Whether or not it is murder is a legal matter, which would be completely unchanged if there was no grieving family.
The only major difference between manslaughter, 1st degree or 2nd degree murder is intent.
I would argue that if you are driving recklessly or dangerously (two different legal definitions), especially at high speed or while drunk/high, there’s a reasonable expectation that your actions can and will kill someone.
Manslaughter isn’t good enough. To me, it’s as equal to murder as firing a gun into a crowd (even if you claim you didn’t intend to kill people).
If you accidentally lock your coworker in the walk-in oven at work and they die, you probably never see the inside of a prison.
Completely different from being reckless and/or dangerous in a vehicle.
Dangerous driving causing death would not, and should not, ever be considered an “accident”.
If you dropped bricks from a building, anyone would agree that those actions will probably kill someone. It’s not good enough to say “three people died because you decided to throw bricks off a building, we’ll give you six months probation for being reckless.”. That’s not justice for anyone.
If “murder” doesn’t fit in the context of death by car, let’s come up with another legal charge that’s more appropriate than manslaughter.
We constantly read stories like this one, where three people were killed by a DUI driver who was also speeding, yet served no time and only 1 year driving suspension.
Or a trucker who killed four and was only given six years in prison, despite being given the “harsher” charge of dangerous driving.
Or this guy, who was racing and killed a woman in a hit-and-run, only got two years. And the only reason why he got a slap on the wrist, is because it wasn’t proven that he wanted to kill the cyclist.
The moment your actions behind the wheel are deliberately dangerous, the context changes, IMO.
Fair points, for sure.
The only major difference between manslaughter, 1st degree or 2nd degree murder is intent.
I would argue that if you are driving recklessly or dangerously (two different legal definitions), especially at high speed or while drunk/high, there’s a reasonable expectation that your actions can and will kill someone.
Manslaughter isn’t good enough. To me, it’s as equal to murder as firing a gun into a crowd (even if you claim you didn’t intend to kill people).
Completely different from being reckless and/or dangerous in a vehicle.
Dangerous driving causing death would not, and should not, ever be considered an “accident”.
If you dropped bricks from a building, anyone would agree that those actions will probably kill someone. It’s not good enough to say “three people died because you decided to throw bricks off a building, we’ll give you six months probation for being reckless.”. That’s not justice for anyone.
If “murder” doesn’t fit in the context of death by car, let’s come up with another legal charge that’s more appropriate than manslaughter.
We constantly read stories like this one, where three people were killed by a DUI driver who was also speeding, yet served no time and only 1 year driving suspension.
Or a trucker who killed four and was only given six years in prison, despite being given the “harsher” charge of dangerous driving.
Or this guy, who was racing and killed a woman in a hit-and-run, only got two years. And the only reason why he got a slap on the wrist, is because it wasn’t proven that he wanted to kill the cyclist.
The moment your actions behind the wheel are deliberately dangerous, the context changes, IMO.