Who Posted?
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
I'll bet drunks outnumber mad mothers
tough to organize them though - they keep falling over
tough to organize them though - they keep falling over
Try framing something honestly for a change. Just for the novelty of it. Are you referring to an attempt to not fund planned parenthood?
What I've said is that you're not going to overturn Roe by electing Republicans, that conservative nominated S. Ct. Justices who gave us Roe and that it is now settled precedent, that the way to break Roe is to amend the Constitution and settle the matter the same way slavery was settled, also unsettling a Court holding.
But they don't notice.
Okay...I'm going to take gentle, non personal exception to this as an ongoing joke. Drunk driving shouldn't be something used as a premise for a chuckle. It's a death sentence for a great many people yearly. I had a very close friend who was like a little brother to me killed by a drunk driver the week after he returned from Paris Island. His family was shattered. It haunts everyone who loved him to this day, a couple of decades removed.
Not attacking anyone, only suggesting it's not the stuff of humor. :e4e:
No death on the highway is a premise for a chuckle. But what happens in this country is differential justice. If I kill someone with my car while totally sober then I will not suffer anywhere near the same consequences as another person who kills someone but has some alcoholic content in their blood. Go figure.
I think that's a topic worth discussing. Is why a person does a thing important in terms of sentencing? Well, we say yes as a mitigating factor. So if intent can lesson a criminal punishment why shouldn't it also increase punishment? In fact, it does already, as a willful act typically carries the greater penalty. And a foreseeable consequence of one act can similarly increase the penalty for that occurrence.
If you hit someone while completely sober it was either an intentional or an accident. But if you put yourself behind the wheel of a lethal instrument while intoxicated then it's a bit different. It might still be an accident, but it's an accident predicated upon a willful decision with foreseeable consequences. You've made a choice to endanger others. It's a degree of recklessness that has to be more seriously dealt with in hopes of discouraging the behavior that leads to it.
There's more than one of you in there? :shocked:
OK. Have you ever had a drink or more and driven a car?
I don't believe anecdotal bits should be the basis of the discussion, to my mind. Whether or not I'd ever murdered a man wouldn't and shouldn't impact the discussion of what should be done to/with murderers, by way of example. That said, a drink wouldn't place me over the legal limit, wouldn't make me a drunk driver. Do you think most people who get behind the wheel fail to realize they're impaired? And should that matter? Also, we have laws on the books to significantly penalize establishments that serve to the point of intoxication.
Any response on the underlying principle I spoke to, the notion that enhancing sentencing is akin to mitigation in principle?
Actually I believe enhancing sentencing is ridiculous. I'm sure you will have several dozen reasons to disagree. I know people who can never drive again because some cop pulled them over and they were dui for a third time but had done no damage to either property or persons. I also know a person with full driving privileges who killed another person on the highway. He was sober. Go figure.
Do you think that mitigating sentences is ridiculous? Should we give a man rushing his wife to the hospital to deliver a baby or his sick child to the care of physicians the same treatment we give someone who is just seeing what his car will do for the heck of it?
Well, if we can mitigate, recognizing that why we do a thing is important then why is it problematic to enhance a sentence on the same principle?
I'm just asking a few questions. I have an opinion. I think the one infers the other. I'm fine with disagreement. I'm just trying to make the disagreement on principle and in argument.
Oh please, spare me the melodramatics. On a dark and rainy night a heroic man rushing his wife to the hospital rounds a corner as she is doubled over in the final throes of labor and momentarily distracted he mows down a bag lady dressed in tattered dark clothing. Verdict, accidental death, no penalty. Meanwhile, young man with previous arrest record turns car onto side street heading for home and strikes rich banker who suddenly darts in front of oncoming vehicle. Police arrive and test young man finding he has alcohol in his system. No witnesses. As young man is zip tied and taken off to local jail you can guess the rest of that story.
Both cases are vehicular homicide. If I had total authority to write the law then I would say 1st case of vehicular homicide results in no penalty. 2nd occurrence results in 5 year incarceration. No exceptions.
Both cases are vehicular homicide. If I had total authority to write the law then I would say 1st case of vehicular homicide results in no penalty. 2nd occurrence results in 5 year incarceration. No exceptions.
See, this sort of thing is the problem. I didn't interject anything like a personal note, I just asked questions. If you don't want personal, don't personalize.
I could have simply noted that the principle of mitigation is why every action that ends in the death of someone isn't murder, that we recognize intent already. And it factors in the charge. So what's your problem with intent enhancing punishment if it can mitigate punishment?
Your examples left out too many relevant factors but were likely both manslaughter charges as they appear.
good morning
good morning
“Good morning Breakfast Clubbers, good morning to ya,
we woke up bright and early just to howdy-do ya.”
1st call to breakfast for all of you out there
America's favorite breakfast club is on the air
good morning
“Good morning Breakfast Clubbers, good morning to ya,
we woke up bright and early just to howdy-do ya.”
1st call to breakfast for all of you out there
America's favorite breakfast club is on the air
Good morning Chrys 
Good morning Chrys
and good morning to you tot
nice to see you making the rounds