I have a serious question, but I want to ask it delicately because I know there are people here who've been affected by drunk drivers and who feel very strongly about the topic: who do you guys bears more responsibility for Jerry Brown's death? Josh Brent, for becoming intoxicated and insisting on driving erratically and too fast, resulting in the fatal collision (note, I didn't say accident), or Jerry Brown himself, for not being over the intoxication limit, but allowing his intoxicated friend to drive, to drive at a high rate of speed, and to be in the car with him and not even wearing a seat belt?
For my part, while they both obviously bear responsibility, I think I've always leaned more towards Jerry Brown in this case. Mostly, because he's not wearing his belt, which was so foolhardy. But also because his judgement wasn't substance-impaired when he got in the vehicle, while Brent's was. Granted, impaired judgement is not excuse for Josh Brent, and it's also the case that there was a point before impairment when he made the choice to drink too much when he knew he was likely going to be driving home that night, so there's plenty of responsibility to go around.
But for my part, and this goes for any of us, if you're sober, and you're getting into a car with a drunk driver, and you also choose not to wear your safety belt, you're taking a really unnecessary and serious risk with your life. If both of these two guys were just wearing their belts (neither one of them were), this might be a very different, and happier story.
