|
|
|
Marco Muzzo
- Thread starter TO Bandit
- Start date
No, not defending of course not no way no how. Not defending not a chance. OTOH the guy didn't intend to take out a family. That day. Mistake.
But I don't think that you would get behind the wheel and drive drunk.
I knew a guy, many years ago, that killed a pregnant woman (and unborn child), while street racing. He showed remorse. 2 years later, he was street racing again.
And it wasn't 1 second, that bad judgment was the entire drive up to that point.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
If I were a member of the Neville-Lake family, it would benefit me greatly knowing the piece of **** who killed my entire family got killed in prison... because that would be true justice.
Actually, true justice would be getting to exert that revenge personally, but a prison death can be a neat 2nd.
Some people enjoy an eye for an eye. Others don't, I'm a little squeamish myself, but I'd look the other way if justice can be served prison justice style.
2002, Dundas and Winston Churchill?
This is why the families of the dead don't get to set sentence.
I remember that, but no. It was a looong time ago. Let me put it this way; he was driving a new Eagle Talon.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
You asked what benefit it would provide and I answered. True justice.
On release from prison. It's not a suspension but a driving prohibition. If he violates it while on parole, it can be treated as a parole violation and he can go right back into prison with no arguments accepted.
If after his prison sentence (including parole period) is satisfied, he would face charges and trial for drive while disqualified, and if found guilty could see up to another five years in prison. Given the severity of the original offence leading to the driving disqualification, his sentence for that would be far more severe than usual.
Except that we do not live in an "eye-for-an-eye" society. If would be extra-judicial murder, and that is not justice by any measure.
A couple of years in jail is not "justice by any measure" for taking all of those lives in that fashion.
It may not be "justice"; fine. Call it karma.
You save the greatest punishments for the greatest evil intents, not for the worst stupid choices.
Did somebody mention murder? Prison style justice could mean any number of things. Most importantly tho, it is served up outside the bounds of the any legal system, like all crimes, by definition, are perpetrated out side the bounds of the law. That would be true justice.
Vigilante justice, is that what you suggest as being true justice? Outside the bounds of law justice as in some ticked-off driver dooring a high-speed lane-splitter who just punched a car mirror a few cars back? Would that be ok?
I disagree. A conscious decision to drink and drive that results in the deaths of four people is a decision that cannot be answered by a few years behind bars in a minimum security facility. It just can't. Some "stupid choices", as you call them, must result in more than the forfeiture of a few years of one's freedom or justice is neither done nor seen to be done. How can we have faith in a justice system that equates a couple of years of freedom to the lives of three children and an elderly gentleman?
I wouldn't bat an eyelash if some guy in prison who lost his kid to a drunk driver attacked Muzzo with a broomstick.
Without a proper disincentive to make such heinous choices they will not stop happening. It's beyond time proper examples were made of those that so carelessly and recklessly put others at risk.
I won't answer any hypotheticals but if the revenge comes from outside the legal justice system so sad to bad you brought it on yourself. Then the vigilante can go to minimum security for his slap on the wrist in the name of justice. All of a sudden the tables are turned.
Justice isn't a courtroom or the letter of law. Its a concept of fairness... so if you ever kill my family, you'll bet that my form of Justice includes the end of your life.
|
|
|
|
|