Dad shoots/kills drunk driver

[WESGATORS]

Originally Posted by wgbgator

What "law" were they taking into their own hands?

The law that should govern the people of the colonies.

Is your objection just with how I use the term "vigilante?"

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[wgbgator]

Originally Posted by WESGATORS

The law that should govern the people of the colonies.

Is your objection just with how I use the term "vigilante?"

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

Yeah, I think that was clear. I mean, they have words like "rebellion," "insurrection," "treason" and "revolution" to describe whatever the Revolution was. Even Dreamliner's "secession" claim seems more apt than "vigilante."

[Lawdog88]

Guy arguably committed a premeditated homicide (he had time to reflect with each step to and from the residence; retrieving the firearm; and in firing it; reflection sufficient to establish premeditation can be found between trigger pulls.).

Guy arguably committed a "heat of passion" manslaughter, due to the obvious circumstances.

Guy could be charged with either and convicted of either, or pardoned by the jury.

Usually the State charges with an eye to the maximum possible conviction they can get, that the facts will support.

[gator10010]

Originally Posted by WESGATORS

I'm obviously not challenging the legality of the situation with you guys. I'm strictly referring to the moral assessment here.



I'm not a fan of broad-stroking crimes/penalties; I'd prefer a little more scrutiny and consideration to deviations from one case to another. So "heat of passion homicide" (to me) should not be considered a one-size-fits-all level of punishment...nor should it be considered a one-size-fits-all level of decriminalization. In this particular case, I'm in favor of less legal consideration on behalf of the drunk driver who killed two children, and I'm in favor of more leniency on behalf of the individual who had his children murdered.

Either way, I find the discussion interesting. My main point here is seeing if there is anything that I'm overlooking that may be more damaging to society than what I may be giving it credit for. I think a lot of the concerns are slippery sloped in nature. But I appreciate the opposing viewpoints, hopefully mine are not too offensive.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

I understand where you are coming from with "broad-stroking crimes/penalties" it is not always fair.

But where does "heat of passion homicide" line stop? Does it stop at strictly children? Can a man commit "heat of passion homicide" upon learning his wife is leaving him for another man? Can a man commit "heat of passion homicide" when he sees his dog run over by a car? Can a girl commit "heat of passion homicide" when her boyfriend sleeps with her best friend?

Also, time wise, how much of a window is allowed for this "heat of passion homicide"? Hours? Days? Months? Years?

At some point a precedent would be set legally and morally. Morally it is wrong to kill another human being.

[gator10010]

Originally Posted by Lawdog88

Guy arguably committed a premeditated homicide (he had time to reflect with each step to and from the residence; retrieving the firearm; and in firing it; reflection sufficient to establish premeditation can be found between trigger pulls.).

Guy arguably committed a "heat of passion" manslaughter, due to the obvious circumstances.

Guy could be charged with either and convicted of either, or pardoned by the jury.

Usually the State charges with an eye to the maximum possible conviction they can get, that the facts will support.

By your definitions it sounds like the guy committed premeditated homicide and the State will pursue the sure thing in "heat of passion" manslaughter.

[Lawdog88]

Originally Posted by gator10010

By your definitions it sounds like the guy committed premeditated homicide and the State will pursue the sure thing in "heat of passion" manslaughter.

Dunno. I think they might go premeditated, but it depends on what the Grand Jury will indict him on (assuming they use a Grand Jury for possible 1st degree cases), and / or whether the State will think the intangible sympathies are too much to overcome, and simply charge him with manslaughter.

[WESGATORS]

Originally Posted by wgbgator

Yeah, I think that was clear. I mean, they have words like "rebellion," "insurrection," "treason" and "revolution" to describe whatever the Revolution was. Even Dreamliner's "secession" claim seems more apt than "vigilante."

I'm not sure what your objection is in light of the definition I provided and the context to which I believe it may be considered applicable. Ok, so we agree to disagree on the scope to which the term vigilante may be applied, no big deal. I'm not looking to get into a semantics dispute. Those other terms are applied in addition to, not instead of, from my perspective.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[brainstorm]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...DUI-crash.html

Three years. THREE years. That is it.

[pecks]

While I was living in La during the 1990's, some guy from Baton Rouge killed a guy the police were escorting through the airport. Live on TV. Reminded me of the killing of Lee Harvey Oswell. Seems the guy had been flown in from Calif where he had been apprehended for kidnapping the mans son. He had sexually abused the kid and the father waited in the airport, walked up to the man and put a bullet in his head. They tried the man in court and he was found not-guilty and turned loose. Created quite a discussion around those parts back in the day.

[Tasselhoff]

[quote=brainstorm;6411512]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...DUI-crash.html

Three years. THREE years. That is it.

The travesty is that we as peoe have started rationalize tbis. How often do you hear...."well he had alittle to much to drink and drove off the road, couldn't find the car' lost his temper...etc....
Wehave allowed alcohol to become an excuse that covers amultitude of sins (or crimes). It lessens the severity of what was done instead of dramatically increasing it. Until it is punished in such a way that drinki g and driving is so bad so hienous that no one would dream of doing it...things like this will continue.

And before anyone says it...I ha e no problem with enjpying alcohol. Just do not drive after doing so.

[The_Ultimate_Gator]

Originally Posted by Lawdog88

Guy arguably committed a premeditated homicide (he had time to reflect with each step to and from the residence; retrieving the firearm; and in firing it; reflection sufficient to establish premeditation can be found between trigger pulls.).

Guy arguably committed a "heat of passion" manslaughter, due to the obvious circumstances.

Guy could be charged with either and convicted of either, or pardoned by the jury.

Usually the State charges with an eye to the maximum possible conviction they can get, that the facts will support.

I'd nullify if I were on the jury.

[m9000]

We need to outlaw drunk driving- for the children. Even if it saves only 1 life.

[PIMking]

Originally Posted by Gatorrick22

I'd sentence him to the minimum for second degree murder... Or even manslaughter.

while the guy who killed his kids would of got the same thing...

[whitelakegator]

Seems a little eye for an eye to me. Dude probably deserved the bullet but you can't have citizens meting out their own punishments or vigilantism.

And yes my avatar is very fitting for this topic.

[Spurffelbow833]

[quote=Tasselhoff;6411716]

Originally Posted by brainstorm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...DUI-crash.html

Three years. THREE years. That is it.

The travesty is that we as peoe have started rationalize tbis. How often do you hear...."well he had alittle to much to drink and drove off the road, couldn't find the car' lost his temper...etc....
Wehave allowed alcohol to become an excuse that covers amultitude of sins (or crimes). It lessens the severity of what was done instead of dramatically increasing it. Until it is punished in such a way that drinki g and driving is so bad so hienous that no one would dream of doing it...things like this will continue.

And before anyone says it...I ha e no problem with enjpying alcohol. Just do not drive after doing so.

You're right, of course, but the bars don't rent rooms to sleep it off. The whole thing's a joke. People go out and get lit and drive home because only social drinking is considered acceptable. Yes, in order to do the proper kind of drinking, you have to be sure you have to drive after doing it.

[KelticGator]

The state should probably try giving him some kind of plea for probation because if I ended up on a jury the guy is probably going to walk. And I suspect its going to be impossible for the jury to end up with NO parents on it. Once they start presenting the circumstances of that night . . . he's going free.

[FearNoSpear]

Watching my child die would render me temporarily insane with vengeance instantly on my mind. If I was on this guys jury no way in hell would I find him guilty