43
   

I just don’t understand drinking and driving

 
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:10 pm
Oh as far as other factors affecting driving abilities over the decades when it came to being there when having one of the family pets needing to be put down I been told by more then one of my vets that I should not be the one driving home afterward and if I do drive to be extra careful.

Yet somehow we do not normally base manslaughter charges on just driving when suffering grief for an animal or a human.

So yes indeed once more alcohol does decrease driving skills but then so do one hell of a lot of others things in life.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:13 pm
Which is the same legal theory which we seen under rape law..... ye who does not make sure before the event the has has consent is libel after the fact for illegal action if the other party objects.... the showing of harm from that act is no longer required .
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:17 pm
@BillRM,
You don't understand that once a driver is in a chemically impaired state, due to the ingestion of drugs or alcohol, he has no voluntary control over the effects of those chemicals on his body or his driving ability--they affect his Central Nervous System in a way that adversely affects driving skills.

And you are still failing to understand that DUI manslaughter is the same as any other vehicular manslaughter charge, except that the driver was also DUI. It is the driver, and not the alcohol, who is held responsible for causing, or contributing to, a death, due to the driver's negligence, except that, in the case of a DUI, the driver was also operating the car illegally and when legally impaired, but the driver's negligence must still be shown to be the cause of the death.

Meanwhile, we have drunk driving laws, and Swift has been charged under those laws, and there is no reason to believe those charges were not justified by his actions.

And we just have to wait and see what will happen in Swift's case.

But, since you like to play arm-chair defense attorney, why don't you follow this case, since this one is going to trial--in fact two trials, a criminal trial and a civil trial. And they are also in Florida. And the case involves DUI manslaughter/leaving the scene, so it should illuminate how real defense attorneys address these charges.
This is the criminal case...
Quote:

Trial experts explain two-year wait time in Wellington DUI manslaughter trial involving John Goodman
01/13/2012
By: Jeff Skrzypek

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - A trial date has been set in the DUI manslaughter trial involving Wellington polo mogul John Goodman.

Flanked by his lawyers, Goodman appeared before a Palm Beach County judge learning March 6th would be the day he would see trial.

"We're prepared. Judgment day is approaching," said Scott Smith, the civil defense attorney representing the victim's family.

Goodman is being charged with DUI manslaughter for allegedly knocking Scott Wilson's car into a canal in Wellington on February of 2010. The 23-year-old driver drowned as a result.

Wilson's mother, Lili Wilson, was asked for comment on Friday after the trial date was set, but kept quiet.

"I'm going to stay quiet today, thank you," said Wilson.

The trial is set to start more than two years after the incident happened, prompting some to question why court has not started sooner.

"It has really nothing to do with the fact who John Goodman is. That fact is, this is a complex case," said Michelle Suskauer, a criminal defense attorney who has experience in DUI manslaughter cases.

Suskauer said in the Goodman case and others like it, it can take years to go to trial because there are so many witnesses to coordinate. She said the judge and lawyers involved also take extra time preparing, considering the potential heavy penalty of a DUI manslaughter charge.

"Is it a long time? Yeah, it's been a while and the case it set fairly soon," said Suskauer.

Assistant state attorney Ellen Roberts, who spoke in general about DUI manslaughter cases, said two years of waiting is actually a lot shorter than the average time. Roberts said it usually takes three years for similar trials to begin.

"It's hard for the family because they've lost a loved one and they haven't seen any justice come from this yet," said Roberts.

Roberts said depending out the outcome, any subsequent appeals can also lengthen the process.

Goodman's lawyers have also requested a change of venue given the attention of the trial. Circuit Judge Jeffrey Colbath did not rule on that matter.

Some legal experts predict the trial will stay in Palm Beach County and start at the time set.

