Watkins: Garrett says team still supports Josh Brent

I fail to see this huge difference. It is negligence resulting from poor decisions being made. In both scenarios, it could easily be avoided by making the right decision. Both actions in and of themselves, are not illegal. Drinking and texting. But doing them while driving, makes both actions coupled together illegal. At least here in ND, texting while driving is illegal. I don't know about other states.
 
We will just to agree to disagree then, because in my mind there is a massive gap between drinking way too much before you get behind a wheel and being distracted while driving sober. Now, I will grant you that texting while driving is immensely stupid, but the two are different to me.
 
By the way, sounds like pit bull owners should be going to jail for years then, too.
 
pdom said:
Iamtdg is racist. If bad driving is a crime, A whole shitload of Asians are going to jail.
Click to expand...

Does laughing at this me make more racist?
 
Iamtdg said:
Regardless, there is a huge difference between being distracted while driving and killing someone and drinking and driving and killing someone. CRock was trying to make out like they should be on the same level, and they are absolutely not.
Click to expand...

I didn't make out like they are on the same level at all. Your exact words were "5 years seems pretty damn appropriate. He killed someone. Accidentally or not."

I didn't make the blanket statement that if someone dies another person should serve 5 years even if it is an accident. But in my personal opinion if someone didn't have the mens rea to commit murder then there is no point in punishing that person as though they committed murder. Do you think a 5 year sentence is going to deter anyone from drunk driving? It won't. No one drives drunk thinking they are going to kill someone. Or do you want him to serve a 5 year sentence as some sort of retribution? Retribution has no place in criminal law.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I didn't make out like they are on the same level at all. Your exact words were "5 years seems pretty damn appropriate. He killed someone. Accidentally or not."

I didn't make the blanket statement that if someone dies another person should serve 5 years even if it is an accident. But in my personal opinion if someone didn't have the mens rea to commit murder then there is no point in punishing that person as though they committed murder. Do you think a 5 year sentence is going to deter anyone from drunk driving? It won't. No one drives drunk thinking they are going to kill someone. Or do you want him to serve a 5 year sentence as some sort of retribution? Retribution has no place in criminal law.
Click to expand...

5 years isn't punishing them like they committed murder. It's appropriate for intoxicated manslaughter, though. Remember the board being up in arms because the dumbass that killed Rant only got a minimal sentence. Yeah, me too.
 
Iamtdg said:
We will just to agree to disagree then, because in my mind there is a massive gap between drinking way too much before you get behind a wheel and being distracted while driving sober. Now, I will grant you that texting while driving is immensely stupid, but the two are different to me.
Click to expand...
Something to think about. An alcohol impaired person is not thinking straight when they get behind the wheel. A texter (as an example) is clear headed and should be more aware they are running a risk. Which one is more negligent?
 
Iamtdg said:
5 years isn't punishing them like they committed murder. It's appropriate for intoxicated manslaughter, though. Remember the board being up in arms because the dumbass that killed Rant only got a minimal sentence. Yeah, me too.
Click to expand...

Yeah and if she got life in prison that would have done what exactly? Made some people on this board feel better?
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Yeah and if she got life in prison that would have done what exactly? Made some people on this board feel better?
Click to expand...

Way to talk in extremes. Nobody said anything about life.
 
Iamtdg said:
Way to talk in extremes. Nobody said anything about life.
Click to expand...

I'm just wondering how increasing the sentence somehow increases the greater good in this world? We can all agree a stiffer penalty won't deter anything. So what is the point of increasing the penalty?
 
Sweet, addition by probation.

:towel
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
I'm just wondering how increasing the sentence somehow increases the greater good in this world? We can all agree a stiffer penalty won't deter anything. So what is the point of increasing the penalty?
Click to expand...

By that logic, what is the point in increasing the jail terms for any violations? Isn't a prison term and the length of it meant for deterrence by it's very nature? I mean, isn't that the point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom