View Poll Results: How should drunks be charged?

Voters
49. You may not vote on this poll
  • First degree murder

    5 10.20%
  • Second degree murder

    8 16.33%
  • manslaughter

    28 57.14%
  • Other

    8 16.33%
Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 156

Thread: Drunk Drivers

  1. #111
    °Selah!
    Alyssa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is dominant
    Last Seen
    05-07-14 @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,648
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    It was an accident. Even if people have problems and can't control their drinking or whatever, less they are going out with the mindset to kill, it's accidental. Not a lot of drunk drivers are getting drunk so they can kill.
    Bull scat. Itís not an accident at all. If someone drinks, they are still responsible for the result. Everyone with even the slightest amount of intelligence knows that driving under the influence of alcohol risk lives and can and often does cause death and destruction. They have the foreknowledge of those facts. That alone makes them responsible. If they continue to drink and drive, their culpability increases.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Not a lot of drunk drivers are getting drunk so they can kill. Maybe 3 years is "too little", but I fear a lot of people are trying to attach first and second degree murder times to punishment; and it just doesn't fit the mechanics of the crime. I do not think that we should increase punishments just because we can emotionalize a topic so much as to throw out reason and logic.
    I havenít noticed reason and logic from the pro-drunk- driving crowd. All I see are excuses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Crimes must be weighed by their functional effects and similar crime is punished similarly.
    Fuctional effects? Like- -Killing someone?.. Just as long as theyíve poured some alcohol down their throats, itís no biggie. The families devastatedónevermind thatógod forbid we express concern for actual justice. That is emotional. Preventing repeat offenses with manslaughter charges is unlikely. Youíre making excuses for them. Just like you make excuses for child molesters and other scum. Sad, really. For every low life, dirt bag, people like you make up excuses.

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    In my younger days I used to go to the bars drink beer and shoot pool until I couldn't see straight, then I would drive home. A couple of mornings I actually went out to see if my pickup was there because I had no memory of driving home. I just thank God I never hurt anybody and now I never ever drive drunk. I think society at large has finally learned drunk driving is serious business and not the funny story we used to think it was.
    And if you had killed someone, do you believe that you would have had a right to go on with your life afterwards because: oh well, you made a mistake?



    Quote Originally Posted by Rosie1 View Post
    I agree with Sawyer and earworm on this one. Locking the guy up for a long time only assures he won't drive during that period. Nowadays, people are required to attend AA, put locking devices in their cars, etc; just for DUII's alone.

    When the young alcoholic stops by for a beer on his way home, hours (an beers) later he has no idea what he's doing.
    Nonsense. Was he in a coma? Unless this person was unconscious, he was aware of his actions. He got out of his car, walked into a bar, and began drinking. No one had a gun to his head. HIS CHOICE. Stop making excuses .

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosie1 View Post
    To an alcoholic "one beer" usually refers to several. There's no easy solution, some people have to learn the hard way, others don't learn, even as their liver starts to fail.

    When I was a teen, one of my early memories was cruising town with my Mom, finding Dad at a beer joint, then I was assigned to drive him home. I was 16 and hadn't had my license very long. I remember Dad fumbling for cigs and droppiing them on the floor of the passenger seat. He wizened up in later, thank God. So, my tolerance of drinking is not real high, LOL.
    No excuse. None whatsoever. Iíve been drinking myself to sleep for months now. Iím responsible for everything that happens. So are other alcoholics. Itís not a disease. Iíve made a choice to quit drinking. Thereís a bottle of liquor downstairs. If I drink it, who should I blame?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Yeah, manslaughter is really a slap on the wrist
    Depends on what state...

