Forgive and forget?

[Ch3tan]

If one drink, drive and hit someone then this person is guilty of whatever. If a person is good enough not to jeopardize people, then he is not guilty. It surprises me how blind quick to judge you self righteous people are sometimes. It also depends if the person driving doesn't care if how he / she drives when under the influence of alcohol. It's all about a persons intentions.

No it isn't. Do you think people drink and drive with the intention of causing injury or death? No, their judgement, reaction times and confidence is all affected by the booze. They are putting others at risk by their actions, no one is being blindly righteous, you however are being very very ignorant.

 

[fettoken]

No it isn't. Do you think people drink and drive with the intention of causing injury or death? No, their judgement, reaction times and confidence is all affected by the booze. They are putting others at risk by their actions, no one is being blindly righteous, you however are being very very ignorant.

Ignorant, or open for the truth and not staring me blind on what is in front of me.

If we put it like this, i decide i want to kill someone, drink some booze and get in the car. When i am about to drive over the person i intend to kill, i accidentally hit someone else and kill him instead. What can we make of this? Well, its easy to stare ourselves blind at right and wrong. Sure, it is fucking stupid and most times unnecessary to drink and drive, but it does not necessarily have to be wrong.


So, forgive or forget someone based on intent or stupidity, or what he did was right or wrong in that particular case.

 

[Sparx]

huh?

 

[ST^]

huh?

 

[fettoken]

Wait, what are we discussing? Never mind me, im just taking the piss. Or am i?

 

[tris-]

Like I said in my original post, I'm in two minds about the whole thing, so I thought it would be worth seeing what people think Its not as if I'm making a poll about it and saying I'll do whichever option gets the most votes, I was just kinda interested to see people's takes on this.

maybe you should. living by the poll of results of FH could be interesting!

 

[soze]

As much as i can understand yours and others sentiments in this thread, i cannot in anyway agree with your last comment. The drink driver doesn't get into his car thinking yea let go kill someone now i have had a few pints. Invariably they either just want to get home or /and are to fucking pissed to know /care to not drive.

Murder, however, is by definition something that is premeditated, or calculated.



Not quite the same now is it?

I do see what your saying but reading this (which i have no idea is actually law or not) I would class killing someone drink driving as Second degree murder.

Spoiler

1.35 Under our recommendations, first degree murder would encompass:
(1) intentional killing; or
(2) killing through an intention to do serious injury with an awareness of a serious risk of causing death.
1.36 Second degree murder would encompass:
(1) killing through an intention to do serious injury (even without an awareness of a serious risk of causing death); or
(2) killing where there was an awareness of a serious risk of causing death, coupled with an intention to cause either:
(a) some injury;
(b) a fear of injury; or
(c) a risk of injury.
1.37 Second degree murder would also be the result when a partial defence of
provocation, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact is
successfully pleaded to first degree murder.

But i will never change your mind and you will never change mine

 

[fettoken]

THe laaaaaaaaauwwww is completely irrelevant in this discussion tho.

 

[Lethul]

fettoken: As you clearly haven't read the discussion according to your replies there really is no need for you to reply further

I find it kinda funny that people still are a bit surprised when Toht shows his ugly retarded side.

 

[Marc]

Tohtori is retarded. Seriously, he has to be.

I hope a drink driver crashes into his flat, destroys it and destroys everything he owns. It will be alright though because no one was hurt.

I will reiterate what i said before for the benefit of Fettoken. Tohtori, your a fucking idiot.

 

[tierk]

I don't think anyone is sayng that drink driving is acceptable - Toh as always in a league of his own - the only point i was making was about some of the stupid comparisons being bandied about.

I have to own up though and admit i have driven while drunk, thankfully not had to regret it - as in a accident of any sort but it is a massive calculated risk every time.

 

[Calaen]

We should keep this thread open now Toh has avoided it tbh

What you thought you should do is right Pikey, seeing how he himself responds to what happened is an important part of how you will judge him from now on.

 

[gohan]

it would be manslaughter not murder or second degree murder as thier is no intention to kill or do harm


simplez

 

[tierk]

it would be manslaughter not murder or second degree murder as thier is no intention to kill or do harm simplez

In the UK yes.

In other countries it can be conceived as murder.

An example of this is a 2007 law in California where an individual could be convicted of second-degree murder if he or she kills another person while operating a motor vehicle while being under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or controlled substances.

 

[Calo]

tbh , driving too fast is as bad as drink driving, and i bet most of you all drive too fast from time to time. And i often drink 1 or 2 beers on a whole evening if i'm "bob" and drive home then. That doesn't effect me at all.

 

[fettoken]

fettoken: As you clearly haven't read the discussion according to your replies there really is no need for you to reply further

I find it kinda funny that people still are a bit surprised when Toht shows his ugly retarded side.

Sure i have read the discussion. You just didn't comprehend my statement. If im right, it was about Dukat should forgive or forget his friend crashing as a cause of drunk driving, but his decision not being based on whether the law says this or that. But im just stating the obvious so nm.

 

[Cerb]

tbh , driving too fast is as bad as drink driving

well for a start thats absoloutle bolloks....dont get me wrong driving too fast isnt safe but i dont think it causes half as many deaths as drink driving does

 

[Thorwyn]

well for a start thats absoloutle bolloks....dont get me wrong driving too fast isnt safe but i dont think it causes half as many deaths as drink driving does

You´re wrong.
Here are the statistics for Germany 2000-2005 (I guess it´s not hard to find the equivalent UK statistics)...

