Teen who killed cyclist in DUI hit-and-run sentenced to 1 year, 10 days - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Eric95;48512978]a year is probably enough for somebody to be rehabilitated though[/QUOTE] She needs to be punished, not only rehabilitated.

[QUOTE=Derposaurus;48512926]1 year hardly gives you enough time to think of your crime.[/QUOTE] how about your entire life? Or is it normal to just forget you have killed someone? Unless you get like the Alzheimer's.

[QUOTE=Yahnich;48513112]no rehabilitation is exactly what needs to be done, what does getting your revengeboner going do? does it help anyone?[/QUOTE] If you don't punish someone for doing wrong then what reason would they have not to do it again?

[QUOTE=Derposaurus;48513131]If you don't punish someone for doing wrong then what reason would they have not to do it again?[/QUOTE] If they were rehabilitated properly they wouldn't want to do it again

[QUOTE=Eric95;48513145]If they were rehabilitated properly they wouldn't want to do it again[/QUOTE] How would you rehabilitate/make them not want to do it again without punishment or with a small amount of punishment? [QUOTE=Bat-shit;48513204]You could make an irremovable electric collar for every human that zaps you when try to do something illegal.[/QUOTE] Believe it or not I'm actually trying to be serious. I'd really like to know what would be an alternative. Should we just let them go and have guilt cure them, like you seem to think it will?

[QUOTE=Derposaurus;48513164]How would you rehabilitate/make them not want to do it again without punishment or with a small amount of punishment?[/QUOTE] You could make an irremovable electric collar for every human that zaps you when try to do something illegal. Seriously speaking, it would seem there is no easy answer to dealing with criminals imho. Trying to prevent crime being perhaps the hardest answer to it.

[QUOTE=Archonos 2;48512780]What exactly are you quoting, oh wise one? And I don't have some bloodthirsty desire for vengeance here. But I don't understand how everyone is so upset by those surprised by the sentence. You took many many years from someone. So taking one from her is wrong? [editline]21st August 2015[/editline] This is exactly what I'm asking, too.[/QUOTE] I think 1 year is enough, anyone who wants more is just adding more years for the sake of it. The sentence she got is appropriate for the crime she committed, no one is saying taking a year from her is wrong, actually the opposite. They're saying adding more is wrong. [editline]21st August 2015[/editline] Justice System in the US needs an overhaul anyway, we have the highest repeat offenders rates out of any country and the private prison industry is getting people locked up for profits. We're clearly doing a lot of things wrong. [editline]21st August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Derposaurus;48513164]How would you rehabilitate/make them not want to do it again without punishment or with a small amount of punishment? Believe it or not I'm actually trying to be serious. I'd really like to know what would be an alternative. Should we just let them go and have guilt cure them, like you seem to think it will?[/QUOTE] No one is saying she should go scot free, absolutely no one, they're saying that adding more years is unnecessary. Saying you're for rehabilitation doesn't mean you're for letting criminals walk away with a slap on the wrist, of course prison sentences are still involved.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48512419]Maybe We should not punish people as harshly for lighter crimes instead[/QUOTE] What do you mean maybe? How about we fix it... It is a serious problem people like to ignore after all (people getting harsh sentences that don't fit the crime).

[QUOTE=Derposaurus;48513164]Believe it or not I'm actually trying to be serious. I'd really like to know what would be an alternative. Should we just let them go and have guilt cure them, like you seem to think it will?[/QUOTE] Oops fast response there, added "seriously speaking" but oh well, it doesn't add much to it.

Arbitrary sentences of X years is stupid because it is purely punishment based. Individuals should jailed, and at some interval be evaluated to determine if they are at chance of reoffending; if they are, then they remain in jail, otherwise they are set free. In between these evaluations, the system should work on rehabilitation, if deemed possible. Otherwise, they will be in jail indefinitely.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48513214]No one is saying she should go scot free, absolutely no one, they're saying that adding more years is unnecessary. Saying you're for rehabilitation doesn't mean you're for letting criminals walk away with a slap on the wrist, of course prison sentences are still involved.[/QUOTE] The US Prison System doesn't exist for rehabilitation, it's punishment based. Unless you think locking people in concrete rooms is good rehab.

