what happens in the states if scum kill people in road accidents?

legs11

i think we should bring that sentence here, 1st/2nd degree murder all the way;)

ninty9er

legs11 wrote:

i think we should bring that sentence here, 1st/2nd degree murder all the way;)

Your phrasing of the question nullifies your answer....accidents are just that....and in most cases it's punishment enough for a person to know that somebody died as a result of their actions....I'm assuming you're coming from the other thread where you made yourself quite clear, but ask yourself, if you had an accident where you were at fault, should you be done for murder...

It's not clear cut and couldn't be applied uniformly so I suggest you get off the bandwagon and cop on

maidhc

legs11 wrote:

i think we should bring that sentence here, 1st/2nd degree murder all the way;)

You cannot accidentally murder someone.

We have a manslaughter charge in Ireland.

We don't really need anymore laws. The ones we have are fine.

dloob

They have an offence of vehicular manslaughter over in the US as well it would be pretty rare to use Murder 1 in such a case.

SoBe

dloob wrote:

They have an offence of vehicular manslaughter over in the US as well it would be pretty rare to use Murder 1 in such a case.

there was a recent accident in the states where the driver looks likely to be up on a 2nd degree murder charge

http://rte.ie/news/2007/0217/cork.html

legs11

i know i might be rambling on here, and i had contradicted my sentence but im sure you got the message.
i mean, what happend last weekend was totally unacceptable and that sorta stuff really has to be kicked into touch.

now, if someone killed a person in a road accident under totally different circumstances then thats a different story.
but the reckless nature of this one really does reek.
the government and the insurance agencies need to buck up., im my day when i was a young lad i was driving a 1.2 litre colt. (which was shyte, but its all i could get and it id the job, albeit terribily). youths of today are spoilt and a hinderance to society.

KdjaCL

ninty9er wrote:

Y.accidents are just that


It's not clear cut and couldn't be applied uniformly so I suggest you get off the bandwagon and cop on

No such thing as an "accident" a convienent word made up to describe "something i didnt mean to happen".

There is always a reason for an "accident" and its always human error/negligence. Its always clear cut there is always a reason. Its foolishness that believes otherwise.


kdjac

ninty9er

KdjaCL wrote:

No such thing as an "accident" a convienent word made up to describe "something i didnt mean to happen".

There is always a reason for an "accident" and its always human error/negligence. Its always clear cut there is always a reason. Its foolishness that believes otherwise.


kdjac

human error is classified as accidental, negligence is classified as reckless

Esel

KdjaCL wrote:

No such thing as an "accident" a convienent word made up to describe "something i didnt mean to happen".

There is always a reason for an "accident" and its always human error/negligence. Its always clear cut there is always a reason. Its foolishness that believes otherwise.


kdjac

Interesting theory. Maybe if you expand it to cover:

the careless driver who overfilled his car/truck with diesel and forgot to put the filler cap back on, then proceeded to spill diesel on a wet roundabout, causing you to lose control

the bad mechanic who gave you your car back with a leak in the brake system, etc.

the 'foolish' child who ran in front of your car, leaving you no time to react

the negligent road workers who left an unsafe surface etc.


- then maybe you might have a point. The driver is not always at fault. To believe otherwise is narrow-minded.

OP: define 'scum'?

Gregor Samsa

KdjaCL wrote:

No such thing as an "accident" a convienent word made up to describe "something i didnt mean to happen".

Um, every word is "made up" to describe something. So what's wrong with having a word to describe unintentional detrimental events?

Anan1

legs11 wrote:

i know i might be rambling on here, and i had contradicted my sentence but im sure you got the message.
i mean, what happend last weekend was totally unacceptable and that sorta stuff really has to be kicked into touch.

now, if someone killed a person in a road accident under totally different circumstances then thats a different story.
but the reckless nature of this one really does reek. .

Do you know the exact circumstances of what happened last weekend, or are you just guessing?

legs11 wrote:

the government and the insurance agencies need to buck up., im my day when i was a young lad i was driving a 1.2 litre colt. (which was shyte, but its all i could get and it id the job, albeit terribily). youths of today are spoilt and a hinderance to society.

You may have had to walk 12 miles to primary school in your bare feet. What is the relevance of your above remark?

Robbo

Perhaps over to legal issues with this? To me it seems to have very little to do with motoring and more to do with taking broadsides at criminal justice in this country.

cyrusdvirus

dunno Robbo. It seems most of us are genuinely horrified that people behave in sucha way on our roads that leaves 2 emergency services members dead.

Anan1

gatecrash wrote:

dunno Robbo. It seems most of us are genuinely horrified that people behave in sucha way on our roads that leaves 2 emergency services members dead.

Most of us don't know the exact circumstances of the accident. Horror at the deaths of two people is no excuse for condemning someone without a full examination of the facts. This is why we have a judicial system, rather than relying on lynch mobs.

slipss

Yeah what everyone else said legs 11, a murder charge is based on premeditation, it can't be apllied to an accident.

cyrusdvirus

Anan1 wrote:

Most of us don't know the exact circumstances of the accident. Horror at the deaths of two people is no excuse for condemning someone without a full examination of the facts. This is why we have a judicial system, rather than relying on lynch mobs.