• 1.834 fatal accidents caused by speeding
• 2.008 dead people

• 345 fatal accidents caused by drink-driving
• 437 dead people

That´s a 5:1 ratio.



Year | fatal accidents | ...caused by speeding

2005 | 712 | 272
2004 | 818 | 296
2003 | 848 | 302
2002 | 872 | 321
2001 | 861 | 321
2000 | 889 | 322

 

[gohan]

stats lie



the percentage of people that speed is lets face it 100%


the percentage of peopelt hat drink drive is maybe 5%


so really it would need to be a 20:1 ratio for it to be the same amount caused by speeding as that by drinking as obviously thiers going to be more accedents from speeders as thiers a hell of alot more speeders on the road than drink drivers, but percentage wise drink driving is probly more dangerous

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well ain't there just a bunch of assholes on this thread.

If you drive from point A to B in the same manner as you wuold sober, the level of alcohol in your blood is meaningless.

Ramming through someones home; someone gets hurt financially.

IF NOTHING HAPPENS, it's ok.

Now stop twisting it into something "Oh my god you support murder" claims

F*cking morons.

 

[Bugz]

Toht what you fail to realise if people are attacking you for:

Also i think drink driving is okey unless you hurt someone

There is so much wrong with that comment its absurd. I'll quickly point out a couple:

- you can never be sure you won't hurt anyone
- its a risk to others - be it mental harm rather than physical harm - which they do not deserve.
- when your drunk and you drive home safely, next time your drunk or had a bit to drink, you may think 'ahh yeah, I was fine last time, maybe I will be fine this time too.' Fast-forward 5 mins later when you have killed a family...
- drink driving effects everyone in different ways but it affects everyone in a negative way. If bob is 2 pints over the limit, he may drive pretty well; if sarah is 2 pints over the limit, she may instantly crash. Drink driving saves the risk of all this by having a set limit.

Of course, all this spews back to the fact you don't know jack shit about driving, being void of a full driving license (although I'd think the points I raised above were pretty self-explanatory).

P.S - to put what you said in a suitable analogy: ' I dropped a brick onto the motorway. I created a risk but because I was 'safe,' it didn't hit any cars. Thereby it is okey.'

 

[old.Tohtori]

Toht what you fail to realise if people are attacking you for:

There is so much wrong with that comment its absurd. I'll quickly point out a couple:

- you can never be sure you won't hurt anyone
- its a risk to others - be it mental harm rather than physical harm - which they do not deserve.
- when your drunk and you drive home safely, next time your drunk or had a bit to drink, you may think 'ahh yeah, I was fine last time, maybe I will be fine this time too.' Fast-forward 5 mins later when you have killed a family...
- drink driving effects everyone in different ways but it affects everyone in a negative way. If bob is 2 pints over the limit, he may drive pretty well; if sarah is 2 pints over the limit, she may instantly crash. Drink driving saves the risk of all this by having a set limit.

Of course, all this spews back to the fact you don't know jack shit about driving, being void of a full driving license (although I'd think the points I raised above were pretty self-explanatory).

Actually i do know about driving, i don't have a license, but i've driven mroe then you.

It doesn't matter what COULD happen, if it doesn't, then there's no harm.

You lot may live in a "this might happen" world, but i don't think that. If it happens THEN it happens. If you can drive equally well with no accidents, drunk off your arse, i have no problem with it.

You people don't ban diabetics from behind the wheel, even if THEY MIGHT have a drop in bloodssugar and crash.

 

[Bugz]

So it's okey for me to go dropping bricks on the motorway as long as it doesn't hurt anyone?

 

[Aoami]

Well ain't there just a bunch of assholes on this thread.

If you drive from point A to B in the same manner as you wuold sober, the level of alcohol in your blood is meaningless.

Ramming through someones home; someone gets hurt financially.

IF NOTHING HAPPENS, it's ok.

Now stop twisting it into something "Oh my god you support murder" claims

F*cking morons.

There is a name for your way of thinking, Tohtori, and it's called Egotism, and the only people who think like that are fucking morons, not the rest of us.

 

[tris-]

- you can never be sure you won't hurt anyone
- its a risk to others - be it mental harm rather than physical harm - which they do not deserve.

that is the same for being sober and infact the same for doing absolutley anything which involves you and another person.

 

[Bugz]

I don't want to confuse the basics of what we're arguing with the indications of risk assessments & the marginal propensity to cause accidents as you consume more drugs etc.

Let's keep it simple Tris as that's a discussion on people as opposed to alcohol.

 

[TdC]

<MOD>Peeps please try to keep on track eh</MOD>

 

[Bugz]

Sorry TdC <wanders out of the thread & vows never to return!> ;d

 

[TdC]

I meant everyone, not you specifically, Bugzy old man


*feels the haters*

 

[old.Tohtori]

So it's okey for me to go dropping bricks on the motorway as long as it doesn't hurt anyone?

Yes. If you cause no harm(get it yet?) by it, it's ok in my books.

Would you or wouldn't you cause harm is a different matter.

There is a name for your way of thinking, Tohtori, and it's called Egotism, and the only people who think like that are fucking morons, not the rest of us.

It ahs nothing to do with egotism, but nice try on the twisting.

that is the same for being sober and infact the same for doing absolutley anything which involves you and another person.

Exactly.

Risks are with anything and only if and when something happens, should it be judged.

Like i said;

You lot let diabetics behind the wheel without a blink of an eye and a diabetic losing concious for low sugar(or even just low sugr, which causes a diabetic to behave drunk) is a much bigger risk.

Also there seems to be the moronic notion that i somehow think it'ss ok for drunk drivers to cause havoc, which is NOT what i'm saying.