gpsblake

https://www.acadiananow.com/news/html...B9D966C1.shtml

LAFAYETTE — Anna Louviere, 78, was out for a walk to get some exercise Tuesday morning when she was struck and killed by a driver who should never have been on the road. Family members said Wednesday that Louviere often went for walks.

“My mother had gone to pay her rent yesterday, but it was closed, so she decided to go to the store instead. So, that was her walk; that was her exercise,” said Diane Groh, one of Louviere’s daughters.

Five pedestrians and a bicyclist have died on Lafayette roads since January, police said Wednesday, and in the last week alone, two of them have been at the hands of drivers on the road illegally.

<rest at link>

My viewpoint is simply this. If someone is driving illegally (suspended license, legally drunk etc) and kills someone, it should be 2nd degree murder. Since what they knew was illegal, the intent was there in my opinion. I also think if somone kills someone and drives-off, should be 2nd degree murder also. Until they pass much stronger laws against this behavior, it is almost like a freebie to kill someone in an automobile and drivers know they have nothing to lose by driving off after hitting a bicyclist.

ctyler

I couldn't agree with you more. As mentioned in other posts on this forum, you can get away with murder by killing someone with your car. There was a guy in my town who had been arrested 6 times for drunk driving and hit a killed an elderly lady while driving drunk. Why was he behind the wheel of a car? It does no good to suspend a drivers license because they just drive without one. It wouldn't do any good to take their car because a friend will loan one to them or they'll just buy another one. And don't get me started on plea bargening!

khuon

I think one thing that needs to be taken into account when someone is found guilty of driving under the influence is some sort of analysis or study to determine how likely they are to repeat and appropriate actions should be taken to prevent it. In many ways this should not be unlike how sex-offenders are treated.

DieselDan

Just like the special plate that cyclists get (see my avater for SC's) maybe DUI offenders should be required to have a "special" plate as well.

slvoid

And once again, I will have to repeat what I've been saying all along.

In america, the absolute easiest way to kill someone is by running them over in your car. That's right, if you don't like someone, then just study how so many hundreds of people get away with murder everywhere when they hit someone with their car then just carefully plan the same scenario. Guaranteed you will get away.

Daily Commute

Murder means intentionally killing someone. There has to be a difference between intentionally killing someone and a tragic accident. The more flagrant the driving violations are, the higher the penalty should be for killing someone by accident. For instance, a drunk driver should get more than a sober person who ran a yellow, someone going 30 mph over the speed limit should get more than someone going 10 mph over the limit. But murder is different.

clancy98

This is now being used in Ohio... Its a bright yellow plate with red letters you get after even a single DUI... Affectionately referred to as "party tags" by the college kid crowd.

The most important part is that you can be pulled over at any time, for absolutely no reason if your car has these tags on it. Started in January. You guys think this is just right or too much?

CLancy

ctyler

It's still not enough. Why should you be driving if you have more than one DUI conviction?

clancy98

no, read closely, these are for first time offenders....

the penalties for repeat offenders have been raised significantly also..

and "I" am NOT driving around with multiple convictions, (just in case there was some confusion CT)

slvoid

There was a case that someone got off killing a cyclist cause they didn't see him as he rounded a corner and ran right into him.
Ok, so suppose I really hated someone cause their dog was always crapping in my lawn and we had a pretty heated argument over it. And suppose 2 years later, after a lot of patience and planning, I now know his route and next time he's walking in the street at precisely the right moment I mow him down in my pick up truck while spilling hot coffee on myself. Then I declare that the sun was in my eyes and I spilled my coffee and I get away with it. It might've looked like an accident but it's still murder.

khuon

Wait wait! Slow down. I'm still writing. Can you perhaps start over and break this down into 12 easy steps? Please don't leave out any details.

BeTheChange

The drung driver plates is a marvelous idea. Hell, if you got a DUI you should be able to get pulled at any time. Even if they don't do it that often it will still be in the back of the drunk's mind.

