Binns in trouble?

2 weeks from his 21st birthday... his first alcohol issue at Iowa... nothing tragically wrong.

The OWI part is what's disappointing...
 
I like many other people on this site are disappointed, but I realize when one of my passions (love for the hawks) consists of watching 18 - 23 year old kids I will be disappointed some times. This does not excuse his mistake, but he is going to pay a price with the legal system and with his hawk family.

I only hope that he learns from this incident, takes his punishment and moves on with his life.

I would hope some of you negative people would do the same.
 
I don't think anyone on here has a problem moving on,the problem I have is two guys just got in trouble and now this.He should know better,we all know the coaches preach to them but yes their still going to make bad judgements and pay the price for it.Yes lets move on and hope this is the last screw up for the year.
 
SDK46 said:
Daniels....next man in.
Click to expand...

This, playing for the Hawks is a privilege. Binns has to hope Daniels doesn't play great and rip his spot away.

I don't get mad at this stuff anymore. Just a chance for the next great hawk to get into the game. We want players who are not stupid and want to be on the field more then partying.
 
ISUhawk said:
If you are in the left turn lane at a stop light and go straight, your driving like an idiot and asking to get pulled over. He should have walked or got a cab home end of story.
Click to expand...

From the location of where he was pulled over, I am guessing the left hand turn lane he drove through was immediately west of Riverside Drive, for the intersection with Orchard Street. This is not a stop light, its a poorly marked intersection for a small side street. I drive down Benton every single day, and pretty much every single day see people mistakenly use that lane as if its a "straight" lane.

The D&D was a very poor choice in his part, but the left hand stuff isn't a big deal. And University Heights cops are indeed d-bags.
 
HaydensDad said:
I would guess that every single above poster has driven with a .101 BAC or higher. For most of us that can be as few as 2-4 beers (depending on time frame), or even 1 strong beer. This is a ridiculous law to punish someone the same for having a few drinks and stilll driving responsibly versus getting loaded to the point where its dangerous. I know when I was younger and dumber I have been around .101 and been completly fine to drive and thought "screw it, i'm over the limit anyway. I might as well have another". I don't see this violation as any worse than a speeding ticket or Jaywalking. The punishment (~$7000 in fines and insurance hikes) certainly does not fit the crime. If he blew .25 or something it would be a different story. I guarantee BB was perfectly fine to drive. I agree he shouldn't have done it because it is illegal and he just damaged his top ten team, but shame on all of you that are throwing him under the bus as some sort of monster that risks killing kids. You are bad Iowa fans.

BTW, If you are that close to blowing legal I believe you can request to talk to your lawyer before doing sobriety test for up to 30 minutes, and then you can request a blood test which is back at the cop shop. You should be below .08 by that point. I've been told that works anyway.
Click to expand...


Are you kidding me? I have never driven drunk just because you make a habit of it don't pull the rest of us in with you. And nobody put you in charge of who is a good hawk fan and who isn't. You are ignorant.
 
hawkinn3 said:
Are you kidding me? I have never driven drunk just because you make a habit of it don't pull the rest of us in with you. And nobody put you in charge of who is a good hawk fan and who isn't. You are ignorant.
Click to expand...


200-SouthPark-1.jpg



That's ignorant!
 
It's funny how we are getting a lot of...how could he do such a thing...and oh no how long is he going to be out for responses.

You can't have it both ways...at times in my life when I have had less to lose I have been far more wreckless with my decision making. For those of us who are working respectable jobs and would likely lose those jobs due to an OWI...we are probably considerably more careful than we were back when we lived in college towns and worked at grocery stores.

The point being...if I'm one of these football players and I see teammates getting into trouble over the offseason and simply getting suspended for 1 or 2 games that they see as meaningless...or at least they're probably not nearly as worried about missing those games as they are Big Ten games...it doesn't seem like it would be much of a deterent.

How much did it really hurt Prater to get his OWI last season? I don't even remember that it happen to be honest.
 
HaydensDad said:
Sounds like a great idea for the high BAC cases. This could be the worst tier of the stepped system. I very much doubt that the type of accidents you are referring to happened with drivers like BB in town and with a ".101" BAC.
Click to expand...

Poor Coordination - once BAC levels reach 0.10, one of the most obvious physical effects of alcohol is slurred speech. Other short term effects of alcohol intoxication are the inability to think clearly and lack of coordination. These consequences can easily cause falls and other accidents.
 
HaydensDad said:
I'm not necessarily suggesting that .101 doesn't warrant punishment, I'm saying it doesn't warrant the same punishment as .25. While .101 may be a bit more dangerous than normal safe driving, it certainly isn't the same as getting sloppy drunk and ramming your car into a school bus or something. I feel the punishment should be graduated in 2-3 levels, just as assault or murder or shoplifting or speeding or almost every other law have punishments that correlate to the magnitude of the crime. This is a logical, common sense concept that I can't imagine anyone would disagree with.
Click to expand...