I just don't understand how other cases of manslaughter get years of prison time but this girl is mixing illegal substance and dui and manslaughter, gets only 1 year and everyone thinks it's enough.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;48513373]Arbitrary sentences of X years is stupid because it is purely punishment based. Individuals should jailed, and at some interval be evaluated to determine if they are at chance of reoffending; if they are, then they remain in jail, otherwise they are set free. In between these evaluations, the system should work on rehabilitation, if deemed possible. Otherwise, they will be in jail indefinitely.[/QUOTE] Exactly, I couldn't agree more. That would perhaps be the most logical and just way of dealing with criminals. It's surprising how "creative" people often like to get over how many days criminals should spend incarcerated for which crime, instead of suggesting some more open-ended solution like you did.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;48513373]Arbitrary sentences of X years is stupid because it is purely punishment based. Individuals should jailed, and at some interval be evaluated to determine if they are at chance of reoffending; if they are, then they remain in jail, otherwise they are set free. In between these evaluations, the system should work on rehabilitation, if deemed possible. Otherwise, they will be in jail indefinitely.[/QUOTE] That sounds good on paper, and I'd support this method if there was anyway to fully determine whether a person is rehabilitated or not. How would you determine their reoffense chance? And why couldn't they be able to fake through it and get out without being fully rehabilitated?

[QUOTE=Derposaurus;48513589]That sounds good on paper, and I'd support this method if there was anyway to fully determine whether a person is rehabilitated or not. How would you determine their reoffense chance? And why couldn't they be able to fake through it and get out without being fully rehabilitated?[/QUOTE] That would take a good faker.. And how does a definite jail sentence help determine their chance of re-offending and rehabilitation?

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48513214]I think 1 year is enough, anyone who wants more is just adding more years for the sake of it. The sentence she got is appropriate for the crime she committed, no one is saying taking a year from her is wrong, actually the opposite. They're saying adding more is wrong. [editline]21st August 2015[/editline] Justice System in the US needs an overhaul anyway, we have the highest repeat offenders rates out of any country and the private prison industry is getting people locked up for profits. We're clearly doing a lot of things wrong. [editline]21st August 2015[/editline] No one is saying she should go scot free, absolutely no one, they're saying that adding more years is unnecessary. Saying you're for rehabilitation doesn't mean you're for letting criminals walk away with a slap on the wrist, of course prison sentences are still involved.[/QUOTE] Prison sentences largely serve as a deterrent in most countries with rehabilitation second. It cheapens what she has done to give a light sentence like that, manslaughter is by and large the second worst crime you can commit. Then it isn't mitigated by her fucking hitting the guy, then fucking off without giving a shit about what she's done. For manslaughter like this you would be expecting about 5-7 years of prison time. Posting the same rehabilitation bullshit reply in every thread is repetitive and not even applicable because prison sentences aren't rehabilitation plants, punishments serve as deterrents, you don't deter people when the second worst crime you can commit gives you only 1 year, and people will respect the judicial system less as a result. The whole rehabilitation argument focuses on the minimum work to sort out one person, while showing so much leniency that there would be no reason to pay attention to the law. As for the guy that was speaking about no prison sentence, just PAROLE. Hell, why not drink and drive, if you fucking kill someone and drive away, uncaring, you won't go to prison, what a fantastic deterrent that is.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48511978]"I don't think 1 year is enough to ruin this kid's life, let's make it 10!" You can't be for "Rehabilitation of criminals" and think this way.[/QUOTE] No one here wants rehabilitation, they really just want to enact petty revenge and see people suffer. I don't understand the argument put forth by those who say that because the victim's life has been ruined, therefore the perpetrator must be harshly punished. So what, we ruin two lives instead of one? Great, society sure is better off with one guy dead and another rotting in prison for the rest of her life!

Drink driving is the most selfish self-centred thing to do. Disgusting.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48511978]"I don't think 1 year is enough to ruin this kid's life, let's make it 10!" You can't be for "Rehabilitation of criminals" and think this way.[/QUOTE] I was never for rehab, I still think some people should just rot in jails, and yet 1 year is still too small. Should have been 5 or 7. [editline]22nd August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=angelangel;48515957]Drink driving is the most selfish self-centred thing to do. Disgusting.[/QUOTE] So is suicide? kek

So in this incident, can the family of the deceased pursue compensation? I'm glad you guys are arguing about her sentence of 1 year, but what about the possible 20-30 years she took from, I don't know, the dead guy? You guys seem so focused on the girl, but you don't discuss what [B]the family[/B] of the deceased could do. Hopefully, the [B]US health system[/B] can surely rehab her in one year. /s What a joke, she should at least get community service.