A civil trial date was set for March 27th.
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/region_c_palm_beach_county/west_palm_beach/trial-experts-explain-two-year-wait-time-in-wellington-dui-manslaughter-trial-involving-john-goodman

And the civil trial has just taken a rather strange twist.
Quote:
Houston millionaire sued in fatal Florida crash adopts girlfriend
By Mike Tolson
February 2, 2012

In the strangest wrinkle yet in a legal drama that pits the state of Florida and a car crash victim against a polo-obsessed Houston millionaire, the girlfriend of John Goodman is now his daughter.

The heir to an air-conditioning fortune, Goodman, 48, has legally adopted 42-year-old Heather Laruso Hutchins, whom he has been dating since 2009. The adoption, which took place in October 2011 but was not publicly disclosed until Tuesday, potentially allows Hutchins to control a third of the assets of a trust fund he set up for his two other children.

A Florida judge called the action "surreal" and a step into a "legal twilight zone" in a recent related ruling. The purpose of the adoption, however, is likely rooted in practical financial matters. Because of her age, Hutchins can avoid the legal stipulation that does not allow beneficiaries to take from the fund until they are 35.

Lawsuit, criminal case

Whether the move could have any effect on a civil trial brought by the parents of Scott Wilson, killed in a collision with Goodman's Bentley in February 2010, is uncertain. An engineering graduate, Wilson was 23 when Goodman allegedly ran a stop sign and knocked Wilson's car into a drainage ditch. He drowned.

Wilson's parents filed a wrongful death suit against Goodman that is set for trial in late March. The state has charged Goodman with vehicular homicide, claiming that Goodman had a blood alcohol content more than twice the legal limit when he allegedly ran a stop sign and ran into Wilson.

That trial, too, is scheduled for March. Goodman, also charged with driving under the influence manslaughter and leaving the scene of an accident, faces up to 30 years in prison.

Florida Circuit Judge Glenn Kelley ruled in October 2011 that the civil jury should not be told of the trust fund, saying it might encourage jurors to impose a larger financial penalty than they would otherwise, even though Goodman has no access to the irrevocable trust.

A jury award inflated by awareness of the trust might end up bankrupting Goodman, the judge ruled, and that would violate Florida law. Lawyers for Lili and William Wilson have appealed that ruling.

How the adoption might affect the exposure of Goodman's assets to a potential jury award is unclear, as the trust money already is off limits. It's also a matter of speculation whether a future probate court will recognize Hutchins as a legitimate trust beneficiary.

Kelley said that for the purposes of the civil trial, he will recognize the adoption as legitimate. One effect that seems apparent is that Goodman has the potential to achieve some immediate benefit of the money set aside for his children. The trust reportedly requires disbursement of 70 percent of the sum to which the beneficiary is entitled once they turn 35.

"By way of this adoption, John Goodman now effectively owns one third of the trust assets," the William Wilsons' attorney, Scott Smith, told the Palm Beach Post. "It cannot go unrecognized that he chose to adopt his 42-year-old adult girlfriend as opposed to a needy child."

Investment stability

Dan Bachi, Goodman's civil attorney, told the Post the odd maneuver was undertaken to assure the stability of investments.

"It has nothing to do with the lawsuit currently pending against him," Bachi said.

Kelley called the adoption "unprecedented," though legal experts have cited cases of adult adoption, most done for reasons pertaining to inheritance and estate planning.

Goodman's wealth came courtesy of his father. Harold V. Goodman founded the Goodman Manufacturing Co. and pioneered the use of flexible ductwork, later becoming a major manufacturer of air-conditioning systems.

John worked for the company after gaining a marketing degree, but business interested him less than polo. Over the last two decades he has been one of polo's largest American benefactors.
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Houston-millionaire-sued-in-fatal-Florida-crash-2932135.php

Both the criminal and civil trials will begin in March. Both should be quite interesting.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:26 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You don't understand that once a driver is in a chemically impaired state, due to the ingestion of drugs or alcohol, he has no voluntary control over the effects of those chemicals on his body or his driving ability--they affect his Central Nervous System in a way that adversely affects driving skills.


