Posted: 8 years ago
You need to pay for your crimes as per the laws of the land. Salman tried and is trying to escape doing so. Paying compensation in exchange for jail term doesnt hold in India. 
Posted: 8 years ago
Originally posted by IAmLuvBolly





@bold1: If it was truly an accident then I honestly don't know. On the one hand it was an accident and it could have happened to anyone, and the person didn't intentionally do anything wrong (and let me clarify that driving drunk means the person is intentionally putting themselves and others in harm's way).

This is also something I've pondered.
I don't drink due to religious restrictions, so I may have very limited insight about this.
The whole reason you are told not to drink and drive is because it impairs your motor senses, right? Balance, etc.
But drinking also impairs judgment. Its a sedative but removes inhibitions makes people indulge in more risky behaviors than they would normally indulge in sober. 
And now it may sound like I'm getting way too loopy but, can you hold someone accountable for the a DECISION made while intoxicated?

I've seen some very rational friends of mine who call me after driving home after a late night party and I know they were drunk. 
But these are a few. Most of my friends already have designated drivers before they begin partying. 

To me it just seems like one big messy situation that goes around in circles. 

It would have been an accident if he lost control of the vehicle due to some other factor. 
He didn't mean to kill someone, so it was an accident in that sense, but it's NOT... because he put himself in that place. 
But the time at which he put himself in that place was a time when he was in that impaired mode. We don't punish minors because their judgment is impaired. But alcohol can theoretically impair anyone's judgement. 

Just always thought about this ðŸ˜†


Edited by desigal90 - 8 years ago
Posted: 8 years ago
Amazing post! 
According to verdict, Salman is sentenced for 5 years but how can that help the victims? How will it help them? I don't think it will benefit them at all! I mean you're putting that guy on jail after 13 years! Trying to prove what? Justice still happens! Then you should also punish those rapists and killers who roam around free. 

Providing the victims with enough money to lead a good life will help more! 
Posted: 8 years ago
Originally posted by desigal90


Thanks Neela Paani ðŸ¤—
And to the members who brought in the points that he may have been intoxicated during the incident, but not 13 years post it.

TRUE.
Very true actually. It was Salman in full conscience avoiding the court at that point and delaying the punishment. 

What do you guys feel about punishment for what can be called an "accident" as opposed to manslaughter with intent or a sexual crime?

For instance, Pallavi, you mentioned the many cases in the states where teens get drunk and get into accidents. 
Drunk accidents are even more common on special occasions like New Years, for instances. 

Anyone aware of what the penalty is in the states for drunk driving? 

Varies state by state...it depends on what the charge is/what kind of deal can be offered/ if charges are pressed. Sometimes there's just a misdemeanor charge rather than a felony, which means a year in county jail or even just a heavy fine. Charges can be anywhere from 1 year in county jail upto 30 years in state prison. 


Posted: 8 years ago
Desi gal : that's the same debate we had in class a couple of weeks back when we discussed intoxication manslaughter. It is an interesting topic altogether. I have limited insights as well when it comes to alcohol due to religious restriction (personal choice as well), however, here in the States, there are defenses like involuntary intoxication (rarely successful though). Temporary insanity under voluntary intoxication can also be used as a mitigating factor interestingly. The main defense to it is obviously "intention", as that's difficult to prove, which is why most cases end up amounting to recklessness and negligence.Edited by kitkataha - 8 years ago
Posted: 8 years ago
Originally posted by kitkataha


Desi gal : that's the same debate we had in class a couple of weeks back when we discussed intoxication manslaughter. It is an interesting topic altogether. I have limited insights as well when it comes to alcohol due to religious restriction (personal choice as well), however, here in the States, there are defenses like involuntary intoxication (rarely successful though). Temporary insanity under voluntary intoxication can also be used as a mitigating factor interestingly. The main defense to it is obviously "intention", as that's difficult to prove, which is why most cases end up amounting to recklessness and negligence.

It just seems kinda counterintuitive to me.
The law says don't drink and drive because it impairs balance, perception, reflexes.
But alcohol also impairs judgment. And decision to drive drunk or to find a friend to designate to drive you is a judgement you make in a state when theoretically your judgement is impaired.

I find it so much more similar to punishing a minor because their judgement is not mature yet/impaired. In a state of intoxication, I would think that even a responsible adult would make the same mistakes a minor makes. 

I guess that's why to me, when it comes to punishment, I think the intent takes precedent over the end matter. 
Yes, a life was lost. But a life is also lost in an accident. We still say it was an accident.. I didn't mean for it to happen.

From what I've read, most people seem content that Salman is punished because it was the law and nobody should be above the law.
I'm more concerned about the victims, the families involved, and yes, even the accused's intent.
In such cases, my intuition and basal morality says to me...well if you didn't mean for it to happen, you still caused harm. You still caused a life to be lost. Make up for it. Do something about it. Help these people out. 


