• el_abuelo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Innocent until proven guilty.

    Luigi didn’t kill that CEO as far as we know, and titles like this don’t help an innocent man.

  • WrenFeathers@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    9 hours ago

    If he used a car purposefully to kill the CEO, no- he would most certainly NOT be free right now.

    Murder is murder, regardless of the chosen method.

      • WrenFeathers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        That’s not how vehicular manslaughter trials work. It’s like any other murder prosecution. He’d need to prove it was an accident. And mowing down someone with a car in front of witnesses in broad daylight?

        Yeah…

        Guilty.

        • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          The max penalty for 2nd degree vehicular manslaughter is only 7 years. In theory he could be prosecuted for 1st degree or even aggravated, but those require DUI or multiple fatalities.

          • WrenFeathers@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            Now look up what the maximum sentence would be for when someone purposefully murders someone with a car. Because Vehicular Homicide in the second degree- is where a death is caused “without an intention to do so” and where there is neither reckless driving, nor a DWI offense.

            You’re manufacturing an argument while leaving out key facts.

            Your boy WANTED the CEO dead. So, don’t use accidental death cases to compare it in bad faith

            Vehicular homicide with intent carries the same penalties as with a gun.

  • neatchee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    152
    ·
    17 hours ago

    This is incredibly reductive and makes us look like idiots who don’t understand “intent”.

    I get it, fuck cars, but this is ridiculous and only serves to make us look like a joke

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Then there’s the Sacklers pushing everyone on opioids until the US public is addicted and getting fentanyl off the street. 82,000 deaths in 2022. The trend is that number is rising.

      Was it intentional that Purdue started the epidemic? Their lobbyists pushed doctors to over prescribe them including for instances that didn’t warrant them, including material bonuses. So not really, but their shareholders really like dividends even if people have to die for them.

      Was it legal? Well, it hasn’t been made illegal yet

      See, were not looking at the true evil.

      In the case of cars, its not really the driver, but in the US, the stanglehold on transit held by big automotive and big fossil fuel. We have lots of highways (the Interstate Highway System is the biggest single project in the world) and they keep killing high speed trains and begrudge municipal transit, and parking requirements assure that every city is a sprawl of delineated asphalt.

      There’s the evil. And since its propelling the climate crisis (and we’re running out of water) it is going to kill us all.

      Too bad they threw billions at the far-right propaganda machine to push the fascist autocrat over the non-white non-male that wanted to transition to renewables.

      Guns are pushed in the US, and kept fairly unregulated by the munitions companies. Their ads imply you can’t be a real man without a loaded firearm. I never got it, but everyone male on the far-right is super sensitive about their masculinity. And they really like guns.

    • brlemworld@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I’m sure that kid in Texas totally didn’t have intent when he ran over 12 people then backed up over them again

      • neatchee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 hours ago

        And did that kid get off with a “oopsies!”? No? Then how is that related to this thread?

    • VeganPizza69 Ⓥ@lemmy.vg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      16 hours ago

      “Oops, my foot slipped on the wrong pedal.”

      Intent without confessions and manifestos may not be that easy to prove.

      • neatchee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        They’re not comparable.

        If I’m at a firing range, where it is expected that people are carrying guns and ammunition, I can pull the same “oops, my finger slipped” excuse.

        Similarly, if I drive my car around the side of your house and into your back yard to run you over, I can’t claim “my foot slipped”.

        Seriously, stop with the mental gymnastics. We don’t need to reach for more reasons to say “fuck cars.” There are plenty within arms reach

        • VeganPizza69 Ⓥ@lemmy.vg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          25 minutes ago

          Similarly, if I drive my car around the side of your house and into your back yard to run you over, I can’t claim “my foot slipped”.

          I see one of those posts with cars crashed into houses every week somewhere. No murder charge.

        • itslilith
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Well, we shouldn’t build our cities around hundreds miles of firing ranges then, right?

        • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You are the one doing mental gymnastics bro. What is that back yard comparison? Obviously you just swerve off the road, run him over and say you fell asleep - long day, had to work long hours to pay off my medical debt. Or have an old person run over CEOs, 80yo in cars kill people all the time because they should not be driving anymore. They always get off easy.

  • Aurix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Murder is with the intention to kill. This would apply for using a car as a weapon as well and courts do go after these cases in practice, of sniping a target with a car.

    But they are too lenient on deathly accidents with gross negligence.

    • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      This would apply for using a car as a weapon as well and courts do go after these cases in practice, of sniping a target with a car.

      Unless the driver admitted to wanting to kill someone on purpose with their car, the grey area between “I didn’t see them” to “I don’t know what happened.” makes it so that drivers are often only given a citation for a traffic violation (i.e. not stopping at a stop sign), if the victim is lucky enough for that level of “justice”.

      It’s very rare to see a driver be convicted of anything beyond vehicular manslaughter, including when you have a history of driving offences, and run off like a coward after running over a cyclist.

      edit: grammar

      • Aurix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        With a random killing you might get indeed away, but murders are usually targeted. In case a deadly accident happens, and it can be proven the driver had a conflict with that person, it does turn the case around.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    18 hours ago

    And if you setup a system were people die preventable, unnecessary deaths the cops will work for you.

  • ladicius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    18 hours ago

    True for Germany, too. The killers sometimes even get to keep their drivers licenses.

    • Ooops@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      13 hours ago

      … with judges explaining their non-judgements with some totally rediculous arguments like: he has already suffered the worst… having to live with the fact he klilled someone, so there’s no reason for further punshment.

    • lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      But there was a case where someone was convicted for murder because he was involved in an illegal car race and should have known better. Yes, illegal car races are a thing in Germany

      Edit: This isn’t the case I had in mind. I remember vague that the victim was an (elderly) man

      • bob_lemon@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        Might be worth mentioning that “illegal car race” does not (necessarily) mean fast and the furious style street racing.

        According to § 315d StGB (the German penal code), driving recklessly and violating traffic laws with the intention of reaching the highest speed does constitute an illegal race.

  • MyDogLovesMe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Works for the Walton family. You know, for those nights of heavy drinking, where you just wanna bounce some peasants off your grill.