A point which is irrelavant given then lack of interest in the other parties level of impairment.....or lack of willingness to follow the penal code (the lighting of the motor vehicle that night) ....
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:40 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Are driving skills enhanced when the BAC level is above .08 or are reaction time, depth perception, night vision, coordination, etc. all adversely affected? And you don't know how high Swift's BAC level was--it might have been considerably above .08.


So we should just charge anyone who we can show had been driving without needed sleep with manslaughter without regard to any other factors in an accident?

So instead of drinking he was having a good time just drinking diet cokes all night long but not sleeping for twenty hours or so.

It had very very similar results in driving abilities and the one time I found myself wavering all over the roadway and not even able to maintain constant speed was due to lack of sleep not a BAC greater then 0.0.

Oh footnote there are blood tests that can show this lack of sleep.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sleep/articles/whatissleep.shtml.

Lack of sleep has serious effects on our brain's ability to function. If you've ever pulled an all-nighter, you'll be familiar with the following after-effects: grumpiness, grogginess, irritability and forgetfulness. After just one night without sleep, concentration becomes more difficult and attention span shortens considerably.

With continued lack of sufficient sleep, the part of the brain that controls language, memory, planning and sense of time is severely affected, practically shutting down. In fact, 17 hours of sustained wakefulness leads to a decrease in performance equivalent to a blood alcohol level of 0.05% (two glasses of wine). This is the legal drink driving limit in the UK.

Research also shows that sleep-deprived individuals often have difficulty in responding to rapidly changing situations and making rational judgements. In real life situations, the consequences are grave and lack of sleep is said to have been be a contributory factor to a number of international disasters such as Exxon Valdez, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and the Challenger shuttle explosion.

Sleep deprivation not only has a major impact on cognitive functioning but also on emotional and physical health. Disorders such as sleep apnoea which result in excessive daytime sleepiness have been linked to stress and high blood pressure. Research has also suggested that sleep loss may increase the risk of obesity because chemicals and hormones that play a key role in controlling appetite and weight gain are released during sleep.

firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:42 pm
@firefly,
John Goodman, like Thom Swift, had been in a bar drinking just before he had his DUI manslaughter accident.
So, one of the first things prosecutors did was to obtain his bar bill and interview witnesses in the bar.
http://www.page2live.com/2010/02/20/exclusive-prosecutors-seize-polo-boss-john-goodmans-200-booze-bill/

The same may have been done in Swift's case.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:49 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
So we should just charge anyone who we can show had been driving without needed sleep with manslaughter without regard to any other factors in an accident?

And you are still failing to understand that DUI manslaughter is the same as any other vehicular manslaughter charge, except that the driver was also DUI. It is the driver, and not the alcohol, who is held responsible for causing, or contributing to, a death, due to the driver's negligence, except that, in the case of a DUI, the driver was also operating the car illegally and when legally impaired, but the driver's negligence must still be shown to be the cause of the death.
Quote:
one time I found myself wavering all over the roadway and not even able to maintain constant speed was due to lack of sleep not a BAC greater then 0.0.

And if you had killed someone, while in that condition, due to your negligence and tired state, you could be charged with vehicular manslaughter.

Drivers are supposed to be responsible--and not get behind the wheel in any sort of impaired state--drunk, tired, emotionally upset--anything that detracts from their ability to concentrate on the road, or that affects their judgment or driving ability.

You've said all this before. Over and over. You're clearly in broken record mode. And you didn't make much sense when you said these things the first time around.





BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 10:56 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
So, one of the first things prosecutors did was to obtain his bar bill and interview witnesses in the bar.


Hmm do not run a bar tab and pay cash as you go along..................

Something I had aways done but not for reasons of defecting a prosecutor someday subpeonaing my bar tab as it was just a habit I had gotten into.

Even in my younger days three drinks was my maximum two to get a small buzz on and one to nurse for the rest of the night.

