Subject:
|
Re: Driver humiliated by Texas judge
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:28:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
997 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks wrote:
> 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. I think the two
> appropriate responses from society to criminal behavior are
> restitution-enablement and treatment for mental illness.
>
> 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.
>
> Finally, doesn't this seem like an uncharacteristically light sentence of
> manslaughter? In Texas!
That's because the person who received this odd punishment didn't kill anyone.
Speeding and reckless driving, yes, but it was somebody else in another car that
was guilty of manslaughter.
-->Bruce<--
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
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
|
|
|
|
