# A drunk driver kills your loved one



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

Polednice and I were having a conversation in the morality thread about intellectual process and distancing yourself from primitive emotion, as well as vengeance, justice, and punishment.. This lead me to a scenario that comes up a lot.

It is rather short: Your loved one has left their house and is on the way to a destination when a drunk driver smashes into them and kills them. The drunk driver is left alive in good health. 

How would you react? What punishment do you think the driver should receive?


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I would be completely devastated and would no doubt fall into a severe depression, unable to cope. The driver should be sentenced to a considerable time in prison.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

Would be on whose account? Is that the sentence you wish for them to serve?

Oops nevermind, I read your sentence "would be" and not "should be". Gah! Question no longer valid.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

I'll give my view on this. 

I'll put my fiancee as the person who was killed in the accident. I would be absolutely inconsolable to an infinite degree. I would see absolutely no purpose in life after such an event. However, I would not wish the driver to get any punishment ON CONDITION. If this was a mistake (despite a large one, quite costly for me), that was out of context of the person's typical behavior, I would let it slide. If this was a continual behavior I would ensure the person sought help. I do this because once my loved one is dead, they are no longer pertinent to the situation. I'm not a fan of the idea of seeking vengeance for dead people because it does nothing practical. What I am concerned about now is other people being put in the same situation as I am. Will this person take another person's loved one away from them? So my concern switches automatically from personal to social. (SEE NOT A SOCIOPATH) Because of this, if upon evaluation, this driver is deemed as dangerous to society IN THEIR CURRENT STATE, then they should be detained in a program until that current state is eradicated. After that, they should be able to return to society WITHOUT STIGMA. If they are not dangerous, then I feel there is no practical purpose of punishment/rehabilitation.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I'll elaborate my position slightly in response.

I would have the individual imprisoned regardless of the regularity of their behaviour, though the prison system in my moral "fantasy" is nothing like the one we know today, though the prison sentence _would_ be dependent on the regularity of their behaviour.

If the accident was not characteristic, they must nevertheless be punished, otherwise we would set the example: a) for this individual, there are no consequences for their actions, therefore they may repeat them out of complacency regarding further accidents, putting more lives at risk; b) for others, you can get away with drink-driving manslaughter if it is your first offence and you can show that it is not a regular behaviour. This would put an insane number of lives at risk.

If the accident was characteristic, they would need to undergo an intensive course of rehabilitation while in prison.

I would also add that _if_ vengeance were a factor for me (it's not), it would not be on behalf of the dead person who now plays no role, but because I had been deprived of something priceless. I also think that the punishment should be suitably severe in terms of the length of the sentence as, although drinking and then driving is not certain to end in tragedy, its potential consequences are so well-known and so valuable - a human life being something of great value - that we must assume the person in question committed the action with the understanding that they could kill someone, thus demonstrating a disregard for others.

Nevertheless, prison would not be a place where we exact punishment on low-lives, it would be a healthy, stable, non-stigmatised secluded area for the _sole_ purposes of rehabilitation and protection of the public.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

Works for me. I must say that when say I regularity, characteristic, and state it doesn't mean "how often they get into an accident", but how often they exhibit reckless behavior such as drunk driving in general. It isn't about how often risky behavior ends in something bad, but the risky behavior itself. It is a shame that people won't be upfront and it may not be possible to determine to a thorough extent. As a society, we must look at "punishment" as a positive thing and not a dead-end that will leave you stigmatized forever.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Cnote11 said:


> Works for me. I must say that when say I regularity, characteristic, and state it doesn't mean "how often they get into an accident", but how often they exhibit reckless behavior such as drunk driving in general. It isn't about how often risky behavior ends in something bad, but the risky behavior itself. It is a shame that people won't be upfront and it may not be possible to determine to a thorough extent. As a society, we must look at "punishment" as a positive thing and not a dead-end that will leave you stigmatized forever.


I meant what you meant by characteristic, I just worded it rather awkwardly. I agree on the other points too.


----------



## Lunasong (Mar 15, 2011)

Cnote11 said:


> I do this because once my loved one is dead, they are no longer pertinent to the situation. I'm not a fan of the idea of seeking vengeance for dead people because it does nothing practical. What I am concerned about now is other people being put in the same situation as I am. Will this person take another person's loved one away from them?


What if the accident left your loved one in a coma requiring long-term and expensive care, with indefinite prospects for recovery? This leaves him or her absolutely present and pertinent to the situation.

In either case, many lives have been irrevocably changed by someone's poor decision. Something to think about every day. We have safety programs at work that drill into us how we are responsible for our own and others' safe behavior by following correct procedures while on the job. Why should that kind of thinking stop when one clocks out? It's made me think twice about my driving behavior because I'm not blameless when it comes to speeding and distracted driving.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

I don't think it should stop. I don't encourage such behavior. 

To Polednice, I was just clarifying what I meant is all!


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Remarry. 

No need to cry over spilled milk.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

The word missing from these excellent responses is 'forgiveness'.

Society uses incarceration and other punitive measures as a poor substitute for its failure to be able to forgive the wrongdoer. And I will use that word, wrongdoer. A drunk driver is a wrongdoer whether or not they kill someone. But unleashing vengeance isn't going to make the situation better.

If the victim of the wrongdoing (the person whose loved one was killed) can forgive the wrongdoer, it is reasonable to expect society, acting on their behalf, to implement a programme of training/counselling/therapy/whatever to ensure that the perpetrator will not repeat the offence.

