- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 11,124
- Reaction score
- 218
Please tell me you're trolling, otherwise that is pathetic.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.way too harsh.
Can anyone here actually say with a straight face that they haven't drank and drive in the past month?
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.
Closest living relative should be allowed to avenge the situation, if they want to IMO.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.
This person chose to drink and chose to drive.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.
Closest living relative should be allowed to avenge the situation, if they want to IMO.
Not if we leave religious fervor out of the procedure.We start down that road, and we end up with Pakistan.
If you're actually serious, I feel sorry for you.way too harsh.
Can anyone here actually say with a straight face that they haven't drank and drive in the past month?
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
Great postThere 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.
It's a very common practice. I've never had a DUI, but lots of ppl I know have one or twoIf you're actually serious, I feel sorry for you.
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.
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.
Fuck no bitch should be doing Life.Is ten years fair?
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.