10 years for DUI manslaughter

way too harsh.

Can anyone here actually say with a straight face that they haven't drank and drive in the past month?
Please tell me you're trolling, otherwise that is pathetic.
 
I'm very anti DUI so I don't think it's long enough imo. With that said though, alcoholism is definitely a disease. Abuse isn't, but addiction by definition is.

Alcoholism a disease...lol

I guess they would be miraculously be cured if they were on a deserted island with no alcohol.

Addiction is a weakness. That is all
 
Horse shit. I remember some Canadin posting in the Heavies once, all high and mighty, saying Canada takes drunk driving much more serious than the US, as evidenced by how it's a pain in the ass to enter the country even from the US if you have a DUI conviction on your record. Apparently that guy was wrong about them being tough on drunks.

I'd say 30-ish would be fair. Execution would be better, but that's a pipe dream, so 30.
Closest living relative should be allowed to avenge the situation, if they want to IMO.

Maybe that's archaic, but I think it would be true justice in a situation like this.
 
There was a guy in my area a few years ago that was drunk and drove the wrong direction on a parkway. Killed a 7 year-old and the driver, an old man. He's doing 18 years to life, motherfucker.

And he's a rich white boy in a New York prison, so you know those are going to be some soul-crushing years.
 
I'm very anti DUI so I don't think it's long enough imo. With that said though, alcoholism is definitely a disease. Abuse isn't, but addiction by definition is.
This person chose to drink and chose to drive.

People don't choose to have cancer.

Addiction being a disease is a myth. Its all about displacement of responsibility. Everyone is responsible for their own decisions.
 
We start down that road, and we end up with Pakistan.
Not if we leave religious fervor out of the procedure.

I believe law enforcement should still arrest them first and they should be given their day in court. If the judge/jury find that the defendant is guilty and should be at the will of the closest living family. That family member should be able to choose whether they will execute the defendant themselves or defer to the justice system. I'm sure plenty would opt out of the vengeance killing and that's fine, I believe they should have the right to do so.
 
I think she should serve at least 25 years, 5 for each person she killed.
 
way too harsh.

Can anyone here actually say with a straight face that they haven't drank and drive in the past month?
If you're actually serious, I feel sorry for you.
 
I thought I'd run this by the war room crew, today in my province a woman who killed a family of five (two parents and 3 children all under the age of 5) while drunk driving plead guilty and was sentenced to ten years minus time served (1 year). Everyone around here is completely outraged by the fact that if to claim to have a "disease" or "illness" when it comes to drinking your automatically considered an ill person who just couldn't help what they were doing rather then a murderer. I believe this woman deserves no less then ten years per victim. Sorry for the rant but please share your opinions

Playing the Victim Card on a DUI is bullshit. I got a DUI about 10 years ago ( I was able to get it dropped to an impaired though) I still like to drink, but I just take a cab when I know I'm going to be drinking. It's possible to be an alcoholic and still be responsible. A person is not a victim if they drive their car to a bar when they're sober, get all pickled, and then drive home.

In short: If you know you're going to get fucked up don't bring your wheels with you.
 
There isn't a sentence that could possibly balance the books for that one. It was still an act of negligence and not an intentional killing. Putting her away for life or putting her to death isn't justice for the criminal, and letting her out after ten years isn't justice for the victims. No justice to be found. The way to attack drunk driving is the way we are already doing it, with little tolerance and tough penalties. It's working but this shit will always happen.
Great post
 
How is dui related murdee treated in prison by other inmates, I mean if you are a rapist you get a mark on your back. I mean if someone ask what are you doing in here and you say dui I murder do inmates respond that irresponsible shit don't fly here watch your back
 
This person chose to drink and chose to drive.

People don't choose to have cancer.

Addiction being a disease is a myth. Its all about displacement of responsibility. Everyone is responsible for their own decisions.

This is a pretty stupid opinion. Of course addiction is a disease. It literally messes with your brain chemistry. Being self inflicted does not mean it is not a real problem.

Addiction is not a good reason to drink and drive. I know full well im addicted to alcohol and dont drink and drive. I drink and stay my drunk ass home.
 
I found a picture of the woman.
8a7804906fd911e180d51231380fcd7e_7.jpg
 
This is a tough one. For those of you who think she should get life, do you seriously not see the distinction between this and a serial killer, or someone who purposely shoots 5 individual people? She didn't even intend to hurt anyone, and though there are 5 dead people, it was one accident where 5 people happened to be in the car.

Intent has to be considered, and her intention was not to hurt anyone, but she was negligent and her own reckless behavior got people killed. She should do some time, and clearly should never drive again, but I don't agree with the people saying more than 10 years. Most people have either driven a little drunk, driven while texting, or reached for something in the backseat, all of which is negligent driving and could potentially have the same result. I don't think it should be ____ x5, because she had no control over how many people were in the car, but I think a few years, a lengthy parole, and clearly mandatory rehab and loss of license forever. It's easy to confuse vengeance with justice, but if it's only driving offenses, this lady could get sober and permanently off the roads and would be no problem in society.
 
Imagine this guy serves his time w/ a guy who was just as drunk and hit a car in exactly the same circumstance, ie did exactly the same thing, except the car he hit only had one person in it. Should the other guy get out earlier?

I don't know how I feel about that.

Also imagine the other car had driven a Hummer and all persons got off with light injuries. Does not change what the drunk driver did, but huge change in the outcome.

IMO 10 years is a fitting sentence as it deters others. Much much more than she would get in most other jurisdictions, btw.
 
If you get behind the wheel drunk and kill kids it doesn't matter what kind of issue you have it should be life.
Even if you are the best most generous person to ever live on this planet and your charitable contributions have saved millions of children around the world from starving to death. If you kill a child while drink driving it should be life no parole.
 
If you get behind the wheel drunk and kill kids it doesn't matter what kind of issue you have it should be life.
Even if you are the best most generous person to ever live on this planet and your charitable contributions have saved millions of children around the world from starving to death. If you kill a child while drink driving it should be life no parole.

So you are saying what she did is 'more wrong' because there happened to be kids in the other car? And she should get a more lenient sentence if she killed adults instead?
 
Back
Top