Killers on Dope.....

[Loosehead]

So Anthony Walker's killers had just been smoking dope. Now I've always been told by the dope enthusiasts that it is preferrable to booze because the latter induces violence. Now hitting someone with an Ice axe is a sort of violence isn't it? mmm any comments from the dope supporters?

Source: Sky news.

[Drisgirl]

stevie21 - In one respect a life lost is a life grieved for.

However it must be taken into consideration how that life was lost.

Was it a momentarily lapse (we all have them) or premedited.Was it racially motivated or was it because the person didnt support the same football team as you.

There is a vast chasm which needs to be closed and that can only mean- if you deliberately verbally abuse a man because you dont like the shade of his skin and then chase him grapple with him then implant an ice-axe into his skull and then leave the country - then yes IMO there is a difference between that and careless driving.

[Drisgirl]

Sorry meant stevie c2it x

[stevie_c2it]

Drisgirl - I agree entirely with your rationale about the severity of particular types of killing deserving a higher (or lower) tariff, but I also am concerned that the courts are giving misleading and mixed messages regarding the acceptability of taking a life through different types of (criminal) activity. For example in a recent case a motorist killed a 16 year old girl after mounting the pavement, he was only fined, not sent to prison. The circumstances, I agree, are in no way �like for like�, however, the issue here is purely of demonstrating a balance in terms of justice. Both acts should be abhorred by society (for very different reasons), but both should also be given sentences that reflect the serious nature, and consequences in causing the death of another person. To act as both an example and deterrent to others, and to give the families (and the rest of society) the feeling that justice was seen to be done.
As it has been in this very sad case (or at least, will be when they catch the others involved).

P.S. Have we met before?

[Drisgirl]

Stevie _ I also agree with most of what you say but the point I attempted to make - and I am ashamed to admit it- I have for example taken my eye of the road and have just caught myself in time.Had I perhaps hit a little kid (God forbid) do you think I would deserve to be jailed as opposed to a drug and alcohol fuelled racist barsteward who purposely targeted this young man and also had a weapon thereby making the crime premeditated?

I maintain my initial comments re dope smoking.Not all - some of my best friends etc etc... but I have seen the adverse reaction to dope smoking.(Had a couple of whities myself) so dont do it.Its not as mellow as people make out.

P.S I believe so - good eh?x

[stevie_c2it]

Don�t get mad! But the answer I would give is yes to both questions. The point being that any sentence for breaking the law should reflect the crime and be a logical deterrent, As the Judge in this case said at the trial "In spite of your youth, deterrent sentences are vital."
Therefore I think a custodial sentence for a manslaughter driving offence is not unreasonable, (but don�t worry I wouldn�t lock you up for too long), as you�ve already said, these racist murderers deserve a long time to reflect on there crime (plus it gets them off the street so the rest of us can feel safe-r). Likewise a dangerous motorist who kills someone should be taken off the road and put out of harms way, but I take your point that �there by the grace of God goes us all�.
There still needs to be a reckoning though, and a fine would be an insult if it were a member of my family, how about you?

[stevie_c2it]

Sorry, I guess I'm off topic a bit!

[Drisgirl]

Well I am going to go totally off topic but let me put this scenario to you.

What if a pedestrian carelessly wanders onto the road forcing a motorist to instictively swerve and thereby killing themselves rather than the pedestrian would the pedestrian get jailed for 'jay walking'?

IMO same as a car driver daydreaming - a life potentially lost.Forget the old chestnut -a car is a lethal weapon-so is a human.

[kick3m0n]

a lot of good points made on this thread I think. I'd just like to add my twopenneth worth.

Yes, a human body is a lethal weapon, as is a car. The disctinction I'd make is that one is more obviously dangerous, and so a greater level of care is requried. Liken it to how you would run if you were carrying a blunt stick, as opposed to how you would run when carrying a very sharp knife. Clearly, you would be much more careful with the knife, as the potential for injury is greater. I'd say the same is expected when you are driving a car, as infact, you need to prove competence before doing it, such are the dangers involved. You're right about the j-walking tho, fair comment.

Re sentences for death by driving. If you want to kill someone, don't bother with a knife or a gun, just get in your car, and drive at them, while talking on your mobile phone. You'll maybe get a custodial sentence, but it'll be peanuts compared to if you'd stabbed them. At the moment, there are grades of charges that can be brought against a driver in these cases, depending on the level of neglect they have shown behind the wheel. However, my real issue with driving convictions is when it regards drunk drivers. If you get behind the wheel of a car after drinking too much, then hurt of kill someone, in my eyes you are far more culpable then someone who has been distracted and caused an accident. The moment you start your engine while over the limit you are risking others lives and I find this unacceptable. I think the penalites for drink driving, particularly where death or injury to a 3rd party in involved, should be far, far higher. I'd like to see manslaughter charges (or equivalent) brought against the driver who kills someone whilst over the limit, so that the jail term imposed on the guilty could be significantly longer.