Slartibartfast

should drunk driving be illegal and should penalties be increased if you were in an accident while drunk?

Basically having an accident is illegal already as is reckless driving, why should penalties be increased if you do so while drunk?

Should punishments have a deterrent value or just punish the action

liquid

Because drinking is wilful impairment of the ability to drive before the accident occurs.

It's a similar case to accidental manslaughter and wilful premeditated murder.

Slartibartfast

In murder there is an intent to kill. In manslaughter there is no intent to kill.

In drunk driving there is no intent to kill, same as there is no intent to kill in normal driving.

Sakpo

This really seems like trolling to me, but I'll answer in case it is a serious inquiry.

It is now a well known fact that drinking seriously impairs the ability to safely operate a motor vehicle, exponentially increasing the chances of killing or seriously injuring somebody else. While there may be no intent to actively go out and kill somebody driving while intoxicated does show a reckless disregard for the lives of other people out on the roads. The law is based on whether the person should have reasonably known they were risking other peoples lives, not whether they were actually trying to kill somebody.

Imagine if I went into a china shop with a blind fold and started running around, with no intent to actually damage any merchandise. Does my lack of intent to break things excuse me when I do? Of course not, I ought to have known damn well I was running a serious risk of damaging the merchandise, much higher then if I wasn't wearing a blindfold. It's essentially the same with drunk driving, except innocent lives are at risk.

[ March 10, 2002: Message edited by: Sakpo ]</p>

LeftCoast

In drunk driving there may not be an intent to kill, but there is a willful and premeditated lack of awareness of the danger that impaired driving poses to the other people on the road. If you were to walk into an office building and start shooting a gun in random directions, do you think that the authorities would just look the other way if by some chance you did not actually kill or wound anyone? No, you'd still be locked up for a very long time. It's called "reckless endangerment".

By the same token if you were exercising due precautions when shooting a gun and somehow someone was killed or wounded, the charges (if any) would not be nearly so serious. Similarly, if you are driving at night, obeying all of the traffic laws and someone steps out in front of your car and is killed, in all likelihood, you will not be charged with any crime or even cited for a traffic violation.

Oregon Slim

There is some need for balance here. Society would not stand to punish those who drive drunk but are lucky enough to cause no damage as killers, even though they become potential killers when they start to drive while impaired. Neither should we let them go free nor punish those who are unlucky enough to kill as cold-blooded killers. But if a drunk is unlucky enough to cause a tragedy, they should share a big load of the misfortune.

My opinion is that harsher penalties for simple drunken driving would be a good idea. They seem to work in other countries. Is it Sweden where the first offense is 30 days in jail, no exceptions, and you are guilty as soon as you get behind the wheel, even if you are too drunk to start the car (0.005 = drunk)? I would set the penalty at 48 hours in jail for the first offense, tripling with each subsequent offense, with convictions staying on your record forever. A law like that would probably do quite a bit to improve conditions in our jails.

tronvillain

Slartibartfast:
A deterrent value - simply punishing the action may be emotionally satisfying, but we're built to find it emotionally satisfying in order to create the deterent value.

Slartibartfast

Fine, punish the actual crime then, i.e. the reckless driving. If a person is drunk and does not commit a crime I see no reason to restrict them. Punish the crime.

When did I say being drunk excuses reckless driving and accidents? You're twisting my words. Straw man. Move along, folks.

Walking into an office and shotting a gun in random directions is already illegal. BUT, take another question. Should a drunk person who shoots someone else be punished MORE than a sober person?

tronvillain

Slartibartfast
Well, perhaps they should be punished for shooting someone and for operating a firearm while impaired.

Slartibartfast

tron, the question is, why? The crime exists regardless of the state of being of the criminal. If I go without sleep for 2 days and then drive and have an accident, should I have harsher punishment?