10 Answers

I hope you don't mind me borrowing your thread friendindeed but your question caused me to have two of my own. Rather than opening a second thread concerning the same topic, I thought it would be OK to piggy back off this one. Again, I hope you don't mind.

Most all states in the US view killing a person while driving drunk as involuntary manslaughter. Meaning even though they killed someone because of their own negligence or recklessness, they didn't really mean to kill them.

My counter argument is, if you feel you're old enough and responsible enough to have a license and also old enough to drink and understand the consequences of being drunk and know that being drunk impairs your vision and judgment, then isn't that enough for them to know they can kill someone while driving drunk? Doesn't ignoring that fact make the act more voluntary than involuntary?

Voluntary manslaughter carries a much stiffer penalty and in some states carries the death penalty. Would deeming the act voluntary thus allowing for a more sever punishment make more people think twice about driving drunk or do you (all inclusive "you") think the level of manslaughter makes no difference?

Colleen

I'm sure there's a lot of things we agree on. Religion and sexuality are just 2 that we don't. Thanks for sharing the thread ; )

Close friends of mine lost their daughter and Son in law to a drunk driver.
They were left to bring up two grand children.

The drunk got a ?60 fine, three points on his licience, and 12 month suspended sentence.

A car driven by anyone, drunk or not, is a potential ballistic weapon.

Of course it does and most times the one drinking never thinks that is true they always think I am fine I can handle it. i cannot help but think if they killed someone in their drunk driving state how horrible their life would be having to live with that the rest of their life....... Darci

Of course a car is a weapon is a drunk person is driving it.

any one drink and drive as no concern for other so they need to punishes to the fulliness

I agree it can become tool of destruction. But this scenario also would than apply to those who no longer have the reflexes to act in an emergency situation due to age or mental defect (Dementia) or how about driver license tests given in a foreign language. If you can't read the sign "Road ends ahead" and you blow through the barricade killing everyone in the car how is that any different? Driving drunk is wrong, but no one intents to kill by way of car. I disagree however with the Voluntary Manslaughter comment made here. That charge requires forethought to commit a deliberate act.

Colleen

I agree with everyone having to take another driving test later in life. I'm just not sure what would be the proper age to choose for this. I would hope that if my driving ever got bad and I was somehow oblivious to the fact, someone would take my license from me.

"about driver license tests given in a foreign language"

This I do not agree with. BUT even somewhat illiterate Americans can get a license. If they understand the shape of a sign and what the shape means, then that takes place of actually reading it.

Colleen

Forethought to commit murder is simply murder. It carries the highest penalty.

Voluntary manslaughter is most often a crime of passion where the person didn't mean to kill, they just allowed their emotions to get carried away or they lost all control of their sense of reasoning and acted on impulse without refection. I think alcohol can cause a person to loss all sense of reasoning and can cause people to act on impulse, act/react without thinking of the consequences due to their actions.

Under the influence of alcohol or drugs while driving a car is a lethal weapon. Judgement is cloudy, Thinking is not clear, and Regards for others as well as yourself is zero to none.

Most of the time, its amazing how the driver of a car, pump up with alcohol, drugs, and/or both comes out unscaved.

Yes its a weapon

what the fuck do you think it is