Why shouldn't we increase penalties for vehicular homicide?
1876 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F
Offline
Posted 4/17/13
Hey guys. I'm having a debate on Tuesday whether or not there should be increased penalties for vehicular manslaughter. For the debate, my side of the argument states that there SHOULD be increased penalties. However, for a follow-up, I have to also write a paper saying that there should NOT be increased penalties or that the penalties should be lessened. The only solid argument I have so far is that manslaughter is unintended. =/ I'm a public health student so I have to also focus on health and policy issues. The focus of this class is also about drugs so I have to include that somewhere in my paper as well.

Two components to consider from NJ's law on vehicular manslaughter:
1. For manslaughter, law officials look into the state of mentality the defendant was in during the time of the victim's death. (You could have been mentally unstable at the time because you might have been depressed)
2. Aggravated manslaughter is when the defendant shows extreme indifference to human life (such as being under the influence of drugs, drinking and driving, and texting and driving). They know it's unlawful to drive under these circumstances but they do it anyway.

I really need good critical thinkers to help me out because I'm f***ed :-( Thanks in advance,

Jane
Posted 4/17/13
Get any article on "tax and smoke" and manipulate the ideas and make them relevant to write on your paper
1876 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F
Offline
Posted 4/17/13
That's completely irrelevant. Why bother to answer when you don't have anything to say?
Posted 4/17/13
You'd be surprised ;).
1876 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F
Offline
Posted 4/17/13
Enlighten me.
67201 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Bonne Lake, WA
Offline
Posted 4/17/13
Hope this response gives you some ideas.


Jane:


I think age has a huge part to play in this. Young drivers between the ages of 16 and 20 should be treated differently than older, more experienced drivers. When you are a young driver, you still are trying to think about everything you are doing, and you are responding to everything around you. you are not yet familiar with the responsibility of the driver. You still feel like a passenger sometimes, gazing out the window at the scenery and such. The experience will come, but you will also make some bad decisions that will shape that experience. To punish a mistake with 10-25 years in prison just isn't right. If you want to be that strict, you should raise the legal driver license age to 25.

Why you should increase the penalties:

Driving is a serious activity, and should only be done by mature individuals. The dangers of driving become greater all the time, and even more so with the more safety features included in vehicles. People feel it is okay to take greater risks because there is less of a chance of they themselves getting hurt. If you increase the penalties, you increase the the negatives of doing something irresponsible while driving, whether it be texting or drinking, etc. The idea is to make these stupid decisions so costly that no one would be willing to risk it.


Why this doesn't work:

How many 16 or 18 year olds know what the penalties are for vehicular manslaughter? How many of those same teens will think about those consequences when they receive a text while driving?

Driving is an exercise in trained reactions. When you are in a moving vehicle, there is not a whole lot of time to think about what you are doing in traffic. You learn to react to the environment around you, to signal your environment of your intentions and how to follow through with those intentions. Driving becomes second nature to most people. Something similar happens with a phone. When the phone rings, you pick it up. In the case of texting while driving, I think that manslaughter is far too severe, as you are asking young adults to try to unlearn responding to a phone, something that they have been trained to respond to for 18 years of their life by example from their parents and with their own experience with owning their own cell phones. I think this is a bit unfair for those teens who make a split second decision based upon a reaction that all of their society has trained them to do.

When it comes to willfully driving while under the influence, I think that the penalties should be far more severe. Not much to be said here.






What is important is the manner of the accident. Who was at fault for the accident? In what manner was the person at fault? What did the other person do to avoid the incident? What caused the particular set of circumstances?

Once you answer these questions, you should then make a fitting punishment. I think texting while driving when it results in serious injury or death should cause the individual to have their license revoked for a period of 8-10 years. They should also be liable for any expenses of the victim. The important issue comes to be, how many lives are you destroying because of a text message? I think it is more important to make the person responsible for causing an accident while texting to understand exactly what damage they have done to the other person. Most relatives of the victims that I have heard from or known don't want to destroy the life of a young teen who did something stupid and had a bad run. Every teenager has done something incredibly stupid. Sometimes nothing bad comes of it. Sometimes they lose their lives. Sometimes, other people do. Very few families will feel vengeful enough to want to convict a child under the age of 20 of vehicular manslaughter.





The most pressing issue, to me, is that people only think about how their actions affect themselves. They don't think about the other people on the road. Before you can raise penalties further for whatever reason, you should put more effort into how you communicate the responsibility of driving to young drivers. When I learned how to handle a gun, I was told you either have the mussel pointed at the ground or in the air. As it was explained to me, you don't point a gun at anything you don't want to kill, ever. Regardless of whether it's loaded or not.

On that same note, when I learned how to drive, it was with my parents. If I did something stupid, like swerving into another lane while changing gears getting on the highway, I got my ass chewed so hard, I felt ashamed of myself. He explained to me, in no uncertain terms, that if there had been a car there, we'd all quite likely would have been dead, and it would have been my fault. My family would suffer through a great heartache, and someone else may lose their close friend, or husband or wife. A child may lose their mother. I was told this while he had the greatest level of disgust in his voice at my actions. Most drivers Ed classes, the teacher would never be aloud to give their students this type of heavy ass chewing. I think it is necessary. You can't just sugar coat what they are doing right, you need to break them down to the point of tears if they do something stupid.






Personal Anecdote: (kinda graphic, but is drawn from personal experience to kind of give you an idea of why I think what I do.)

