US Supreme Court will not hear......

[DocWalker]

Where did I say it was OK? In fact, I specifically called for convictions in circumstances where a person is intoxicated and causes harm to persons and/or property. Please stop putting words in my mouth.



What about texting, doing makeup, reading the newspaper, etc. while driving that results in someone being killed? What about a 16 year old, young, dumb and full of courage, speeding around blind curve and killing someone? Those are all acts we all know are irresponsible and potentially dangerous, but they do not automatically result in a person's death - in fact, more often than not, no one is even hurt. Therefore, it does not rise to the standard of premeditated murder.



If the killing was premeditated, sure. If it was the result of an accident, that's life, and also can happen with people who are stone-cold sober. If it was the result of a clearly-preventable accident, with no premeditation or ill intent, that is negligent homicide or manslaughter. Society correctly recognizes that there is a significant difference in the evil quotient of someone who kills another with malice aforethought and one who kills another unintentionally.



Ummm...ok. I agree. Of course, you did advocate summary execution for anyone using a firearm while intoxicated; to me, that's not "holding people accountable." That's unacceptably harsh vigilantism to serve your own bitterness (understandable if you have suffered a loss), rather than justice.



If he kills any person while intoxicated, it is not as if he will go free. He will face a serious felony charge and do time. However, in a society says it reserves the death penalty for only the worst of the worst, yet often has a hard time sentencing intentional, sexually-motivated child killers to that punishment, it would be unreasonable to demand the death penalty for someone who has killed another unintentionally.

Also, how is it that you know that the drunk you mentioned drives without a license, but the police don't? Do you have psychic powers? If so, and if you believe so strongly in holding people responsible, I recommend you call the law on him.



Right.

Driving Drunk is not an ACCIDENT.

I also think they need to increase the use of the death penalty and make it so people are not waiting 20 years.

I don't have psycic powers the drunk brags about driving and when I see him driving I do report it but nothing ever gets done.

Sociaty doesn't hold people accountable anymore, they blame it on he was sick or it was an accident. Again shooting a gun in the general direction of a crowd is not an accident even if you didn't actually aim at someone. Just like driving while drunk or stoned isn't an accident it is a choice "a premenditated" choice to play russin roulette with innocent lives they may pass.

I don't drink and drive and don't carry my pistol when I drink...My choice I have seen to many people wounded or killed from people that choose to either shoot or drive while stoned/high.

So my option is if someone kills someone while drunk or stoned due to their actions be it in a car or by a gun it is neither an accident or unitentional.

I also agree, cell phones, make-up, watching TV, or any of the other things people do while driving should be held to an equal standard. If someone is texting and kills someone it is not an accident, an innocent person was killed to the premeditated negletful act of another.

 

[ManInBlack]

I also agree, cell phones, make-up, watching TV, or any of the other things people do while driving should be held to an equal standard. If someone is texting and kills someone it is not an accident, an innocent person was killed to the premeditated negletful act of another.

In law, premeditation is completely different than neglect. I understand your passion about this subject, but this is where we part ways.

 

[DocWalker]

In law, premeditation is completely different than neglect. I understand your passion about this subject, but this is where we part ways.

I understand also, but I disagree with what is premeditated. To me premeditaion is a chioce to do something before you do it...

I choose to use my cell phone and drive knowing it distracts me and I might kill someone by running them over.

I choose to drink or do these drugs and drive knowing it slows my reaction time, impairs me and I might kill someone.

I choose to unload this clip into a target knowing there is a kindigarden class right behind my target. After all it is not my fault if they get in the way of my bullets.

I choose to carry my weapon and drink in a bar knowing that my getting drunk could affect my reasoning and I might kill someone that I might not otherwise harm.

I guess some choices that are thought about prior to doing them are not Premenditated they must just be an accident or neglect. Stupidity is a wonderful excuss until your child is killed by an ACCIDENT that was preventable.

I didn't know the grenade would explode if I pulled the pin.....don't worry it was an accident.

 

[bigtoe416]

sooooooo looks like the US Supreme court isnt going to hear arguments about our local sheriff and chl for ommp patients huh?

That does appear to be the case good sir. Jolly good call by the nice fellows over at the Supreme Court. Jolly good.

 

[DocWalker]

The situations you describe are called "wanton endangerment" in Ky. law. Premeditation would be:

Intentionally running over someone with your car. It is not important if you were on the cell phone or had been doing drugs or alcohol.

Going to the Kindergarten and intentional shooting children.

Intentionally shooting someone whether sober or drunk.

There is a big difference. The difference is in wanton endangerment, you knew or should have known there was a danger that death or serious injury could result and didn't care. In premeditation you made certain the death or serious injury occurred intentionally.

Typing in a bigger font is impressive, I bow to your superior computer skills.

I know the difference about the letter of the law, I also know that if a drunk driver kills my child and he dosen't die in the crash he will see what premeditaion is when he is released. This is just me but to do something that you know could kill someone to me SHOULD be considered as premeditated since the choices made prior to the killing were considered before hand. We hear stories everyday of Neglegent people killing people and claiming it was an accident...sorry but in my option the drunk drive didn't kill someone they MURDERED them.

But you know what they say about options everyone has them.......

 

[Teddybearfrmhell]

Typing in a bigger font is impressive, I bow to your superior computer skills.

I know the difference about the letter of the law, I also know that if a drunk driver kills my child and he dosen't die in the crash he will see what premeditaion is when he is released. This is just me but to do something that you know could kill someone to me SHOULD be considered as premeditated since the choices made prior to the killing were considered before hand. We hear stories everyday of Neglegent people killing people and claiming it was an accident...sorry but in my option the drunk drive didn't kill someone they MURDERED them.

But you know what they say about options everyone has them.......

didja hear that the US Supreme court is not going to hear arguments in the local CHL vs ommp case?

 

[DocWalker]

didja hear that the US Supreme court is not going to hear arguments in the local CHL vs ommp case?

Yep, not just a rumor anymore...

 

[We-the-People]

didja hear that the US Supreme court is not going to hear arguments in the local CHL vs ommp case?

We now return to our REGULAR PROGRAMING...thread hijack over. Damn fine of the SCOTUS to refuse to hear the case since it was already properly adjudicated. Now we just need to get the feds and locals to realize that federal firearms laws (and drug/medication lawas as well) do not apply to firearms manufactured within our state (nor marijuana grown and used here) that do not cross state borders in commerce (the commerce clause being te so called "authorization" for federal gun contrl schemes).

NOTE.....that's "not crossing a border in commerce"..... it is, under constitutional and legal principles, perfectly constitutional to carry your Oregon manufactured firearm into another state for NON commerce reasons, such as your self defense when visiting relatives in the people republik of Taxifornia. Medical MJ I'm not so confident on being as how it is a major cash crop in Taxifornia.

But then I'm not a lawyer.

 

[ManInBlack]

Medical MJ I'm not so confident on being as how it is a major cash crop in Taxifornia.

You do realize, don't you, that licensed medical marijuana dispensaries must, by law, be non-profit, and are not taxed?

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dispensaries-222445-profit-marijuana.html

Authorities say such examples are contradictory to California law which does not authorize collectives, cooperatives or individuals to profit from medical marijuana sales.

 

[We-the-People]

You do realize, don't you, that licensed medical marijuana dispensaries must, by law, be non-profit, and are not taxed?

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/dispensaries-222445-profit-marijuana.html

Yes I realize that. However, case law precedent says that even illegal crops/products that move in interstate commerce can be regulated under the commerce clause. I'm pretty sure no one would argue tha illegal MJ doesn't move interstate.