Not being able to see the pedestrian of cyclist because the sun is in your eyes, or you are rounding a curve is completely the driver's fault. I was talking to a fellow student in organic lab and he was in a car with a girl who was driving 50mph in dense fog where she should have been going 15mph and hit and killed an old woman who was taking a left in front of her with not lights on. I really can't believe people.

If you are drunk and hit someone it needs to be less of a charge than leaving the scene of the accident or drunks will feel they have nothing to loose by leaving. If you don't have your liscence and you hit and kill someone it should be automatic 2nd degree murder because you know what you are doing is illegal and you don't have your liscence for a reason. It's something to work toward all.

Dchiefransom

Yes, I have a problem with it. After all punishment involving a DUI has been taken care of, this is a very bad violation of people's Constitutional rights.

Daily Commute

You've demonstrated that sometimes people can lie and get away with things. That doesn't mean that we have to treat all accidents as if the driver intentionally killed someone.

As to the driver you mentioned, what were the facts? Was the cyclist reckless? What did the prosecutor charge? If the prosecutor took your attitude and tried to prove murder, I can see why the driver walked away.

ctyler

Tragic Accident? Give me a break. As the driver of a car you are required to have your car under control at all times. If you can't see ahead of you, SLOW down. If the sun is in you eyes, SLOW down or stop! Run a red light and kill someone? That's a tragic accident? To me that's murder.

kurremkarm

Driving on the roads is not a consitutional right it is a priveledge.

DUI is being treated harshly and i have zero problem with that. The plates are a great idea and i wish they had em in kansas.

Daily Commute

Then, quite frankly, you have no clue what "murder" is.

I'm not saying these drivers should walk free. I'm just saying there's a difference between causing a death by doing something stupid and intentionally mowing someone down. The law should treat intentional killing more severely than accidental killing.

PedalDog

We had a recent case in the UK where a drunk driver with no insurance ran down and killed a girl at Christmas in the early hours.
He was jailed for 7 years but in a recent retrial he had the sentence reduced to 5 years!
A life is less valuable to the recent judges I suppose!
I am for a total revocation of licence for good with drunk drivers. NO EXCUSES!

sbhikes

We had a local case in the wealthy section of town where a woman killed a pedestrian with her SUV. She went home, probably slept it off, then hours later, when any alcohol in her system would have worn off -- IF there was any -- she called the police to report that she thought she felt something hit her SUV on the way home from a dinner party. Of course she got away with murder.

Becca

If it gets the drunks off the road, I'm all for it.

NYCBM

DWS- Driving While Sleepy. I remember watchign a tv show that did a test to see who drives better, drunks or sleepy heads. The drunks were the better drivers.

suntreader

A feeble attempt was made to force convicted South Carolina DUI's to use special "drunk tags" on their cars, but it was quickly shot down in the state legislature. Reason: to force the stigma of a special tag on a DUI constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Needless to say, the SC legislature at that time was packed with trial lawyers who make their living putting drunk drivers back on the road.

Allow me to vent just a little more...

Ten years ago a 60 year old member of my church choir was killed on his bike by a drunk woman on her way home from a club at 7am on a weekday. The court really taught her a lesson, though. She was given six months probation! The reason for leniency: the trauma of killing another human being was punishment enough. Why ruin her life by making her go to jail as well?

Well, I don't know how the young drunk driver is doing now, but the cyclist's widow still attends grief couseling group meetings at our church each month.

Daily Commute

The yellow tags perfectly constitutional because the drunk driver has a chance to make the city prove he's guilty of a crime before he gets the tags. There may be some quirks dealing with family members who drive the same car, but those can be worked out.

And suntreader, I'm sorry for your loss. I agree that drunk drivers who kill should spend time in prison.

Hopper

This is a bit different but part of it is realative.

In South Australia there are requests being made by the police to make P plate drivers who break the law while driving (speeding or have ANY alchol in their body) have to use different coloured P plates to everyone else. This is mainly just t make an example of the person along with the 6 month driving ban.

ctyler

You're playing a game with semantics. Murder means you planned to kill someone? Dead is dead, no matter how you kill someone.