as serious an offense as attempted murder. The only difference between murder and attempted murder is pure luck. The act by the perpetrator is exactly the same. I hope the consequences are severe for such irresponsible behavior.