And (and I think this is often overlooked by moralists) it behoves the wrongdoer to offer an act of retribution, of penance for the hurt he has caused. That may be no more than a willingness to engage with whatever change programme society can offer him.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

brianwalker said:


> Remarry.
> 
> No need to cry over spilled milk.


Nice to see you'd remarry your mother, brianwalker.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

To Jeremy,

My post, in a way, was implying that! I almost used the word but I didn't. However, that is definitely the tone I was going for. Your post is ace, as usual.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

Cnote11 said:


> To Jeremy,
> 
> My post, in a way, was implying that! I almost used the word but I didn't. However, that is definitely the tone I was going for. Your post is ace, as usual.


Thank you. Always worth calling a spade a spade.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

When death is involved, I personally have no place for forgiveness. I would never seek vengeance or punishment for the sake of it, but I would not forgive a person who had extinguished another's only chance at existence in the void of eternity. If anything is unforgiveable, that is.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Polednice said:


> When death is involved, I personally have no place for forgiveness. I would never seek vengeance or punishment for the sake of it, but I would not forgive a person who had extinguished another's only chance at existence in the void of eternity. If anything is unforgiveable, that is.


Glad to find out that you're pro-life!


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

brianwalker said:


> Glad to find out that you're pro-life!


I don't think anyone is anti-life.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

I will have to, in a civil manner of course, disagree with you, Polednice. :cheers:


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Cnote11 said:


> Nice to see you'd remarry your mother, brianwalker.


I thought loved one meant "lover" or "wife".

Er, I don't love my mother, so.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

Polednice said:


> I don't think anyone is anti-life.


You'd be surprised!


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

brianwalker said:


> I thought loved one meant "lover" or "wife".
> 
> Er, I don't love my mother, so.


:lol: I hadn't thought so... but no no, I meant in general. Wife, siblings, parents, etc.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Polednice said:


> I don't think anyone is anti-life.


Really? Millions of abortions occur every year!


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Cnote11 said:


> :lol: I hadn't thought so... but no no, I meant in general. Wife, siblings, parents, etc.


Sue them for compensation.

_The brawling of a sparrow in the eaves,
The brilliant moon and all the milky sky,
And all that famous harmony of leaves,
Had blotted out man's image and his cry._


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

brianwalker said:


> Really? Millions of abortions occur every year!


Good job abortions don't kill anything then.


----------



## brianwalker (Dec 9, 2011)

Polednice said:


> Good job abortions don't kill anything then.


And the Nazis just burned logs for energy I guess.

The Nuremberg trials was one big imperialist facade then, for the Western Powers' exploitation of Germany.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

Polednice said:


> When death is involved, I personally have no place for forgiveness. I would never seek vengeance or punishment for the sake of it, but I would not forgive a person who had extinguished another's only chance at existence in the void of eternity. If anything is unforgiveable, that is.


But who is affected by our refusal to forgive? Forgiveness is always about enabling _us _to move forward.

It is not helpful if we believe we are entitled to sit in judgement on other people.

Refusing to forgive is about making our need to be right about the situation more important than moving on.

Religionists may feel entitled to withold forgiveness on the grounds that 'Our Lord' wouldn't have forgiven (except that Jesus would have, of course). But, for the rest of us, it is worth examining whether or not forgiveness is the most useful approach (I think it is).

And, Polednice, it is _only _important when it is difficult. That it is difficult doesn't make it less useful - less the best way forward.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Jeremy Marchant said:


> But who is affected by our refusal to forgive? Forgiveness is always about enabling _us _to move forward.
> 
> It is not helpful if we believe we are entitled to sit in judgement on other people.
> 
> ...


Maybe that's important for some people, not for me. Given a perfect judicial system, I see no reason why I should feel forgiveness. It's a silly feeling.

Telling someone, "I'm fine with you having accidentally killed my husband" does not help _me_ move on, it helps them. Me refusing to forgive is not an act of judgement - as I said, I'm not seeking vengeance or my own kind of justice - it's just an acknowledgement of the fact that the life that was taken from me was inexpressibly valuable, and there is nothing anyone can do that could ever fill the hole or make it right. As such, the perpetrator does not deserve a gesture that says everything is OK - everything is _not_ OK and it will never be OK again.


----------



## Lunasong (Mar 15, 2011)

Thanks, Jeremy. I hope all will consider my post again for how easily this can be on the other foot. Just one moment of inattention is all it takes. You don't have to be drunk for a terrible accident to happen.


----------



## Guest (Apr 29, 2012)

I'd like to see the person used as a crash test dummy.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

Most people I run into say they would want the person to rot in jail for a long, long time. Surprised at the answers I've gotten so far.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Cnote11 said:


> Most people I run into say they would want the person to rot in jail for a long, long time. Surprised at the answers I've gotten so far.


I'm not so surprised at that - it's certainly disappointing though.


----------



## Cnote11 (Jul 17, 2010)

and why is that? I want some green peppers and pepper steak


----------



## eorrific (May 14, 2011)

I don't know how you people could be so forgiving. Tsk tsk tsk... 
That drunk driver is irresponsible and selfish. Why would he drive when knowing that he/she is drunk. Then combined with such fatal accident, I ask for justice. If the law does not provide it, I shall ask Don Corleone. :devil:


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Pliers and a blowtorch.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

eorrific said:


> I don't know how you people could be so forgiving. Tsk tsk tsk...
> That drunk driver is irresponsible and selfish. Why would he drive when knowing that he/she is drunk. Then combined with such fatal accident, I ask for justice. If the law does not provide it, I shall ask Don Corleone. :devil:


What would justice be for you?


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

Polednice said:


> What would justice be for you?


----------

