The Liverpool incident.

[Darran]

Yes.

You are conflating entirely different crimes.

I’m making a point about using a car as a weapon.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

I’m making a point about using a car as a weapon.

Someone drink driving is not doing that though.

It may result in the same outcome but as I said before, the intent is not the same. And intent matters under the law.

 

[Darran]

Someone drink driving is not doing that though.

It may result in the same outcome but as I said before, the intent is not the same. And intent matters under the law.

I’m not disagreeing with you but how can the sentences be so far apart when a car is involved.
I’m pretty sure you’d have given the woman who killed a baby more than 4 years.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

I’m not disagreeing with you but how can the sentences be so far apart when a car is involved.
I’m pretty sure you’d have given the woman who killed a baby more than 4 years.

Yes I would.

But a lot of sentencing is all over the shop. The fact that having indecent images of children is not an automatic 10 year sentence plus chemical castration is beyond me.

But the crimes here are totally different. Drunk driving doesn’t involve intent to harm. He deliberately harmed as many as he could until he was forcibly stopped.

 

[Darran]

Yes I would.

But a lot of sentencing is all over the shop. The fact that having indecent images of children is not an automatic 10 year sentence plus chemical castration is beyond me.

But the crimes here are totally different. Drunk driving doesn’t involve intent to harm. He deliberately harmed as many as he could until he was forcibly stopped.

Thank you,I quite like you.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

Thank you,I quite like you.

Obviously.

 

[Darran]

Obviously.

Ok don’t push it.

 

[Jack2jack]

Yes I would.

But a lot of sentencing is all over the shop. The fact that having indecent images of children is not an automatic 10 year sentence plus chemical castration is beyond me.

But the crimes here are totally different. Drunk driving doesn’t involve intent to harm. He deliberately harmed as many as he could until he was forcibly stopped.

But surely if you get into a car and you are drunk, then you know before hand that there is a chance you may crash into someone and cause harm, then the intent is there. Although I'm sure the law would argue against that view. Clearly I'm not lawyer just saying.

 

[exiledclaseboy]

“Driving offence”.

 

[Jack2jack]

Don’t bother A you know what these argumentative twats are like.

They’re like one of those awkward pricks who get done for speeding but won’t admit who was driving the car when there’s a couple of people insured to drive it,they’d rather waste police time than admit it.

No aimed at anyone in particular of course.

Aye maybe for the best, take it easy pal

 

[jack123]

But surely if you get into a car and you are drunk, then you know before hand that there is a chance you may crash into someone and cause harm, then the intent is there. Although I'm sure the law would argue against that view. Clearly I'm not lawyer just saying.

And that’s one thing, I’ve never been able to really wrap my head around, if some idiot takes his car keys with them when out on the drink, they should face the full force of the law.

I understand the difference between intent though, at the time a would be drink driver left the house with their keys, did they really intend to potentially cause death or serious injury to somebody?

I must admit, this had me think, if I was doing over the speed limit in a 20mph area, and a young child run out, and because of my speed, I caused that child an injury, then I’d be exactly the same as Mr. peed up Joe Bloggs, although I didn’t intend to cause any injury to anyone, my selfish actions at the time would have caused that.

 

[Jack2jack]

And that’s one thing, I’ve never been able to really wrap my head around, if some idiot takes his car keys with them when out on the drink, they should face the full force of the law.

I understand the difference between intent though, at the time a would be drink driver left the house with their keys, did they really intend to potentially cause death or serious injury to somebody?

I must admit, this had me think, if I was doing over the speed limit in a 20mph area, and a young child run out, and because of my speed, I caused that child an injury, then I’d be exactly the same as Mr. peed up Joe Bloggs, although I didn’t intend to cause any injury to anyone, my selfish actions at the time would have caused that.

The law is a funny animal 123. And for us mere mortals its unfathomable.

 

[Jack2jack]

I’ve no idea why you can’t have a decent debate on here anymore.

I'm out.

 

[Darran]

It’s mostly cos of you. You are everything you claim to hate next door.

I’m only asking why sentences are so different from similar (ish) crimes.

Seriously it wouldn’t surprise me if something else happens before Christmas too.

 

[jack123]

The law is a funny animal 123. And for us mere mortals its unfathomable.

Yes. Hopefully sometime soon, the law will change that favours public opinion. There’s been so many wasted lives, be it drink drivers, young men having a race and crashing and killing a family, There was no intent to hurt anyone, but they were doing 80 plus on the wrong side of the road.