Would you like this law? - Manatory life in prison for DUIs who kill kids?

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 11:05:32 -0500,
(Matthew Russotto) wrote:

>In article >,
>AusWendy > wrote:
>>
>>"Shawn Hirn" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>> In most cases, those who cause a fatality out on the road have committed
>>> an accident. True, these are horrific accidents, but they're still
>>> accidents.
>>
>>I disagree.
>
>Then you're either stupid, or are willing to knowingly deny reality in order to
>further demonize drunk driving.
>
>>If you are out driving with over the legal limit of alcohol in
>>your system then it is NOT an accident.
>
>Did the drunk intentionally kill the person? No? Then it was an
>accident.

Now that is really stupid. That's like saying if a terrorist throws a
bomb in a restaurant and kills someone then it's an accident because
he wasn't really aiming at any particular person!!! Drunk drivers are
like bomb-tossing terrorists and you're an idiot.

On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 08:23:25 -0700, "I am a MO"
> wrote:

>
>
>
>"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On 1 Aug 2006 23:11:15 -0700, "
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>By the way, about the child porn thing, you surely do not believe that
>>>there is no harm to the child do you? Every person who looks at child
>>>porn is hurting that child. It is exploitation, no matter what
>>
>> Maybe, but it sure isn't as bad as KILLING a kid as drunk drivers do
>> every day. And yet kid-killing DUIs gt off with fines. After all it
>> was an accident, right? STOP CODDLING THESE KILLERS ON OUR HIGHWAYS.
>>
>>
>
>So everyone who kills a kid should go to prison. What about those vile Jews
>who are killing kids with bombs??
>

Don't ask me. I hate israel.

"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 08:23:25 -0700, "I am a MO"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On 1 Aug 2006 23:11:15 -0700, "
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>By the way, about the child porn thing, you surely do not believe that
>>>>there is no harm to the child do you? Every person who looks at child
>>>>porn is hurting that child. It is exploitation, no matter what
>>>
>>> Maybe, but it sure isn't as bad as KILLING a kid as drunk drivers do
>>> every day. And yet kid-killing DUIs gt off with fines. After all it
>>> was an accident, right? STOP CODDLING THESE KILLERS ON OUR HIGHWAYS.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>So everyone who kills a kid should go to prison. What about those vile
>>Jews
>>who are killing kids with bombs??
>>
>
> Don't ask me. I hate israel.
>

Waiting for the nukes to fly.

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 11:05:32 -0500,
(Matthew Russotto) wrote:

>In article >,
>AusWendy > wrote:
>>
>>"Shawn Hirn" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>> In most cases, those who cause a fatality out on the road have committed
>>> an accident. True, these are horrific accidents, but they're still
>>> accidents.
>>
>>I disagree.
>
>Then you're either stupid, or are willing to knowingly deny reality in order to
>further demonize drunk driving.
>
>>If you are out driving with over the legal limit of alcohol in
>>your system then it is NOT an accident.
>
>Did the drunk intentionally kill the person? No? Then it was an
>accident.

The drunk intentionally got drunk and intentionally tried to operate a
vehicle when he/she could not safely do so. It is in the same
category as a person committing a bank robbery can be charged with
first degree murder if a bank guard kills his accomplice.

On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 02:06:54 GMT, Clark F Morris
> wrote:

>On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 11:05:32 -0500,
>(Matthew Russotto) wrote:
>

>>
>>Did the drunk intentionally kill the person? No? Then it was an
>>accident.
>
>The drunk intentionally got drunk and intentionally tried to operate a
>vehicle when he/she could not safely do so. It is in the same
>category as a person committing a bank robbery can be charged with
>first degree murder if a bank guard kills his accomplice.

It's not quite in that category since DUI is usually not a felony and
thus the felony murder rule does not apply. One reason i would like
to see DUI made a felony in all cases.

In article >,
Clark F Morris > wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 11:05:32 -0500,
>(Matthew Russotto) wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>>AusWendy > wrote:
>>>
>>>"Shawn Hirn" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>> In most cases, those who cause a fatality out on the road have committed
>>>> an accident. True, these are horrific accidents, but they're still
>>>> accidents.
>>>
>>>I disagree.
>>
>>Then you're either stupid, or are willing to knowingly deny reality in order to
>>further demonize drunk driving.
>>
>>>If you are out driving with over the legal limit of alcohol in
>>>your system then it is NOT an accident.
>>
>>Did the drunk intentionally kill the person? No? Then it was an
>>accident.
>
>The drunk intentionally got drunk and intentionally tried to operate a
>vehicle when he/she could not safely do so. It is in the same
>category as a person committing a bank robbery can be charged with
>first degree murder if a bank guard kills his accomplice.

Well, no, it's not; felony murder is a very narrow category.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.