I understand your logic...but the problem with it is that we're dealing with a mind-altering substance. One which impairs your decision making abilities.

This is the reason why you hear all those commercials stating that - Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving. They want to set the expectation that drunk driving is such a serious crime that they are willing to over enforce the law in order to prevent it.

Lowering the limit or lessening the punishment for lower BAC levels only entices people to have less hesitation about having some drinks and driving. Then once they start drinking...most of us have been there...one thing leads to another...and if you didn't arrange an alternate way home...you're probably driving.
 
HawKCP said:
I understand your logic...but the problem with it is that we're dealing with a mind-altering substance. One which impairs your decision making abilities.

This is the reason why you hear all those commercials stating that - Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving. They want to set the expectation that drunk driving is such a serious crime that they are willing to over enforce the law in order to prevent it.

Lowering the limit or lessening the punishment for lower BAC levels only entices people to have less hesitation about having some drinks and driving. Then once they start drinking...most of us have been there...one thing leads to another...and if you didn't arrange an alternate way home...you're probably driving.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I was thinking. I think most people on this thread were only expressing their disappointment that these kids didn't use better judgement, especially with all they have going for them. The chances of losing those opportunities is great. That being said I think the more disappointing posts are those that say that it shouldn't be a big deal if someone blows slightly more than the legal limit, after driving, then suggests ways to blow a lower amount to beat prosecution. For a long time, driving while intoxicated wasn't taken seriously by the law. Even now too many people get away with multiple offenses. There's plenty of evidence to show that many people are impaired at .10.

I am hopeful that Mr. Binns certainly learns from this. I am sure he's embarrassed. He's only 20 and when you're 20 you don't always make the best decisions. I remember being 20 and doing a lot of dumb and foolish things where I should have known better, including drinking and driving, and I cringe when I think about what could have happened. I also have a 20 year old, along with a 23, 10 and 8 year old and I make sure I tell them how idiotic is is to drink and drive. I hope they listen.
 
curtfry said:
Didn't we hire someone to control these problems? I hope that person is now in the unemployment line.
Click to expand...

Yea,it's there fault they should know where every football player is at all times.Yep fire them,how dare they let our football players make bad choices and get in trouble with the law.
 
I am not morally outraged at what Binns did. I am not a Puritan who believes in the intrinsic "evils" of alcohol, even in the OWI context. Cars are dangerous, whether the people driving them are "buzzed" or not. There are, of course, states of inebriation that cause most people to drive less safely than they normally would. But then there are many, many, many people who drive like maniacs even when they're perfectly sober. The idea that you can pick a single numerical measure like BAC and say that "below this line you're fine, but above this line you're a menace to society who should be locked up and vilified" is a fantasy and it doesn't make us safe. There are more than enough horrifying, deadly, family-destroying car crashes in this country that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with drunk driving. As a society we could be dealing with that problem much more directly, but ... that's probably a discussion for the Politics forum.

I am, on the other hand, quite intellectually disappointed in Broderick's decision-making. He knew he was rolling the dice with consequences that would be very negative for his own legal standing, his reputation, his team's cohesiveness, and his team's reputation. Bad play, kid. It's like TMFS getting burned by Penn State's play-action pass for a touchdown, only with real-world consequences. He needs to make smarter decisions. To wit:

1. You couldn't have waited two weeks until your 21st birthday?

2. You couldn't have just had a party at your place? Or a friend's place where you could crash for the night if necessary?

3. If you went downtown to meet girls, perhaps you could have tried the following: "Hi, my name is Broderick Binns, I play football for the Iowa Hawkeyes. Would you pretty ladies like to come to a party I'm having?"

4. You couldn't get any of the drunk, hero-worshipping Hawkeye fans who were buying you drinks all night to float you a few bucks for a cab?

5. You mean to tell me that nobody has ever warned you what royal asshats the University Heights police are? (I used to work for Cambus, and they literally pulled over a couple of our drivers -- with passengers on board -- for going 26 in a 25. Every passing vehicle is basically an ATM on wheels for those jerks.)

I have no problem with KF signing him up for community service, extra sprints, etc., and a 1-2 game suspension for this foolishness. I feel sorry for whatever piece of gum Coach was chewing on when he got that call! That plus the legal consequences will be more than enough punishment for this.

But the talk about kicking him off the team or a six-game suspension, etc. because his tomfoolery frustrates our wish as fans to see the 2010 National Championship Hawkeye season we've all played out in our minds, (Just admit it.) is going too far IMO. Let's not start defecating egg rolls just yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top