But I guess I'm not the law. 
Just a rambling mind ðŸ˜†

Edited by desigal90 - 8 years ago
Posted: 8 years ago
I've always thought that as well. 😆 if at all, alcohol should be used as a mitigating factor because it impairs your ability to judge 😆 its tricky, extremely tricky, which is why the criminal justice system, amounts that to recklessness/negligence. My argument is that jail time is deserved for crimes that carry the intent element. It's fair, deserved, and useful. However, for crimes that lack the mens rea, restorative justice should be adopted. Retribution at that point serves no purpose because the offender did not intentionally commit the crime...which is why probation/fine work better in those cases. Listening to a victim/victim's family and to see how their life has changed because of you is a traumatic experience in itself.

Salman's case is different altogether. He did not have a speedy trial, so his punishment of thirteen years will serve no goal. He's guilty..surely he is. No denying in that. The Courts, however, need to accept their negligence as well.Edited by kitkataha - 8 years ago
Posted: 8 years ago
Originally posted by Saraa.


Amazing post! 
According to verdict, Salman is sentenced for 5 years but how can that help the victims? How will it help them? I don't think it will benefit them at all! I mean you're putting that guy on jail after 13 years! Trying to prove what? Justice still happens! Then you should also punish those rapists and killers who roam around free. 

Providing the victims with enough money to lead a good life will help more! 
 
If you look at it a bit more objectively, you will see how it will help them.
 
By giving Salman 5 years, it might not help the victims of this case directly, but it will be a warning to those who might drink and drive in the future. It will help prevent many such accidents in the future. It will help the 'future' victims, who will not be victims anymore, thanks to the strict implementation of the punishment.
 
The It's-been-13-years-why-punish-now is such a scary argument. Had he confessed 13 years ago, it would not have dragged for so long in the first place. He chose to fool the law. But at the end he has to pay the price.
Posted: 8 years ago
Originally posted by kitkataha


I've always thought that as well. 😆 if at all, alcohol should be used as a mitigating factor because it impairs your ability to judge 😆 its tricky, extremely tricky, which is why the criminal justice system, amounts that to recklessness/negligence. My argument is that jail time is deserved for crimes that carry the intent element. It's fair, deserved, and useful. However, for crimes that lack the mens rea, restorative justice should be adopted. Retribution at that point serves no purpose because the offender did not intentionally commit the crime...which is why probation/fine work better in those cases. Listening to a victim/victim's family and to see how their life has changed because of you is a traumatic experience in itself.

Salman's case is differnt altogether. He did not have a speedy trial, so his punishment of thirteen years letter will serve no goal. He's guilty..surely he is. No denying in that. The Courts, however, need to accept their negligence as well.

I think both of us are more or less on the same page when it comes to this.
Something about the justice system and how it deals with these matters doesn't settle well with me either. Not talking about just this case, but all cases involving intoxication, especially with vehicles.

It's such a gray area.
How would you approach a case where someone sexually harasses another under the influence of alcohol though? Maybe sober, they would have thought twice of the consequences and refrained from the act. 
But then again, they always had the thoughts. Like that way, wouldn't we just stretch everything done under the influence into "impaired" judgement? Even though it's not completely so. Such a gray area!
Posted: 8 years ago
Originally posted by desigal90



This is also something I've pondered.
I don't drink due to religious restrictions, so I may have very limited insight about this.
The whole reason you are told not to drink and drive is because it impairs your motor senses, right? Balance, etc.
But drinking also impairs judgment. Its a sedative but removes inhibitions makes people indulge in more risky behaviors than they would normally indulge in sober. 
And now it may sound like I'm getting way too loopy but, can you hold someone accountable for the a DECISION made while intoxicated?

I've seen some very rational friends of mine who call me after driving home after a late night party and I know they were drunk. 
But these are a few. Most of my friends already have designated drivers before they begin partying. 

To me it just seems like one big messy situation that goes around in circles. 

It would have been an accident if he lost control of the vehicle due to some other factor. 
He didn't mean to kill someone, so it was an accident in that sense, but it's NOT... because he put himself in that place. 
But the time at which he put himself in that place was a time when he was in that impaired mode. We don't punish minors because their judgment is impaired. But alcohol can theoretically impair anyone's judgement. 

Just always thought about this ðŸ˜†



But, the first decision is to drink right? That was not made with 'impaired' judgement.  If someone takes the first decision to drink then they should figure out who will do the driving also especially because most people today KNOW what can happen if you drive drunk.  

More generally, if you are choosing to take a substance that you know can alter your state of mind then you are responsible for the consequences of that action. Period. 

Being irresponsible is NOT an excuse from making bad decisions. 

If someone knows they are going out for the night and want to drink, then IMHO, they should make sure they are NOT driving first and foremost.  It's fairly easy to get a taxi today too...and cabs like uber are not even that expensive.

Edited by chocolover89 - 8 years ago

Related Topics

doc-text Topics pencil Author stackexchange Replies eye Views clock Last Post Reply
Mind blown 🤯

pencil Zeal17   stackexchange 23   eye 2090

Zeal17 23 2090 6 months ago Maharani69

Topic Info

39 Participants 88 Replies 9041Views

Topic started by desigal90

Last replied by gilmores

loader
loader
up-open TOP