Subject:
|
Re: Driver humiliated by Texas judge
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:11:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
959 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks wrote:
> Neat, welcome ot .o-t.d, Tim :-)
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
>
> > My thoughts? If this becomes common practice and it will effectively decrease
> > the incidents of reckless driving (a growing problem, from my observations), I'm
> > all for it.
>
> That's a pretty big "if." There are three parts of this issues that seem
> noteworthy to me.
>
> First, modern disciplinary thought (well, not all of it, but the good stuff)
> suggests that punishment supplants the innate needs of the guilty to correct the
> results of their antisocial behavior. Given that I believe this to be true, I
> suspect a punishment like this will only harm the situation.
What restitution would you suggest for causing an accident that killed someone?
Maybe I'm not being creative enough, but the person's already dead. Wouldn't the
goal be making sure this person _never_ does the same thing again, and that as
many people as possible learn from their mistake?
> I think the two
> appropriate responses from society to criminal behavior are
> restitution-enablement and treatment for mental illness.
Do all criminals *want* to make restitution? I'd say there's a fair amount who
don't give a rat's behind about their victim, or even the fact that they're
doing jail time for their crime (given the number of repeat offenders).
> Second, I agree with Bruce's implication that as an "unusual" punishment it
> fails the test of constitutionality. There's no way I'd stand for that if I
> were his lawyer.
Legally, sure, it might be thrown out. I'm not sure though if it would be right
to throw it out, though, if it corrects the problem with no physical harm to the
perpetrator and at the same time discourages others in society from doing the
same. All it harms is the person's reputation and image, which it could be
argued that if the person was that reckless with their driving that they caused
someone else's death, isn't that a fair punishment? Maybe it isn't?
Now, I'm just throwing this out there. I'm not convinced of this, and there may
very well be lines of thought that would indicate my above comments dangerous.
I'm just wondering...
> Finally, doesn't this seem like an uncharacteristically light sentence of
> manslaughter? In Texas!
Ha! :-)
-Tim
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Driver humiliated by Texas judge
|
| (...) Sure. Because society somehow forgot to teach them compassion, respect, self-worth, etc. Should we wash our hands of them, dooming us to repeat offense, even if we keep them in prison? Or do we decide to look for ways to help them break the (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Driver humiliated by Texas judge
|
| (...) As you note, the death can't be taken back. But that person could, and this is merely an example, tour highschools giving talks to classes about what happened and why. He could fundraise for traffic safety organizations. (...) That's a (...) (20 years ago, 24-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Driver humiliated by Texas judge
|
| Neat, welcome ot .o-t.d, Tim :-) (...) That's a pretty big "if." There are three parts of this issues that seem noteworthy to me. First, modern disciplinary thought (well, not all of it, but the good stuff) suggests that punishment supplants the (...) (20 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
29 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
