|
He is screwed.
If that person dies, he could be charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, reckless driving, and manslaughter. Except no less than 10 years.
All we can do is to pray for the well-being of the victims.
EDIT: some information for you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_(Canada)
If no one is killed or hurt, and the prosecutor is proceeding by summary conviction, the maximum sentence is 18 months of jail. If no is killed or hurt, and the prosecutor is proceeding by indictment, the maximum sentence is 5 years of jail.[16]
If another person suffers bodily harm because of the offence, the maximum sentence is 10 years in jail.[18]
If another person is killed because of the offence, the maximum sentence is a life sentence.[19]
Since someone is seriously hurt (actually, two people), he is looking at around 10 years assuming they don't die. If that person dies, o boy.
|
On January 03 2010 14:54 psion0011 wrote:
Your buddy should get the death penalty.
troll.
|
On January 03 2010 15:04 Rotodyne wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 14:54 psion0011 wrote:
Your buddy should get the death penalty. troll.
If that person dies, he COULD face life imprisonment, however, which is the second harshest punishment available in Canada.
|
On January 03 2010 14:57 Rainmaker5 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 14:54 psion0011 wrote:
Your buddy should get the death penalty. Right because that will solve all of our problems.
Well, something is wrong with the system of deterrents in place if people continue to drink and drive, and in the process put other people at risk. If the punishment is harsh enough, you're not going to drink and drive. Simple as that.
|
Snet
United States3573 Posts
What was his BAC? When police say he failed the test, in some states that's as low as .02 BAC which wouldn't of been the cause of this accident.
He's probably getting up to a couple of years for seriously injuring 2 people while under the influence. He better hope to god no one dies.
Then he has to worry about being sued. Your friend is fucked for a long time.
|
On January 03 2010 15:10 Snet wrote:
What was his BAC? When police say he failed the test, in some states that's as low as .02 BAC which wouldn't of been the cause of this accident.
He's probably getting up to a year for seriously injuring 2 people while under the influence. He better hope to god no one dies.
Then he has to worry about being sued. Your friend is fucked for a long time.
It's 0.08 in most provinces in Canada. And since it's DUI causing bodily harm, the Crown Attorney is obviously going to press charges.
|
On January 03 2010 11:07 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
If you're going to drive drunk, at least eat a loaf of bread and drink a gallon of water to at least pretend like you give a shit.
that shit doesnt work.
only way to sober up is to wait until your liver processes the alcohol
|
On January 03 2010 15:14 SoMuchBetter wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 11:07 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
If you're going to drive drunk, at least eat a loaf of bread and drink a gallon of water to at least pretend like you give a shit. that shit doesnt work. only way to sober up is to wait until your liver processes the alcohol
The only way is to ASK a friend to drive you home and make sure you stay at the backseat.
|
On January 03 2010 15:04 Rotodyne wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 14:54 psion0011 wrote:
Your buddy should get the death penalty. troll.
uhh no drunk drivers should all be killed before they kill innocent people
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
Drunk drivers that are above a certain limit (say .12 BAC) should lose their license for life. There's so much information on drunk driving and its consequences that they need to be pulled off the road for good. Sure it will fuck up their life not to be able to drive, but it's better than having them be able to be out there posing a danger to others.
I dunno how harsh jail time should be, though. Locking someone up for life for what is essentially an accident doesn't seem right to me, even if the drunk driver kills someone.
|
Snet
United States3573 Posts
On January 03 2010 15:22 motbob wrote:
Drunk drivers that are above a certain limit (say .12 BAC) should lose their license for life. There's so much information on drunk driving and its consequences that they need to be pulled off the road for good. Sure it will fuck up their life not to be able to drive, but it's better than having them be able to be out there posing a danger to others.
I dunno how harsh jail time should be, though. Locking someone up for life for what is essentially an accident doesn't seem right to me, even if the drunk driver kills someone.
I agree for repeat offenders.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On January 03 2010 15:23 Snet wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 15:22 motbob wrote:
Drunk drivers that are above a certain limit (say .12 BAC) should lose their license for life. There's so much information on drunk driving and its consequences that they need to be pulled off the road for good. Sure it will fuck up their life not to be able to drive, but it's better than having them be able to be out there posing a danger to others.
I dunno how harsh jail time should be, though. Locking someone up for life for what is essentially an accident doesn't seem right to me, even if the drunk driver kills someone. I agree for repeat offenders.
For most crimes, whether or not the crime is a repeat offense should be a big factor in the severity of the punishment. But for drunk driving, it's my opinion that the deluge of "over the limit under arrest" commercials and stuff like that negates the usefulness of the repeat offender policy. Maybe I'm being too harsh, though.
|
On January 03 2010 15:22 motbob wrote:
Drunk drivers that are above a certain limit (say .12 BAC) should lose their license for life. There's so much information on drunk driving and its consequences that they need to be pulled off the road for good. Sure it will fuck up their life not to be able to drive, but it's better than having them be able to be out there posing a danger to others.
I dunno how harsh jail time should be, though. Locking someone up for life for what is essentially an accident doesn't seem right to me, even if the drunk driver kills someone.
That's the maximum sentense. In Canada most criminals get early parole so even a maximum sentense is issued he probably will get out in no more than 25 years.
|
On January 03 2010 14:48 Tien wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 10:20 ShcShc wrote:
(dunno if I should post the news article, but here's the copy/paste)
" Two pedestrians were seriously injured downtown this morning by a drunk driver.