Now one drink is my limit except on a cruise or at a hotel/resort in Cancun,
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 11:04 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
DUI manslaughter is the same as any other vehicular manslaughter charge


No it is not far from it as the standard for a manslaughter charge to be file in any other case of driving impair is far far far higher.

You not only need to show negligence but gross negligence in driving without sleep and then that the cause of the accident is mainly due to the driver lack of sleep.

There is no presumption of guilt due to lack of sleep as there is in the case of a BAC at .08 or higher.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 11:09 pm
@firefly,
These were some of the earlier details from John Goodman's DUI manslaughter/leaving the scene accident.

Goodman, like Swift did not stop at the scene or try to aid the victim.

Goodman, like Swift, also called the police. It took Goodman an hour to make the call. We don't know how long it took Swift to make his call.

Interestingly, Goodman's bond is a little lower than Swift's.
Quote:
Polo Mogul Arrested, Charged in Fatal DUI
Wellington International's John Goodman out on bond after court
By Brian Hamacher
May 19, 2010

The Palm Beach polo club mogul who was involved in a February crash that killed a young man was arrested early Wednesday on DUI manslaughter charges.

John Goodman, owner of Wellington's International Polo Club, was released on $100,000 bond after he made his first court appearance Wednesday morning.

Goodman, 46, was arrested at the Four Seasons Hotel in Miami and booked into the Palm Beach County jail, according to the Palm Beach Post.

Also charged with vehicular homicide, Goodman is accused of killing 23-year-old Scott Wilson in the deadly Feb. 12 crash.

According to police, Goodman was driving his black Bentley shortly after 1 a.m. when he blew through a stop sign and collided with Wilson's Hyundai Sonata at the intersection of 120th Ave. and Lake Worth Rd.

Wilson's car tumbled into a canal, where it laid top-down, causing the recent college graduate to drown.

Police said Goodman waited nearly an hour to call police and didn't make an attempt to help Wilson.

Goodman's blood alcohol level was later tested and found to be at .177 percent, well over the .08 legal limit.

During his court appearance Wednesday, Goodman was ordered not to drink, drive or go near bars.

After the court appearance, Goodman's attorney, Roy Black, issued a brief statement.

"After thoroughly reviewing the facts available to us, the defense team believes that the arrest warrant and charges reveal only a part of the whole story," Black's statement read. "Mr. Goodman is entitled to his day in court. We ask that the public and the media not rush to judgment until all of the facts are known."

Wilson's family filed a wrongful death lawsuit last month.
http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Polo-Mogul-Arrested-Charged-in-Fatal-DUI-94260714.html

I agree. Mr Goodman is entitled to his day in court. I am looking forward to following this trial--Roy Black is a top-notch attorney.



firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Feb, 2012 11:17 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Lawyers on both sides of John Goodman case are formidable
By Andrew Marra
Palm Beach Post

At first glance, the odds might seem stacked in the battle for polo mogul John Goodman's fate.

On one side of the criminal case against him is famed defense attorney Roy Black and his powerhouse Miami law firm - a stable of aggressive, impeccably mannered counsels to the troubled rich and famous.

On the other side: a two-person prosecution team led by Ellen Roberts, a former homemaker who didn't attend law school until she was in her late 30s.

But no one should be fooled by the vital statistics.

Local attorneys say that if Goodman's DUI manslaughter and vehicular homicide charges go to trial, Black's highflying firm will have found a formidable foe in Roberts - a blunt, hard-driving veteran who has exclusively prosecuted traffic homicide cases for more than 16 years.

While Black is known as a slick and brilliant tactician who often scores attractive plea deals for his high-profile clients, Roberts is regarded as a fiery, aggressive prosecutor who knows DUI law inside out and takes her cases very personally.

"She is a very tough competitor and she's very thorough," said attorney Michelle Suskauer, president of the Palm Beach County Bar Association, who has gone up against Roberts in court. "She lives and breathes these cases. She definitely leaves no stone unturned."

