Felony texting while driving

[sealine]

A general sense. As police officers, we are not the law-makers, it is our job to judge character and infer whether or not someone should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Negative Ghost Rider.

 

[PaulB47]

I am training to be a police officer and as a police officer I can say this, it largely depends on the kind of person we are dealing with here. A 20 year old, disrespectful hipster yuppie who is texting is a threat and danger to society.

So are cops...

 

[Provincial]

Perhaps we should check Courtney's campaign donations for links to insurance companies or their lobbyists. Insurance companies like to promote legislation that might reduce claims.

 

[fxdc]

So an injury resulting in a lifelong disability for an innocent recipient would not rise to the level of prison time?

Let me clear this up for you and others. As variables can exist.

Mandatory prison 10yrs or more pending .... we're drugs also involved or booze.

Life long disability. ... yes prison time.

No injuries. But the cars, major fine as stated before.

 

[teflon6string]

That's mo' betta. I think...

Injuring me or someone I love because one is unwilling to prioritize driving a motor vehicle over shooting texts? I would insist that years of angry buttrape in prison be just one of many consequences.

 

[Alexx1401]

Let me clear this up for you and others. As variables can exist.

Mandatory prison 10yrs or more pending .... we're drugs also involved or booze.

Life long disability. ... yes prison time.

No injuries. But the cars, major fine as stated before.

I have LONG thought they should treat "vehicle crime" like "gun crime". Shoot someone because you thought it would be fun, no guns for life. Drive drunk and high, run from Cops and kill someone? No problem here's your license back. It should be you are banned from operating a vehicle for life.

 

[mkwerx]

I have LONG thought they should treat "vehicle crime" like "gun crime". Shoot someone because you thought it would be fun, no guns for life. Drive drunk and high, run from Cops and kill someone? No problem here's your license back. It should be you are banned from operating a vehicle for life.

Doesn't work - only the law abiding would abide by such a ban. Just like gun ownership. A felon bent on owning a gun will own a gun. A drunk bent on driving a car will drive a car. Neither gives two squirts of runny poo about the law.

10 years prison is also a bit excessive IMO - even if the victim is paralyzed. Hefty fines - and a year behind bars I could see. Even better than locking the person up though - would be changing the law and making the perpetrator actually financially compensate the victim. Just like child support or spousal support - you paralyze someone, 25% of your pre-tax income goes straight to them. Put a red tag on the driver license of the perp so that every employer knows this and the funds go to escrow to pay the victim(s). I can only see someone getting long prison terms if they killed someone - 10 years for vehicular homicide.

But if we're going to go that route - then we need to change and address the other things - like DUII, to make sure the punishments are equal.

But then again, I still think we could wipe away 90% of the laws on the books and craft broader laws with real common sense behind them.

Premeditated Homicide - the act of intentionally planning to kill another and carrying out the act

Homicide - intentionally killing another in the heat of the moment or without prior planning

Unintentional Homicide - the act of killing another through carelessness, recklessness, or negligence, without intent but through actions a reasonable person would deem reckless, negligent, or careless.

Vehicular Homicide - the act of unintentionally killing someone by failing to perform the duties of a driver, failure to drive in a safe manner, driving under the influence of intoxicants, or driving while distracted

Attempted Premeditated Homicide - the act of attempting to kill someone with prior planning

Attempted Homicide - the act of attempting to kill a person without premeditation.

Battery - the act of intentionally physically injuring another, without the intent to kill them

Causing Unintentional Injury to Another - the act of causing physical injury to another person without intent, through actions a reasonable person would deem negligent, reckless, or careless

Sexual Assault - the act of intentionally forcing sexual relations of any nature upon a non-consenting person, or engaging in sexual relations with a person not legally able to give consent, such as minors, or persons suffering from mental illness or disability

Kidnapping - unlawfully detaining, imprisoning, or restraining another against their will

Theft - intentionally depriving or attempting to deprive a person or entity of property, or the use of said property

Burglary - entering into the property of another person or entity with the intent to commit theft, battery, homicide, or sexual assault

Trespass - entering the property of another person or entity, without their consent, or remaining upon the property after being told to leave said property.

Careless Driving - operating a motor vehicle in an unsafe manner, in such a way that a reasonable person would deem to be careless and likely to cause minor property damage or physical injury to others, or actually caused such property damage or physical injury

Reckless driving - operating a motor vehicle in an unsafe manner, in such a way that a reasonable person would deem reckless and likely to cause major property damage or severe physical injury to others, or actually caused such property damage or physical injury

Official Malfeasance and Misconduct- committing any crime or crimes while serving in any governmental capacity, whether appointed, elected, or volunteer, or attempting to deprive other citizens of any constitutional rights either through legislation, unreasonable enforcement action. A conviction of this crime automatically doubles the sentence for the crime committed, because of the person violating the public trust and violating their oath of office.

I don't really see a big need for any other laws. It would also keep the .gov operating within their Constitutional bounds, or at least closer to it. There are so few laws listed that the whole "ignorance is no excuse" would need not apply, because there would be almost no excuse for not knowing those few laws. Only extreme mental disability would prevent someone from learning and understanding those laws.