The man who was hit, 25, is reportedly in critical condition while the woman, 50, is considered stable, police said.
The SUV was headed east on Ste. Catherine St. W. around 4 a.m. when the driver swerved, possibly to avoid to another vehicle. He hit another car and rolled onto the sidewalk between Crescent St. and de la Montagne St., striking the victims.
The driver and passenger of the vehicle were uninjured. Police arrested the driver and brought him back to the police station for an alcohol test, which he failed.
Police suspect it was the combination of alcohol, speed and weather that caused the accident. "
=>
What seemed to have happened:
Apparently a taxi came out of nowhere and he tried to avoid it, but instead hits another car and hits twp pedestrians on the sidewalk. As far as I know, he drank a few mini-shots in the club (I think) and didn't seem to have that much tolerance (but I barely know the guy and probably biased because I have a stereotype that asians don't have much tolerance). He honestly looked fine when I saw him about 5 minutes before the accident.
I almost hopped in his car to go eat at a Restaurant with other friends, but I decided to take the taxi home instead (too tired to go beyond 5am).
He's just an acquaintance. Seemed like a nice guy though (despite this...).
what is the most likely situation that can happen to him?
He failed the alcohol test.
Was this new years? I heard about this. I think I was close to the area.
Yeah. New Years Day.
|
It's a shame. He should have used his head instead of the car.
Something tells me you and your friends should have stopped him before he got in his car. -_-
|
These is obviously a horrific thing, and this guy does deserve a pretty harsh punishment for fucking this guys life up possibly permanently. But these people saying drunk drivers deserve to die are idiotic.
|
On January 03 2010 15:38 bEsT[Alive] wrote:
It's a shame. He should have used his head instead of the car.
Something tells me you and your friends should have stopped him before he got in his car. -_-
Maybe. But he's just an acquaintance and he seemed sober enough.
I would feel much more guilty in other times where I knew a friend drank a lot and I still let him drive (though without accidents/without getting caught).
I do sometimes feel that drunk driving happens pretty frequently.
I think that's whats more disturbing. It happens pretty often, almost as if its the normal thing to do.
|
Friend, acquaintance, stranger, or not. It's about accountability man. Everything else is negligence =/
Drunk driving happens a lot because:
a) people believe it won't happen to them: "It was only one drink."
b) self-image: they don't want to look bad/weak. Kind of absurd don't you think?
c) don't be that guy (the party killer): "Give me your keys man." "Why? "Because you had a few drinks."
d) negligence & responsibility. This one pertains to everybody unfortunately including the bartenders and you. o:
|
On January 03 2010 15:28 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 15:23 Snet wrote:On January 03 2010 15:22 motbob wrote:
Drunk drivers that are above a certain limit (say .12 BAC) should lose their license for life. There's so much information on drunk driving and its consequences that they need to be pulled off the road for good. Sure it will fuck up their life not to be able to drive, but it's better than having them be able to be out there posing a danger to others.
I dunno how harsh jail time should be, though. Locking someone up for life for what is essentially an accident doesn't seem right to me, even if the drunk driver kills someone. I agree for repeat offenders. For most crimes, whether or not the crime is a repeat offense should be a big factor in the severity of the punishment. But for drunk driving, it's my opinion that the deluge of "over the limit under arrest" commercials and stuff like that negates the usefulness of the repeat offender policy. Maybe I'm being too harsh, though.
I think you are. You underestimate the amount of times that drunk driving is a legitimate mistake that the person themselves feels terrible about. Say someone usually never does something like this, but in a fit of rage, love, whatever, they go to drive somewhere after having one too many drinks. They get pulled over, and lose their license for life? The punishment doesn't fit the crime imo. Now if they do it again that's another story.
I'm concerned with the sentiment of "they should be given the death penalty". While punishment is meant as a deterrent in many cases (a fine for example), just as often it's meant to provide society a way to remove a problem from itself and possible fix it. Prison terms can be rehabilitating for some people and some crimes and not just meant as punishment. Things can also only be deterred up to a certain point. If I know that if I murder someone and get caught I'll get 50 years in jail, but do it anyway, then it's very unlikely that a death penalty would be enough either. However, after those 50 years if I get out of prison, it's probably very likely that I'll have changed quite a bit from my murderous youth. (Of course there are situations were rehabilitation is unlikely, like serial killers, and then the death penalty would be appropriate). But this is just kind of a tangent on penalty/crime anyway.
This guy is probably going to get the book thrown at him regardless. These are exactly the types of cases that the harsher laws about drunk driver were designed to prosecute and he will no doubt get 5+ years in jail at least (assuming the person he hit doesn't die).
edit: I actually had a friend drink under the influence New Years morning, like 2:00 AM. It was literally down a residential street about 1 minute, but still. I was passed out but I'm a bit disappointed my other friends didn't stop him.
|
On January 03 2010 15:05 illu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2010 15:04 Rotodyne wrote:On January 03 2010 14:54 psion0011 wrote:
Your buddy should get the death penalty. troll. If that person dies, he COULD face life imprisonment, however, which is the second harshest punishment available in Canada.
Second harshest? I thought that was the worst you hippies could do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