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Legal issues aside... most people who are drunk are also incapable of accurately assessing their own driving abilities at the moment. Most think/say, "Oh, I'm fine.", and honestly believe that, when in reality they're not.
    I donít give a damn. They are still responsible. Before they get drunk, it is THEIR responsibility to make provisions for their ride home. If they donít, theyíre culpable. Quit making excuses for killers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcana XV View Post
    That's all well and good, but none of that is any indication of clear intent to go out and commit murder. The legal system places specific definitions on the different levels of murder. Take it up with them.
    Intent is when someone makes a decision knowing the consequences beforehand. That is what is happening in these instances. They know theyíre going to drink, they know that drinking leads to poor decisions, and they know that those poor decisions risk lives. They just donít give a crap. And you kicking the can down the road with such a pointless, say-nothing response is almost as bad a Ikariís pro drunk emotional tantrums.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Umm whether you think they are "scum of the earth who are unworthy of life" (pure emotional prejudice with no place in criminal justice) is completely IRRELEVANT to the actual criminal charge they should face. People who accidentally kill someone while driving drunk are not guilty of first-degree murder, because there was no intent to kill. Simply being irresponsible is not the same as committing premeditated murder.
    Yes they are. See above response.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Let me rephrase your above statement about first-degree murder, and tell me if you still agree: Do you think that someone who intentionally uses their car as a weapon to mow down a pedestrian should receive no harsher punishment than someone who accidentally killed someone through negligence?
    Drunks arenít accidentally killing someone through negligence so your example is moot.



    Quote Originally Posted by Luna Tick View Post
    If they kill someone, that's involuntary manslaughter. If they didn't kill or injure anyone, that's a DUI and they should be charged as such.

    The legal limit should also be changed from .08 in most places to .12. Impairment begins at .12 to .15. The changing to .08 was nothing more than "feel like we're doing something" legislation and has done nothing at all to catch more drunks.
    God damn. So now itís not even manslaughter, itís involuntary manslaughter. Well. Letís not inconvenience them too much.

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    I have a question for you If I may, should people that kill driving that are high on weed be charged the same as drunk drivers and individuals that kill while texting while driving....should they be charged the same as well....after all murder is murder right ?
    Meh weed is too difficult to pin point. Even if it is as dangerous as alcohol, and itís not, there is no real way to prove that it is the cause of an accident UNLESS the person is caught with it on his person and it is clear that he was actually smoking it at the time of the collision. For example, if someone quits smoking pot and a month later gets into a car accident and is tested, thc is still found in his system. Because itís fat soluble, it stays in the tissues for several weeks, long after itís metabolized. The ďhighĒ may only last a few hours depending on quality and a personís tolerance. Alcohol is completely different/.
    Not sure about texting.
    ďIn politics, stupidity is not a handicap.Ē -Napoleon

  2. #112
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by evanescence View Post
    How should they be charged?

    I'm leaning towards first degree murder. They are clearly scum of the earth who are unworthy of life.
    I lean towards negligent manslaughter.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  3. #113
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by evanescence View Post
    How should they be charged?

    I'm leaning towards first degree murder. They are clearly scum of the earth who are unworthy of life.

    You didnt answer this question before...ill try again...should people that kill people driving that are high on weed...be charged the same as a drunk driver all the reasons you gave or people that text and cause fatal accidents...
    I say your right about Drunk Drivers...but your leaving out all the others that deserve to be treated the same way..
    A drunk may very well have emotional or alcohol problems...but that doesnt make the victims family feel any better, when an emotionally stable individual with no addictions is just a plain IDIOT and texts while driving and kills someone that doesnt make them feel any better either.
    Last edited by lpast; 04-15-12 at 10:17 PM.

  4. #114
    °Selah!
    Alyssa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is dominant
    Last Seen
    05-07-14 @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,648
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    it is an accident no matter how negligent on the part of the drunk driver.
    An accident is ďoops, I just stepped on your toeĒ, not oops I just killed your family. Stop making excuses for killers.
    ďIn politics, stupidity is not a handicap.Ē -Napoleon

  5. #115
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,590
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    You didnt answer this question before...ill try again...should people that kill people driving that are high on weed...be charged the same as a drunk driver all the reasons you gave or people that text and cause fatal accidents...
    I say your right about Drunk Drivers...but your leaving out all the others that deserve to be treated the same way..
    A drunk may very well have emotional or alcohol problems...but that doesnt make the victims family feel any better, when an emotionally stable individual with no addictions is just a plain IDIOT and texts while driving and kills someone that doesnt make them feel any better either.
    Most states cover driving under the influence of either drugs or alcohol to be DWI... Driving While Impaired. The fines and sentences are similar, IIRC. DUI laws almost always refer to both drugs and alcohol, I believe.

