|
Post by Shane for Wax on May 4, 2011 10:49:20 GMT -5
Intent is fun when it comes to criminal justice.
|
|
|
Post by rookie on May 4, 2011 11:06:52 GMT -5
Kitty, I'm sorry, that was rude of me. And I apologize. So please let me try this again, only a bit more civil.
I think drunk drivers are a public menace and we should be using every legal resource available to keep them off the streets.
I think that when caught they should receive fair and fitting punishment.
I do think "I was drunk" should never be an excuse in a court of law.
I do not, however, agree with assigning them any motive or intent. And that is why I think it should be manslaughter rather than murder.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on May 4, 2011 11:11:09 GMT -5
The problem with intent, is you can't read minds, and people say shit all the time that they don't really mean. I mean, like, "I'm so angry I could kill so-and-so" could, in the wrong context, be taken as a threat. And if the person you mention were to end up dead, a reasonable amount of suspicion would be directed your way, until evidence points elsewhere. Intent is next to impossible to prove, short of a bloody recording of someone saying, "I'm going to kill Person A", like, ten minutes before going and killing Person A. Or, like, witnesses who heard him say that, or saw him go after Person A with a weapon. Or evidence of long-term planning of the crime.
Intent is a messy kind of grey area, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by rookie on May 4, 2011 11:22:53 GMT -5
Sure is. And that's why I try to stay away from assigning intent to actions.
|
|
|
Post by katz on May 8, 2011 8:26:17 GMT -5
Like everyone else, I'm kind of torn. However, having studied things like restitution circles (having to sit down with your victim and learn about how your actions impacted them) and seeing how successful they can be, there's some logic to this. A lot of crimes are committed because of a lack of empathy. Drunk drivers see themselves getting home as more important than the lives of strangers. Knowing that he killed a real girl who is very missed and absorbing the impact of that gives him empathy to all potential victims.
I'd actually like to see this employed for rapists. It would de-objectify victims.
|
|
|
Post by Her3tiK on May 8, 2011 9:32:19 GMT -5
Doesn't sound unreasonable to me. Not at all. What better way is there to learn not to do something like drunk driving than to live with a constant reminder of the person/people you hurt because of it?
If her family will never be able to forget, why should he?
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on May 12, 2011 1:07:27 GMT -5
Like everyone else, I'm kind of torn. However, having studied things like restitution circles (having to sit down with your victim and learn about how your actions impacted them) and seeing how successful they can be, there's some logic to this. A lot of crimes are committed because of a lack of empathy. Drunk drivers see themselves getting home as more important than the lives of strangers. Knowing that he killed a real girl who is very missed and absorbing the impact of that gives him empathy to all potential victims. I'd actually like to see this employed for rapists. It would de-objectify victims. I wonder if it would work with abusers, as well? Or would it just give them more ammo...
|
|
|
Post by kittygogo13 on May 13, 2011 20:02:23 GMT -5
HE should get time in jail and have to wear the bracelet just having him wear the bracelet is wayy to lenient because he could see it as "wow all i have to do is a piece of jewelry, yay!" or something like that lol
but if he wears it AND spends a good amount of time in jail where his freedom is gone; spending plenty of time remembering his victim in lock up many people need to be punished like this so they can get into their skulls that what they did was wrong and not something to ever be taken lightly
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on May 13, 2011 20:29:39 GMT -5
I still think it's too emotional.
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on May 13, 2011 21:35:09 GMT -5
I still think it's too emotional. Aye, me too.
|
|