Is it the act or the object used to commit the act?
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Is it the act or the object used to commit the act?

  1. #1

    Is it the act or the object used to commit the act?

    As I was driving home from work today I observed a woman engrossed in talking into her iphone as she was driving. I first thought of the recent shooting in CA where people were zombified and didn't notice the shooter. Next I thought to myself, what if she killed someone while driving and being distracted.

    This brought me back to a personal tragedy that happened a few years ago. I close friend of mine was riding his motorcycle when a motorist violated his right of way by making a left turn in front of him. The resultant crash killed my friend. The driver had drugs in his system on the toxicology report but evidently not enough that he could be charged with a dui or dwi (whatever Florida calls it). The motorist was still negligent and his negligence resulted in the death of my friend. The motorist got a ticket, paid a fine and that was it.

    I would surmise that if you negligently killed someone with a gun it would be an open and shut involuntary manslaughter conviction; which leads to my question: "Is it the act, or the object used to commit the act?"

    Negligence is negligence. I am in no way saying that anyone who negligently kills someone with a gun deserves a ticket. I think those that kill with a car deserve a conviction.

    thoughts?
    Steady gun, sight reference, trigger control.


  2.   
  3. #2
    I am in complete agreement with you. A crime is a crime, be it with a gun or an auto. Even using a club, it is still murder. Do the time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    I am old and slow, BUT dead on with my aim!!

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    West Jordan, Utah
    Posts
    154
    I agree fully. If you kill someone then you kill someone and should be held responsible for it. I see to many instances where someone is not held responsible. There was an example just a few months ago where a mother and father left a loaded .22 criket rifle where their kids could get it and the small child got it and shot his little sister killing her. How can the parents NOT be responsible in that matter? The rifle itself has a built in lock, how hard is it to see the negligence in this case?


  5. #4
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Houston, Texas, United States
    Posts
    519
    Ban Iphones? Ban Driving? Have a nationwide curfew of everything. When prior text and drive and kill someone they get right prosecuted....an incident with a gun....we all get blamed. Libtards can't make that connection(more likely revise to). IT'S NOT ABOUT THE GUN, IT'S JUST ABOUT CONTROL.

    Sent from my SGH-M919 using USA Carry mobile app

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    "Funny thing about killing a man, you take all that he was and all that he ever will be." In other words you have taken everything from them past, present, and future. For those who remember the quote, hats off to you.

    I don't care if it was intentional or not, unless it is in self-defense or defense of another, the killing of anyone regardless of how you do it should be one of the most aggressively penalized laws that we have.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast