2007-10-01 12:12:50 · 17 answers · asked by sum_one_important 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Not as a automatic "rule" they shouldn't just get sentenced to "Death Row", no.
They should - however, be charged with vehicular assault (or vehicular manslaughter) if they actually hurt or killed someone. They should automatically get their licenses taken away (with an option to review their license suspension after a minimum of 5 or 7 years).
2007-10-01 12:19:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think so because when someone is high or drunk, they can't think right and can't make decisions wisely so I don't think they should send them to Death Row because it was not "intentional." In other words, he or she probably wouldn't have done it if he or she wasn't drunk. I would think a life sentence would probably be a bit better. But I would think that sending them to Death Row is acceptable if he or she has run over two or more people because that would seem as if they did it on purpose, but if it was just one I would just go with the life sentence.
2007-10-01 13:12:14 · answer #2 · answered by AgentI 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. We should do away with vehicular manslaughter and charge them with first degree murder. If you go out and drink or get high and you climb behind the wheel of a car you knowingly are attempting murder. If you are then in an accident that kills and innocent person because of your stupidity then yes you should be charged with murder. A person before they begin to drink or get high is well aware of the risks associated with drinking and driving or driving under the influence of drugs. This means that the crime is premediated. They know what the potential is that an accident could occur. ( If a bank robber goes into a bank with the plans of robbing the bank goes up to the teller and demands the money then changes his mind he will still be charged with bank robbery) ( If a person hires a hitman to kill someone they are charged with attempted murder) Someone would have to be deaf, blind and dumb not to know these risks. If you know it while you are sober and choose to still participate in the behavior then you should face the maximum penalty. Ignorance is not a good excuse, lack of mental capacity due to alchol and drugs is not an excuse. People that have been arrested for lesser crimes have done more jail time than someone who has murdered a person while driving drunk. I recently read an article where a drunk driver killed a mother and 3 children. He received 5 months jail time, That is disgusting. Not only has the family been victimized by the drunk driver it was once again victimized by the judicial system
2007-10-01 12:22:55 · answer #3 · answered by D and G Gifts Etc 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The reason a person is sent to Death Row is from premeditated murder, or murder in the first degree. If you go out with the intent to kill people, then the death penalty applies. If you kill someone by accident or without intent, then that is not first degree nor is it premeditated. If a drunk driver killed a friend or family member of mine, I would be upset and would want to see them in prison, but the death penalty is a bit extreme for even that.
2007-10-01 12:22:32 · answer #4 · answered by Andrew E 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think that a drunk driver that runs over someone should be sent to jail (like weekenders), but more than that, they should be punished financially. Fine them thousands upon thousands of dollars to the point where they will never even THINK of driving drunk again. The idea of punishment is to deter that person from re-offending. People on death row are there because they killed someone with premeditation. Drunk driving is just carelessness, it's not premeditated that they're going to get drunk, drive home, and run someone over... at least not usually.
2007-10-01 12:19:28 · answer #5 · answered by Bob Thompson 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Death penalty is a bit much. But some states have been able to get drunk drivers convicted of murder (as opposed to manslaughter). However, it remains to be seen if those convictions will hold up.
2007-10-01 14:59:20 · answer #6 · answered by Boots 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No- that's a punishment we reserve for the most vicious and heinous of crimes. I'm sorry if you lost someone you care about to drunk driving, but I believe the Death Penalty is too severe for a crime of negligence. They weren't setting out with malice to murder someone, they just weren't thinking about anyone's safety but their own.
2007-10-01 12:23:53 · answer #7 · answered by Beardog 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that killing someone like this is almost as bad as doing it intentionally. There's no excuse. I don't know about death row, but they definitely need to be severely punished.
2007-10-01 13:59:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes..maybe not 10 years ago but with all the media coverage and awareness today there is no excuse to drive drunk...its stupid..
2007-10-01 12:16:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No - but, I don't believe in the Death Penalty.
They should have to go to jail and sometimes they get life in prison - but they don't deserve death.
2007-10-01 12:15:56 · answer #10 · answered by Michelle Zalbo 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