I've debated with a few tough-on-crime people on this site who insist that people who kill others should be executed. I few "softer" people say they should be imprisoned for life. I wonder if they think that Laura Bush should have been executed or imprisoned for life. If you're tough on crime, but you don't think that Laura Bush should have been imprisoned or executed, I'm interested in knowing why you make this exception.
For what? Do you mean the traffic ACCIDENT she had when she was young? No crime committed, just a horrible accident. Life in prison (I'm against the death penalty for the most part) is for deliberate acts of murder.
If she had raped and murdered someone, I would. If she was in a traffic accident, no. I may would have supported some juvie time depending on the circumstances.
She killed somebody. You really think she should just have done "some juvie"? Should anyone who kills somebody get to just do a bit of time?
She had just turned 17 and ran a stop sign at night while traveling at less than the posted speed (why there was a stop sign controlling a 55 mph road is beyond me). The person she hit died because he wasn't wearing a seat belt and was thrown from the vehicle, breaking his neck when he landed. Very tragic but hardly rising to the level of premeditated murder.
I never said it was premeditated murder. I said that she killed somebody, which is a fact. My question is how to deal with people who kill other people, and if there are going to be exceptions. Should young, black guys who accidentally kill others get just a slap on the wrist?
A crime implies intent. Carelessness is not a crime, nor is temporary inattention. There is liability, but no crime. Now, if you hit somebody on purpose (or while drunk (both examples of intentional acts)), there is a crime.
Depends on the reason for the accident. If they accidentally shoot someone that they are robbing, no. If they accidentally kill somebody in a car accident, yes. I notice liberals seem to think all killing (except for fetuses in the womb) is equivalent. It's not.
No. To be a capital crime in all the states, it has to be first degree murder, which requires premeditaion.
This thread isn't really about negligence, manslaughter or murder as much as punishment. I keep hearing "lock them up and throw away the key," and "A bullet is the cheapest way to deal with them." Let's not pretend that these tough-on-crime people don't exist, and that they don't have absolutist ideas about dealing with people who kill. If you are claiming that Laura Bush should have been punished for accidentally killing somebody in a car accident, then what should her punishment have been? Many people would suggest that it be execution or a true life sentence.
This isn't a crime. The appropriate punishment is losing her driver's license. I'm not speaking for anybody else, as I'm a conservative against the death penalty for the most part (the exception would be that if there were a real person almost incapable of being housed in prison like the fictional Hannibal Lector, I would advocate for the death penalty for him, as it would be too dangerous to imprison him for the rest of his life.)
She should have faced serious charges, but death penalty or life in prison just wouldn't be reasonable for a 17 year old who ran a stop sign, even though it resulted in someone's death. I think we've all ran stop signs at some point, and as kids, it's even more likely. Killing someone due to your reckless behavior isn't a crime? See below. Wrong. Criminally negligent homicide. Vehicular manslaughter. Take your pick and Google it. No, but do you think someone who caused death as the result of a failure to comply with driving laws should face NO punishment at all?
Is it true the police report disappeared shortly after it happened and was revealed in 2000? Her father had a lot of money and influenced the local politics. I can see that happening. But she's already in prison. Look who she's married to.....a drunk who beat her. She threatened to leave him unless he cleaned up his act. She has a shrew of a mother in law and the rest of her in laws are a pack of criminals. Even tho she killed someone because of her negligence I'll forgive her because of the suffering she's already endured. It's no wonder why she looks so tired all the time.
The person she ran over just happened to be an old boyfriend. Crazy coincidence, I think not. But I wasn't there to monitor the cops.
I disagree. You're being to polite. It's not ignorant - it's downright stupid...... Laura Bush is in her 70's now? And this guy wants to go waaay back to when she was a 17 yr old teenager and had that car wreck which she admitted she was at fault..... Anyone, and it doesn't matter what politics they're in, and has an experience has to live w/it for the rest of their lives and that's harsh punishment right there..... If that had been 17 yr old Hillary instead of Laura, would this thread had been posted? Not hardly...... Get a life, Pardy.........
Intent not required for crime (see public welfare offenses). However, obviously she was not criminally responsible in this incident.
Let me intervene . What I believe he meant was that if he hit you with his car and killed you no crime would be committed. Even if you were walking on the sidewalk and I saw him deliberately run you down and I was on the jury I would say he did nothing wrong . >>>>MOD EDIT: METAPOST<<<<