Punishment should be appropriate to the offense, and the victim should be able to petition the court for what they believe an appropriate sentence should be, and the judge/jury should take that into consideration and come up with an appropriate punishment on a case by case basis, based on the facts of the case. For non-person to person crimes - financial compensation should be the punishment. For person to person crimes - an appropriate term of imprisonment AND restitution to be paid - either by asset transfer (that is, taking the property and monies of the perpetrator and giving it to the victim), or wage assessment. Prison should be for violent people - not petty criminals or drug offenders. Those folks belong in treatment centers and hospitals. I'd also be all for bringing back the stocks - a day or three in the stocks won't kill anyone, and the public humiliation may cause them to change their ways.

We could return police to being peace officers and not law enforcement officers at the same time, because their mission would shift to keeping the peace and not enforcing an encyclopedic volume of crappy laws.

Prisoners should remain in prison until they are no longer a threat to others, or their sentence is fulfilled. They should have all their rights available to them as well upon fulfilling their sentence and restitution to their victims fulfilled.

And Peter Courtney should pull his lower lip over his head and swallow if he really believes texting & driving should be a felony.

 

[Alexx1401]

Doesn't work - only the law abiding would abide by such a ban. Just like gun ownership. A felon bent on owning a gun will own a gun. A drunk bent on driving a car will drive a car. Neither gives two squirts of runny poo about the law.

I know another law will not work. I'm talking about it shows the truth of those who scream for more gun laws. NONE of them would support banning possession of a car but they with a strait face say banning gun ownership is fine.
I would fully support taking the license for life when you do something stupid enough after say a couple tries. A lot of them would still drive but they should then be jailed for longer and longer terms.

 

[theshake420]

You should have to take a training course in order to get a gun as well as a car. And you will be approved by an instructor based on your test score. If he judges you based on race or creed you can sue him. This way, the liberals will finally shut up.

Anyone who has a gun before 2017, doesn't have to take the test. If someone is over the age of 25 and doesn't have a gun by now, they deserve to have to take an intelligence test to get one.

 

[theshake420]

Theft is the highest crime, and perhaps the only crime.

Murdering someone is theft of life.
Raping someone is theft of sanity.
Being stupid is theft of time.

 

[HuckleberryFun]

I'm for requiring a training course requirement to get into NWFA forums. Admittance will depend on your score.

 

[theshake420]

I'm for requiring a training course requirement to get into NWFA forums. Admittance will depend on your score.

I have a high IQ, that should be the only requirement for authorization of any kind of internet communications.

 

[HuckleberryFun]

I have a high IQ, that should be the only requirement for authorization of any kind of internet communications.

So do I. But my Mother taught me it's not nice to say so.

 

[mkwerx]

You should have to take a training course in order to get a gun as well as a car. And you will be approved by an instructor based on your test score. If he judges you based on race or creed you can sue him. This way, the liberals will finally shut up.

Anyone who has a gun before 2017, doesn't have to take the test. If someone is over the age of 25 and doesn't have a gun by now, they deserve to have to take an intelligence test to get one.

One little problem standing in your way is that pesky little Constitution, and the 300+ million privately held firearms in the hands of Americans right now.

Driving is *not* a right - whereas owning a firearm is. A highly intelligent person wouldn't need reminded of such.

 

[Gaucho Gringo]

Wadda' you wanna bet the Portland city council brings up the possibility of penalties for putting metal/recyclables in you garbage can? Doubt it would be put in place at this time here in PDX. The way we're going, it's coming down the pike though!

They already did that with the exorbitant garbage rates. I am glad I moved to Vancouver where I pay 1\2 the rate for twice as much garbage. And I don't have to put up with a stupid, leaky food scrap container and the awful smells.

 

[notazombie]

A general sense. As police officers, we are not the law-makers, it is our job to judge character and infer whether or not someone should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Well, this matter is closed. The Decider has spoken.

 

[Lilhigbee]

I have to go, I'm out of time. Someone has stolen it all!!

 

[bsa1917hunter]

You should have to take a training course in order to get a gun as well as a car. And you will be approved by an instructor based on your test score. If he judges you based on race or creed you can sue him. This way, the liberals will finally shut up.

Anyone who has a gun before 2017, doesn't have to take the test. If someone is over the age of 25 and doesn't have a gun by now, they deserve to have to take an intelligence test to get one.

Holy cow, how old are you? I sure hope you never pull me over... Be honest, I just passed you on I84 a little while ago. You were in the cop car driving 25mph, trying to keep everyone from going too fast, weren't you?

 

[Lilhigbee]

Not really a cop, but plays one on the inter webs.

 

[Koda]

In all seriousness... Im not certain what the best solution is for this but I do know that there is zero reason to text and drive, I cant imagine losing a loved one because someone just had to reply there is no justification for that.

does anyone know if texting and driving deaths are more than drunk driving deaths? I wonder what the comparison is between those...