phishtaper Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 why do you guys think "intent" has anything to do with this? bobby walks into a crowded shopping mall and start randomly firing a machine gun and kills ten people, but bobby didnt actually "intend" to kill anyone.how is that any different than bobby going into that same mall with that same machine gun and intentionally firing at those same ten people and killing them?driving drunk is the same thing as randomly firing the machine gun, regardless of the intent to kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwa. Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Another important topic lost to internet semantics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 fair enough, but this thing was framed and started as semantics right away. i dont think there was any real debate that this was tragic, buddy's an a-hole and he should have gotten more time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted June 13, 2008 Report Share Posted June 13, 2008 Intent has nothing to do with it.To murder someone is to unlawfully kill them. He didn't unlawfully kill her. He unlawfully drove drunk, and then subsequently lost control of his truck and his truck killed her. That's what the courts saw and that's what is reflected in his sentence. Which I for the record think was way too light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schwa. Posted June 13, 2008 Report Share Posted June 13, 2008 fair enough, but this thing was framed and started as semantics right away. i dont think there was any real debate that this was tragic, buddy's an a-hole and he should have gotten more time. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouche Posted June 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2008 y'all should practice law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonyak Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 [color:purple]I do in my spare time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaggyBalls Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Drunk driving is NOT the same as randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd.Both are ridiculous acts, but they are NOT the same thing. To suggest they are is sensationalizing the issue and only serves to distract people from thinking clearly about any of it. If you're defending the victim try not to confuse the issue. Perhaps a reason Quebec judges are light on repeat offenders is that the side of victims of drunk driving has a bunch of 'clever' comparisons while most of the killers/could-be-killers need rehabilitation once their sentences are over.It would seem that Judges are a bit more sympathetic to realistic explanations of events and personal situations.It would be very difficult for me to keep my composure if my kid were mowed down by a repeat drunk driver...if I had a kid of course.I sure hope that our society can find ways to give would-be drunk drivers other better options than to drive home drunk. There are many lame excuses these folks would have - taxis are too expensive, no time in the morning to get their vehicle, etc...They're still used and nobody's stopping these people from getting in their cars and driving.is prevention even all that possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Here's a somewhat (barely) related question, to which there is no right or wrong answer, which is really more of a "Philosophy of Law" question than a law question:Should "attempted murder" be a different charge, or redressed by different sentences than "murder"? If so, or not, why?I truly am curious about what people have to say regarding this. (Especially Canned Beats; lol.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouche Posted June 15, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Should you only be charged as a murderer if you are successful? How many tries at killing someone should a person have before they get it right?If you're trying to do something like kill someone, then you probably should be punished like you had fulfilled the act. Just because you sucked at killing, doesn't mean that you don't deserve to suffer the same consequences as a meticulously and successful killer would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaggyBalls Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 I'm with you on this one, Mike.Would this be 'Aggravated Assault'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Really, eh? It's that simple and clear?Okay.So, Guy #1 stabs Guy #2 out of anger, intending to kill him. Guy #1 is watching Guy #2 bleed to death. Guy #1 then thinks, "Wow, I really hate Guy #2. I would love to watch him die. That said, if I could think of some benefit to me I would do something to save this guy's life right now, but given that I already tried to kill him, and Attempted Murder attracts the same sentence as Murder, I might as well not bother to call an ambulance, and just let him bleed to death."That's cool; or do you think society would see some benefit by giving Guy #1 some incentive to call the ambulance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouche Posted June 16, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 If a guy who tried to kill someone actually called an ambulance or performed some first aid after realizing the error rather than letting him die, that's a totally different story, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Why? If the sentence for Attempted Murder (which he already committed) is the same as Murder, the only difference is whether or not the guy died. If the minimum sentence is life in prison for either charge, then what difference can it make if the guy ultimately saves the victim? He can't get less than the minimum. "Mitigating factors" at the time of sentencing cannot override a statute that says "the minimum sentence for this is 'x'".I think your question implies that you do think Attempted Murder should be dealt with differently than Murder, at least under some circumstances; doesn't it?(These issues are rarely black and white, is my main point.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Drunk driving is NOT the same as randomly firing a machine gun into a crowd.YES, they are. both involve a person intentionally taking charge of a known deadly weapon. the decision to begin the potentially deadly act is more cogent than the fact that reasonable expectation of death resulting from the former is less likely than from the latter. I sure hope that our society can find ways to give would-be drunk drivers other better options than to drive home drunk. wow. society has nothing to do with someone choosing to become intoxicated and then getting behind the wheel of a car. dont blame society, there are already enough "options" available. sorry YT you cannot pin this one on anyone other than the murdering drunk. let's not think we need to babysit every one of society's problem children here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattm Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Personally I agree with bouche up there in that if you try to kill someone then you should be charged as if you had killed them. I also think that if you tried to kill someone and then had that guilt streak and tried to save them, you should get a slightly less penalty as the incentive or whatever but not much since you intended to kill the person in the first place and if you can get up the nerve to kill someone then you can probably do it again and really, I don't want you around, whether you succeeded or not. Back on topic, I think that 5 years for that guys is way, way too light. He should have been charged with man-slaughter or even second degree murder. We all know that you can kill people when driving drunk. BUT, what if you did drive drunk and you're tire blew and you killed someone. If you'd been sober, your tire would still have blown and you'd probably still have killed the same person, the only difference is that you're drunk and therefore susceptible to more hatred and labelling. Last year some truck had a chunk of metal come off on the 417 that basically took a guy's head off. Was the owner of the truck a murderer? He did just as bad a thing by not checking the truck but they are not going to press charges even if they find the guy. Some family is out 1 dad because of this but no one will be charged. If the person who owns the truck was found to be drunk, would they be more guilty or less? Should they be charged or not? I think they should, I also think I'm even more confused than I was before. Conclusion: The bastard should fry, she was 17 and full of life and he was old and degenerate and it's not friggin fair!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamilton Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 So, now you're in favour of the death penalty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 I wonder: should being caught driving while impaired, without having killed or hurt anyone, be a less serious charge than driving while impaired and killing someone?Assume an impaired driver loses control on an empty back (or even front) road, but escapes unharmed. Is this a less serious offense than if (by happenstance) there had been someone driving in the opposite direction on that road that the impaired driver killed when he lost control? His actions, his reckless disregard for other drivers (who may have been) on the road, is exactly the same, but the crime he'd be charged with is very different in the two situations.Aloha,Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Question:If I blow .08 at a RIDE program, should I be charged with attempted murder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 If I blow .08 at a RIDE program, should I be charged with attempted murder?no, but the sentence if convicted should be comparable.drunk driving is one of the few areas of sentencing where stiffer penalties will lower incidence, i think. society and the legal industry still condones it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 The legal industry condones drunk driving???Okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Well, I sure hope someone firing a gun into a crowd gets charged with attempted murder. And seeing as you are arguing that drunk driving is the same as firing a gun into a crowd, can you explain your position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 i could care less what the actual charge is. call it attempted murder, call it impaired driving, call it bobs yer uncle. the important thing is that the severity of the sentencing be comparable. and yes, the legal industry condones drunk driving. look at the joke sentences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velvet Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 When I was a kid drunk driving was barely illegal and it happened all the time. The legal system in Canada cracked down on drunk driving hard and completely changed the climate on it. Look at this thread for an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 then why are 17yo girls riding their bikes on the road still being mowed down by drunks? cracked down, yes. cracked down enough, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now