There seems to be little question that Goodman, 46, the multimillionaire owner of Wellington's International Polo Club Palm Beach, will bring to court all the advantages money can buy.

His deep pockets can assure that Black's firm can hire any number of private investigators and experts to probe for weaknesses in the state attorney's office's case, which alleges Goodman was drunk in February when he crashed 23-year-old Scott Wilson's car into a canal and then ran off, leaving the recent college graduate to drown.

When Goodman was arrested Wednesday on charges of vehicular homicide and DUI manslaughter with failure to render aid, it set into motion what is likely to be one of the most closely watched local traffic homicide cases in recent years.

Black, who declined to comment for this story, has a reputation for tough fighting and smooth negotiations. When radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was investigated and eventually charged with felony doctor shopping in 2006, Black persuaded Palm Beach County prosecutors to drop the charges if Limbaugh completed 18 months of substance abuse treatment.

When Boca Raton accountant Jay Levin was charged with manslaughter for shooting dead his 16-year-old neighbor in 2003, Black's firm struck a plea bargain so he served only a year of weekends in jail and 10 years of probation. An unusual clause Black worked into the plea deal allowed Levin to get off of probation five years early.

Perhaps most famously, he won a not-guilty verdict for William Kennedy Smith in a 1991 rape case after persuading the judge not to allow testimony from other women who claimed he had tried to assault them.

When Black battled out the Smith case in court, one of the two prosecutors working against him was none other than Roberts, then a 46-year-old quick-rising prosecutor with six years of experience at the state attorney's office. She served as the No. 2 prosecutor in the case.

If the Goodman case can be considered a rematch at all, it's one that's squarely on Roberts' turf.

Roberts, who started and now runs the state attorney's office's traffic homicide division, acknowledges that her team will be outgunned financially. But she shrugs off any implications that it will give Black's team any advantage.

"The more money they have, the more experts they can hire and the more depositions I'll have to go to," she said dismissively. "The only difference between them and me is they make a lot more money."

Roberts downplayed the need for outside experts in DUI crash cases, saying she prefers to rely on the expertise of law enforcement officials who investigated the crash.

And Roberts, who teaches police officers at an academy in Jacksonville how to investigate crashes, said her team understands the issues like only someone who was there at the crash site can.

Roberts is known for frequently visiting the scenes of fatal crashes hours after they happened. She works closely with the families of crash victims and has developed lasting bonds with some.

"There's nothing like going to the scene of a crash," she said. "It's the sights and smells that make you passionate about it."

In legal circles, Black's reputation precedes him. His talent for thoroughly investigating a case and devising shrewd legal strategies at trial can sometimes put pressure on prosecutors to negotiate, said Doug Duncan, a prominent West Palm Beach defense attorney.

"Sometimes there are cases where it is in everyone's best interest to resolve it by a negotiated plea," he said, declining to comment directly on Goodman's case.

Roberts said if the case goes to trial, she will be ready. And if events so far are any indications, she won't be going easy on Goodman.

At Goodman's first court appearance Wednesday after his arrest, Roberts surprised his defense attorneys by calling for the polo financier to be placed on house arrest with an ankle bracelet after being released on bond.

She argued that because of his wealth and connections in England and Argentina, he was an unusual flight risk. A judge denied Roberts' request but did restrict Goodman from leaving Palm Beach County without special permission.

The message seemed clear: Roberts wouldn't be pulling any punches.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/sfl-john-goodman-lawyers-20100522,0,299057.story

hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 12:00 am
@firefly,
Do the dynamics of the impact matter to Thom's future? I dont think so...Thom was drunk and chose to drive, Barry is dead....case closed. That will be 13 years, tyvm.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 07:56 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Do the dynamics of the impact matter to Thom's future? I dont think so...Thom was drunk and chose to drive, Barry is dead....case closed. That will be 13 years, tyvm.