    Some states are adding texting or using a cellphone while driving to the list, and if they kill someone in the process, it's vehicular homicide.

  6. #116
    °Selah!
    Alyssa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is dominant
    Last Seen
    05-07-14 @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,648
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    You didnt answer this question before...ill try again...should people that kill people driving that are high on weed...be charged the same as a drunk driver all the reasons you gave or people that text and cause fatal accidents...
    I say your right about Drunk Drivers...but your leaving out all the others that deserve to be treated the same way..
    A drunk may very well have emotional or alcohol problems...but that doesnt make the victims family feel any better, when an emotionally stable individual with no addictions is just a plain IDIOT and texts while driving and kills someone that doesnt make them feel any better either.
    i don't know how i feel yet when it comes to text messaging. I'm leaning towards charging them the same way because the message is out there. People are aware of its danger. I answered your question about weed.
    ďIn politics, stupidity is not a handicap.Ē -Napoleon

  7. #117
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Let me rephrase your above statement about first-degree murder, and tell me if you still agree: Do you think that someone who intentionally uses their car as a weapon to mow down a pedestrian should receive no harsher punishment than someone who accidentally killed someone through negligence?
    Quote Originally Posted by evanescence View Post
    Drunks aren’t accidentally killing someone through negligence so your example is moot.
    So you honestly don't think that a guy who intentionally mows someone down with his car because he wants to kill them, is any more morally culpable than a drunk driver? Really?

    Even if I were to grant you that drunk drivers know that their actions MIGHT kill someone (which isn't always the case), that is still a far cry from actually INTENDING to kill someone. Most drunk drivers (if they're even aware that they are too drunk to be driving) believe that they will make it home safely without getting into an accident...and they're usually right. That isn't premeditated murder; that's just stupid.

    God damn. So now it’s not even manslaughter, it’s involuntary manslaughter. Well. Let’s not inconvenience them too much.
    This mindset is exactly the problem. You are arguing about how much it "inconveniences" them rather than actually addressing the fact that it doesn't meet the criminal definition of anything else. In other words, you're arguing out of raw emotion: you don't like drunk drivers, so you want to throw the book at them regardless of the costs/benefits of actually doing so.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  8. #118
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,271

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcana XV View Post
    But it's still defined as "murder" which assumes malicious intent. I did say premeditation or malice.
    Well murder is defined as the illegal taking of human life. Malicious yes, but I wasn't meaning to argue, I was just providing a clear definition.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  9. #119
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,399

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by evanescence View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Legal issues aside... most people who are drunk are also incapable of accurately assessing their own driving abilities at the moment. Most think/say, "Oh, I'm fine.", and honestly believe that, when in reality they're not.
    I don’t give a damn. They are still responsible. Before they get drunk, it is THEIR responsibility to make provisions for their ride home. If they don’t, they’re culpable. Quit making excuses for killers.
    PERFECT example of how your emotions are clouding any rational judgement from creeping in. So much so, you are utterly incapable of comprehending what you're reading (regarding this issue). In no way, shape, or form, was I making excuses. If you had actually slowed down to read and comprehend what was being said, in context, you would have known that I was merely making an observation, and there was absolutely no hint whatsoever of approval of said actions in that observation.

  10. #120
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Drunk Drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by evanescence View Post
    i don't know how i feel yet when it comes to text messaging. I'm leaning towards charging them the same way because the message is out there. People are aware of its danger. I answered your question about weed.
    How about people who exceed the speed limit? Or people who try to make it to the intersection when the light turns yellow? Or people who fail to check their blind spots before merging? Basically, anyone who breaks almost ANY traffic law knows that they could potentially kill someone. Or for that matter, anyone who drives at all, even obeying all the traffic laws, knows that they could potentially kill someone. Do you think that they should ALL be charged the same as cold-blooded murderers if they're in an accident that kills someone?

    This standard is ridiculous. "Knowing your actions might potentially kill someone" =/= "Intending to kill someone."
    Last edited by Kandahar; 04-15-12 at 10:42 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •