Please think this over a bit before answering. Try not to answer emotionally.

 

I believe they may not know the intent.. but I believe by knowingly breaking a law that puts the public at risk and killing someone while breaking that law.. I believe it could be classified as murder the outcome is forseeable even if the person who it happens to would be random.

However I do think it would be better if they would change it to make it more clear.

 

no intent to kill means no murder. unless you want to change the definition of the word murder. we do things that involve risk every day. if you drive 1 mph over the speed limit you are breaking the law. if you get in a wreck going that speed and someone gets killed, is it murder? 'its not the same thing' you say. oh yes it is. i cant stand people who lack the ability to be objective.
oh...and this is not a response to your post rotary so dont take offense.

 

Yea well the the phrase "street racing" comes up too often. It pisses me off that whenever a teenager crashes nowadays they always say.. "well he must have been street racing"


If your following a friend on the highway and your going faster than the speed limit, your street racing. No its just two cars that are speeding.

 

Well in the case in the other thread the courts so far rule it as any inherently dangerous act. You have to make a decision to race and you know that your driving on a public road so it must be inherently dangerous to do so. Kind of the same way our laws covering drunk driving came about. Its not your intend to crash and kill somebody but to drink and then drive its an inherently dangerous act that you knowingly take part it. Only difference is MADD helped get it made into a law. Public opinion is directing this current trend.

 

manslaughter is killing someone due to negligance. drunk driving and street racing fit into this category. murder by definition is something else.

 

Your "poll" is flawed because it puts qualifiers in, that don't allow me to answer. I would like to answer "no" but with no qualifier.
A striaght survey shouldn't try and guide a response.

T

 

I think we'll see a special law covering street racing in the next couple years. It already started with states passing laws that allow them to seize and keep your car. If the trend keeps up the majority of the population will end up making a new law just to fit the situation.

 

The intent of the survey choices is not to "guide" a response, it is to ascertain the reason for your answer. I was working within the limits of the technology on this forum. If you don't like it, I suggest using one of the more sophisticated tools available and post your own poll.

Would you prefer a useless CNN style: "Should we got to war with Iraq?"

YES or NO?

What does that really tell us?

Not much I say.

I'll try to have the moderator add "No; for other reasons"

 

so very true...and one of the things thats so f'd up about this country. emotion should play no part in law. of course im talking about a 'should be' which is the equivalent of fantasy.

 

btw...ive never street raced...not once. im just very opinionated. (i do drive fast most of the time though.)

 

Yes, a "yes" or "no" would have been better and then allow the purpose of the forum to articulate the rationale.

The best type of surveys are indeed the simplest when trying to ascertain sheer number.

There is no need to get upset about my comment on your survey. I was just pointing out that your responses have a slight "tone" to them which is in line with your opinion on this case. IOW, it's not so clear cut that the available responses indicate anything other than those who agree or disagree with you. But, nothing wrong with that. I was just making a point.

I don't consider it "murder". Manslaughter yes and it should be involuntary manslaughter at that. There is a reason why it's called "involuntary".
It comes down to "intent". And the law is normally interpreted. However, it should be left to the jury to interpret not the PA or the judge.

I think the charge is so heavy so that they use this as a political tool to demonstrate their eagerness to help stamp out the problem of the day, which probably is the dreaded and so nasty "street racing".
The charge will be pleaded down as the accused probably don't have the money to fight the issue. This is where money helps.

There was a question posed; that if a person were to get into an accident due to speeding, and an officer decided he should quickly get to the scene by driving very fast, and subsequently hit a car and killed the occupents,
should the "speeder" be charged with "murder"? That is a very good question. I was rather surprised that people would agree that it would be ok to charge the speeder with the "murder" charge. Frankly, I find it ludicrous, just as I think murder in the 2nd degree is not the right charge here either.

This is typical of our legal system and society today. Someone is always to blame and must be held to the highest extent of the law. Well, in a free society with supposed "rational" thinking, "murder" is a ridiculous charge.
Have we gone go far to blame others for everything that we can no longer understand "intent"? Think of this, if those people weren't on the road then they wouldn't have got hurt. Yes, that is a bit out there, but so is the 2nd degree murder charge.

What if you were walking in a car dealers lot and slipped on a patch of ice which the dealer knew was there, and you slipped on it and hit your head and died. Is the dealer guilty of 2nd degree murder?

Law is very interesting. I guess that's why it's always "practiced" rather than being concrete.

T

 

In Texas, it's classified as criminal negligent homicide...and rightfully so.