Let see the direct cost will be around 390,000 to keep him in prison for 13 years to the taxpayers not to comments on the indirect costs.

How many young people could we help with state grants to get college degrees, how many poor women could we screen for breast cancer for that amount of money and on and on we go.

The fireflies of the world think that harsh sentences only harm the person who they fall on instead of all of us as a society.

Does a long sentence of a decade or so get the point across any better then a sentence of a year or two that society frown on anyone who drive with a high BAC and get involved in an accident that take a life?

That is in added to the issue of whether it should matter how must if any the BAC level of the driver was responsible for the accident in any case.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 08:07 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
Do the dynamics of the impact matter to Thom's future? I dont think so...Thom was drunk and chose to drive, Barry is dead....case closed. That will be 13 years, tyvm.
BillRM wrote:
Let see the direct cost will be around 390,000 to keep him in prison for 13 years to the taxpayers not to comments on the indirect costs.

How many young people could we help with state grants to get college degrees, how many poor women could we screen for breast cancer for that amount of money and on and on we go.

The fireflies of the world think that harsh sentences only harm the person who they fall on instead of all of us as a society.

Does a long sentence of a decade or so get the point across any better then a sentence of a year or two that society frown on anyone who drive with a high BAC and get involved in an accident that take a life?

That is in added to the issue of whether it should matter how must if any the BAC level of the driver was responsible for the accident in any case.
If it were up to me,
I believe that I 'd just let bygones be bygones.
Let Tom go freely, with the expressed hope that he will drive carefully
and the judiciary shud stop interfering with Tom's dietary choices.





David
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 12:32 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
Does a long sentence of a decade or so get the point across any better then a sentence of a year or two that society frown on anyone who drive with a high BAC and get involved in an accident that take a life?

Yes, as a matter of fact it does get the point across better--to other people who might think about getting in a car drunk. Laws and sentences are also meant to have a deterrent effect.

And Swift hasn't been sentenced, and you don't know how long a sentence he will receive, nor are you aware of the sentences handed down in similar cases in Florida.
Quote:
society frown on anyone who drive with a high BAC and get involved in an accident that take a life

"Frown" is an odd choice of words, as though the needless taking of a human life is like some minor act, like slurping your soup in public, that elicits a disapproving response, a "frown", a tongue-click, a shaking of the head, a wagging of the finger. If you can't understand the outrage of society about people being needlessly killed, because others selfishly feel entitled to get drunk and then drive in an impaired state, then you really don't understand this topic, or why the sentences have gotten increasingly more punitive.

We are talking about real people being killed by drunk drivers. If a drunk driver killed your wife, I doubt you'd think a sentence of a year would be sufficient. The parents of the young man killed in the accident with John Goodman, the case I've been posting, wouldn't accept a year as a sufficient sentence either. But, what's most interesting, is that you are completely focusing off the crime itself, which is the real issue. Punishment, any punishment, is after the fact, the real issue is how to prevent drunk driving, and the resultant deaths from it, in the first place. Check the title of this thread.

It seems important to you that people, including yourself, be able to drive drunk. You decry past decreases in the legal BAC level, and you want it raised again, beyond .08, so more people could be legally driving in an even more impaired state than current law permits. You think drunk driving is no worse than driving while extremely tired or very emotionally upset, ignoring the fact that people shouldn't drive in those states either if they impair judgment or concentration, or reaction time, or any of the abilities required for responsible driving.

Why it is important to you to be able to drive drunk, and beyond the current legal limit of .08, is anyone's guess. Drinking is obviously important to you, despite your many attempts to deny that, because you are arguing against attempts to restrict drinking on the part of those who drive cars. You've even voiced your concerns about lost revenues to bars and restaurants if people have to watch their drinking before they get into a car. You want the legal limit raised to that which is most often found in deadly crashes, something that would make it acceptable for people to consume even more alcohol than they do now before they get behind the wheel, and increase the probability that even more deadly crashes, as well as more crashes that result in non-fatal injuries, would occur. Why is it so important to you that people be allowed to drive drunk--very drunk--and way beyond the .08 limit where impairments can already be clearly demonstrated? Is foregoing binge drinking before driving that big a hardship for you?

If Thom Swift hadn't been drunk when he got behind the wheel of his car that night, he wouldn't have to worry about the length of a possible sentence, and you wouldn't have to worry about the cost of incarcerating him, and Barry Lancaster would likely still be alive. The problem is drinking and driving.

If drinking is so important to you, go right ahead and drink, but don't get behind the wheel of your car after you do that. But, if you do choose to drink and drive, and you kill someone, don't whine about the length of your sentence, or your "usefulness to society" or how much it will cost to keep you behind bars, or any of the other crap you keep coming up with--none of those things will obliterate your responsibility for taking a human life, which is why they are all very much beside the point. Cars are lethal weapons and they have to be operated responsibly, by responsible drivers, and when drivers fail to act responsibly, the law will hold them responsible for their actions.
Quote:
The fireflies of the world think that harsh sentences only harm the person who they fall on instead of all of us as a society.

I've made absolutely no statements to that effect, so stop fabricating nonsense.

Drunk driving harms all of us--we are all in a position to be potential victims of a drunk driver.



OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 12:44 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
Yes, as a matter of fact it does get the point across better--to other people
who might think about getting in a car drunk.

Laws and sentences are also meant to have a deterrent effect.
Do u think it works?
Is there a note in this thread about someone else in that community
SUBSEQUENTLY getting arrested for DUI, after Tom did ?





David
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 12:48 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
I once heard that what puts people off committing crimes is the likelihood of getting caught, not the actual sentence. People who commit crimes don't think they're going to get caught, except for a few with psychological issues.

If say, there was a police patrol outside the bar that breathalised everyone that got behind the wheel of a car, those people in the bar would be less likely to give it a go.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 01:03 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Yes, as a matter of fact it does get the point across better--to other people who might think about getting in a car drunk. Laws and sentences are also meant to have a deterrent effect.


Do you have any studies to back that claims up that longer sentences for DUI manslaughter had a greater deterrent effect then a shorter sentence would?

Somehow I can not see someone in a bar saying to himself I am willing to run the risk of a DUI manslaughter charge by having a few more drinks if the sentence would be two years in prison but not if it ten years in prison!!!!!!!

We do know the harm done in tying up resources that could be use in many others areas by the government in keeping someone behind bars for prolong periods.

Let see the cost of keeping someone in prison run around 25 to 30 thousands a year not to mention the loss to the society in taking a working person and taxpayer off the roll for those years.

Perhaps placing his family on the welfare rolls also.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 01:15 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:

Let see the cost of keeping someone in prison run around 25 to 30 thousands a year not to mention the loss to the society in taking a working and taxpayer off the roll for those years.

Perhaps placing his family on the welfare rolls also.

And, when a drunk driver kills the father of three children, who is going to support those children? Drunk drivers kill working taxpayers, who are also husbands and wives and parents. And they can often be involved in accidents where they kill more than one person.

You're the one concerned with the sentences. I'm concerned with the problem of drunk driving--and stopping it.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Feb, 2012 01:42 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You're the one concerned with the sentences. I'm concerned with the problem of drunk driving--and stopping it.


Unless you or others can show that long long sentences for DUI manslaughter have any benefits in decreasing drunk driving let alone stopping it all you are doing is wasting government resources and by doing so likely costing others people their lives such as by reducing the government funds available for medical care programs for the poor.

 

Related Topics

Can a thread be removed or locked? - Question by BeachBoy
dui - Question by sylvia chomas
Drinking and Driving Tip.... - Discussion by Slappy Doo Hoo
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/11/2025 at 03:16:18