She shouldn't be allowed a driving license for at least a decade imo. Atleast with her criminal record she'll have a tougher time getting work. Not to mention the shame of having to tell people she ran over and killed someone while drunk in every job interview ever.

[QUOTE=Kagu;48517742]So in this incident, can the family of the deceased pursue compensation? I'm glad you guys are arguing about her sentence of 1 year, but what about the possible 20-30 years she took from, I don't know, the dead guy? You guys seem so focused on the girl, but you don't discuss what [B]the family[/B] of the deceased could do. Hopefully, the [B]US health system[/B] can surely rehab her in one year. /s What a joke, she should at least get community service.[/QUOTE] Putting her in for longer isn't going to bring the guy back. [editline]22nd August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Dark RaveN;48516158]I was never for rehab, I still think some people should just rot in jails, and yet 1 year is still too small. Should have been 5 or 7. [editline]22nd August 2015[/editline] So is suicide? kek[/QUOTE] This is just arbitrarily throwing out numbers as a "Feel good" measure, this isn't how justice should work.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48518037]Putting her in for longer isn't going to bring the guy back.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the obvious, but the family probably doesn't think the same. Also, thanks for ignoring my other points, I never said she should be put in for longer but suggested that there should be other punishments. Your "righteous way" of thinking isn't enough for the family. I'm not asking for an eye, I'm suggesting other ways to compensate.

[QUOTE=Kagu;48518063]Thanks for the obvious, but the family probably doesn't think the same. Also, thanks for ignoring my other points, I never said she should be put in for longer but suggested that there should be other punishments. Your "righteous way" of thinking isn't enough for the family. I'm not asking for an eye, I'm suggesting other ways to compensate.[/QUOTE] Right, that was dumb of me to say.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48512115]This is basically what I try and say in every thread, I trust the judgement of an Alaskan judge more than the knee-jerk reaction of some angry teen on Facepunch. [editline]21st August 2015[/editline] People underestimate how long a year is, how much it effects your life to basically miss an entire year so early in it. You could've gone to college, saved up funds to go to college, gotten a job and a good living and live on your own, and now she gets to have a late-start to adulthood with felony charges on her record. 1 year is enough, stop with this emotional-based retribution bullshit, that isn't how justice should work. This is made even more ironic because a lot of the same people would claim to be for a "Rehabilitation based" prison system. You don't give people stupidly massive sentences for crimes in a rehabilitation-based system unless they're like, a pre-meditated mass shooter.[/QUOTE] Shouldn't have gotten drunk and drove a fucking vehicle, she deserves more than what she got for killing someone.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48515901]No one here wants rehabilitation, they really just want to enact petty revenge and see people suffer. I don't understand the argument put forth by those who say that because the victim's life has been ruined, therefore the perpetrator must be harshly punished. So what, we ruin two lives instead of one? Great, society sure is better off with one guy dead and another rotting in prison for the rest of her life![/QUOTE] Come back with that attitude when someone you know has been killed by a scumcunt like the bitch in this article. A one year sentence for this is a complete joke. A 2 year minimum should be in place for a DUI homicide, but she also fled, which should at least double that. I didn't see anything about license suspensions either. She deserves a suspension as well as a probationary period during which she can only commute to and from work (any tickets or accidents and the license is fucking gone).

I've always felt a DUI should entail a far harsher punishment than it currently does---it should be an instant suspended license with a stint in prison, or something along those lines. It shouldn't take killing someone for a person to stop doing it. We need to stop them before that can happen.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48518037]Putting her in for longer isn't going to bring the guy back. [/QUOTE] So are you saying that man's life was only worth one year?

[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;48516158]I was never for rehab, I still think some people should just rot in jails, and yet 1 year is still too small. Should have been 5 or 7. [editline]22nd August 2015[/editline] So is suicide? kek[/QUOTE] Unless you're a suicide bomber, you're not going to kill anyone else unlike a drink driver.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;48520081]So are you saying that man's life was only worth one year?[/QUOTE] Is 1 too low a number because it's the lowest number we have? It's arbitrary what people throw out there as to what's "Just", and forget just how long a year is. Saying how much worth the man's life shouldn't even be a necessary and is only used to justify revenge boners people have. Let's say you drove drunk, killed someone, got sentenced to 2 years in prison and everyone else wanted you to be in for 7. Do you not realize how long 7 years is? Hell that's a number people throw out here and say is justified, it's ridiculous. People forget the sense of scale time is and just how long these people have to spend isolated from the world and just throw out numbers until they feel good. That isn't how justice should work.