1876 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F
Offline
Posted 4/21/13
Ah, I forgot to clarify that I'm writing my paper on a specific bill that deals with raising penalties for intoxicated drivers. I completely agree that newly licensed drivers and teens aren't educated enough. They don't take it seriously because they're such natural risk takers and are completely reckless and manifest extreme indifference to human life. Clearly, schools aren't doing a well enough job to prevent students from driving recklessly/intoxicated. No one drives in a motor vehicle thinking that they'll be killing someone even if they are under the influence.

Thanks so much for your input, it'll really help me with my debate on Tuesday. I owe you!
27254 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 4/21/13 , edited 4/21/13
FOR increased penalty:
-It's the same as any other willingly unlawful and dangerous behavior (choosing to drive under the influence)
-It would make people less likely to drive under the influence, making roads safer (people will be scared off by the possible consequences)
-It will probably reduce the incidence of repeat offenders
-Driving is a right and not a privilege, it should be taken very seriously at all times

AGAINST increased penalty:
-This may unfairly punish people doing something not as severe, like speeding, when natural conditions cause them to hit and kill a person
-Alcohol itself is perfectly legal, yet releases inhibitions and makes people do what they normally wouldn't do in certain cases (temporary madness?)
-Vehicular manslaughter can be done more on impulse and doesn't require as much planning (could just be in spur of the moment)
-A person on drugs should be charged for whatever unlawful drug they are abusing, not what the drug has done to their mind (sort of like a temporary madness, they weren't 'themselves' when they committed the crime)
-It would burden young first-time offenders so much that they take years to get back onto their feet, if they can at all
67201 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Bonne Lake, WA
Offline
Posted 4/22/13

janeshinnn wrote:

Ah, I forgot to clarify that I'm writing my paper on a specific bill that deals with raising penalties for intoxicated drivers. I completely agree that newly licensed drivers and teens aren't educated enough. They don't take it seriously because they're such natural risk takers and are completely reckless and manifest extreme indifference to human life. Clearly, schools aren't doing a well enough job to prevent students from driving recklessly/intoxicated. No one drives in a motor vehicle thinking that they'll be killing someone even if they are under the influence.

Thanks so much for your input, it'll really help me with my debate on Tuesday. I owe you!


No Problem. I've never had a debate before, but it always annoys me when a person in a debate doesn't know enough about a topic to actually think aobut it critically. I'm relatively good at critical thinking (I think), and persoanlly, I owe it to the fact that I I don't just commit myself to something, but there is a reason for why. I just can't believe in something without reason.

So, in that sense, I was looking what the issue this bill hoped to address was, how it tried to do it, and then, from my own experience and knowledge, apply what the affects really will be, and then also suggest my own solution that may work slightly more effectively, based upon my own experiences. I also tend to not believe in right or wrong, per say. Every action has consequences, good and bad. You just have to learn to effectively examine those consequences, and weigh them against the eachother. From my point of view, the main issue at stake in a debate is not the consequences themselves, but the weight of each consequence. It's fairly easy to determine what will happen, but it's the meaning of those happenings that really make the difference in how good an idea is.
Posted 5/7/13
ITT: Hey guys, do my homework for me!
1876 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F
Offline
Posted 5/8/13 , edited 5/8/13

Iainfixie wrote:

ITT: Hey guys, do my homework for me!


Lol. I was asking for input. Why's it a problem for you if others are willing to help? I also wouldn't use other people's personal experience in my debate or paper. If you want proof I'll send you my paper. Oh, and I'm glad I can entertain you. It's always a pleasure to be able to spark interest.
Posted 5/8/13


ur cheating on me? and all this time my summer plan was gunna be Px90 and .. you. WOw ..

1876 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F
Offline
Posted 5/8/13 , edited 5/8/13

Iainfixie wrote:


janeshinnn wrote:

Plus the only reason why I PMed you was to make sure I got my message across in case you didn't see what I wrote above :-) I ain't a puzzy


Pussy, no.

Shameless attention whoreish "Look at me I'm an asian girl on the internet, worship me nerds" kinda girl, yeah.


That's all you have to say? Mhm I'm an attention whore. That's exactly why I've only had 15 friends on my buddy list over the course of 6 years on Crunchyroll. and why would I need nerds to worship me when I'm the one asking insightful people for help? and I guess I am pretty shameless for my forum post, but none of your opinion matters to me because I know I'll be getting somewhere greater with my education than your lame DJing cause that'll get you SO far in society. Idk dude I can also add that you're pretty hypocritical cause you make yourself the epitome of shameless on your profile. ya racist southerner. If seeing Asian girls on the internet ticks you off, why are you on Crunchyroll? Definitely not the site I would use to avoid Asian chicks. :-D and thanks for the compliment; I know I'm not a pussy.
Sailor Candy Moderator
200577 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28
Offline
Posted 5/8/13 , edited 5/8/13
Please next time use the general help thread when help with homework lol!
http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-1099/the-general-helpadvice-thread


When making a topic refrain from making personal threads or "I need help" threads. Personal and help threads will automatically get locked. Whether you receive your answer or not.

Also, this thread has been derailed several time as well please try and stay on topic next time!


As personal threads are not allowed and this thread is locked. Also, please see the site rules so that none of your future threads will suffer the same fate here: http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-406095/crunchyroll-site-forum-rules
You must be logged in to post.