I've been very careful to keep my opinions seperate to my knowledge of the facts.
And i haven't condemned anyone.

FACT> 2 Emergency workers are dead because of the behaviour of a driver.
FACT> Most of us are horrified at the fact that this individual was driving in such a way that resulted in the deaths of Garda Kelleher and Firefighter Liston.

OPINION> Vehicular Manslaughter sounds like a good law to me

Gregor Samsa

gatecrash wrote:

FACT> 2 Emergency workers are dead because of the behaviour of a driver.

Apportion of blame is the responsibility of the courts. Until they do so, this is an opinion.

legs11

scum in this case is a reference to the guy who got a text message in the early hours of the morning and decided after being drinking all night to take two mates to limerick for a party at 5am.....i mean WTF.
he actually lives 10mins away from me but i dont know him:rolleyes:

i believe the two men who were reovering the wreck could hear properly so they would surely have heard the oncoming car, but couldnt get out of the way in time due to its speed.
from my knowledge this is what happened.

i was driving along the same stretch of road many years ago and came acoss such a scene, there was a squad car at the scene with blue lights and what not, tending to a upturned car, i saw the blue lights ahead of me and slowed down. not a very difficult thing to do.

its interesting to see what becomes of this dude, i bet due to our inept government, squat.

maidhc

gatecrash wrote:

OPINION> Vehicular Manslaughter sounds like a good law to me

Look.

We have MANSLAUGHTER and we have DEATH BY DANGEROUS DRIVING.

Both can apply where a person kills another using a vehicle without premeditation. If the driver has a malicious intention to inflict death or serious bodily harm, then a charge of murder can be brought.

It is up to DPP to decide on the charge, and for the courts to decide if the accused is guilty or otherwise.

"Vehicular Manslaughter" would add nothing other than more paper to the statute book.

Trampas

legs11 wrote:

the government and the insurance agencies need to buck up., im my day when i was a young lad i was driving a 1.2 litre colt. (which was shyte, but its all i could get and it id the job, albeit terribily). youths of today are spoilt and a hinderance to society.

What do you want insurance agencies to do??

Maybe if someone causes a car crash and its totally someones fault. They lose their licence.

Traumadoc

I was at the scene of an accident on the first of january this year (7.20 am), i along with an ambulance officer were nearly hit by an elderly driver who skidded and narrowily missed us both. He then proceeded to shout abuse at us!!

Should I call the old people of this country "spoilt" "a hinderence to society" or that old driver "scum" if he had crashed into us??

ninty9er

Traumadoc wrote:

Should I call the old people of this country "spoilt" "a hinderence to society" or that old driver "scum" if he had crashed into us??

Of course not because they've earned the right to drive ****e and get away with it...isn't that right legs:p

legs11 wrote:

im my day when i was a young lad i was driving a 1.2 litre colt. (which was shyte, but its all i could get and it id the job, albeit terribily). youths of today are spoilt and a hinderance to society.

I would assume you weren't a young lad in anyone else's day!!!

In my dad's day his 1st car in 1978 was a 1977 Ford Escort, considering what they were made of (**** all and no heavey roll bar technology or anything, the 1.3 engine of the day would have propelled it about the same as a 1.8 propells a Focus today....was he a menace to society....possibly, but he paid £1400 for the car, £50 for a years insurance, £5 motor tax and less than 50p a litre for petrol so get off the high horse about today's spoilt youth.

I'm a 20 year old student working 2 jobs to keep a 1.0 Corsa taxed insured and fueled as well as have a life......and yes i'm a named driver, but insurance is still my expense and being due next month the cheapest quote I can get is €1300 with a 2yr full licence and 1 years named driving experience.....

GET FU<KING REAL

What happened last weekend was a tragedy, NOBODY ON HERE KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED.....do you KNOW that the car was insured in his dad's name..NO, do you KNOW he was drinking..NO.

The deaths are a tragedy and from them we can infer that he WAS driving dangerously, but anything more than that is speculation

legs11

I'm a 20 year old student working 2 jobs to keep a 1.0 Corsa taxed insured and fueled as well as have a life

thats exactly my point, this guy was driving a 2 litre sports car, and was 18.

what can insurance companys do?

well it doesnt take a rocket scientist to see that not letting young drivers drive powerful cars might actually recuce the carnage on our roads.

''do you KNOW that the car was insured in his dad's name..NO, do you KNOW he was drinking..NO''

what has driving insurance in his dads name got to do? so your saying its alright for people to go driving their dads cars.......like his dad got a porsche or a M5 and its grand to let their 18yr old son drive it?

if he wasnt drinking he must have been as high as a kite not to have slowed down, or else blind.

unkel

Closing this for the same reason I closed the other thread. Let the authorities get on with their jobs...

@legs11 and others - do not start another thread about this until those jobs are finished