I apologize for the multiple posts. I am seemingly not able to edit or delete previous posts, to figure out why the quoting isn't working.
Your quote: OK, let me rephrase my response: I feel that the penalties for deaths caused by DUI should be the same as for premeditated murder.
I see. Phrased that way I understand your point. However, I still feel that manslaughter is [still only] manslaughter, regardless if drinking alcohol is an easily accessible way for most people to get into a terrible situation such as that. On this point we disagree.
Your quote: Her repeated DUI behavior and killing of innocent people, to me, justifies a much harsher punishment.
I am undecided on this topic. I am trying to extrapolate her running into a crowd and killing a dozen people. Whether it is 3 or 12 people dead, her actual act (and thus crime)is the same, so my initial opinion is she should be punished according to only killing one. Now, if she were to kill the 3 boys on 3 separate occasions, that is a far worse situation and pathology. I am not defending her actions, of course (you alluded to that in a previous post) but trying to form my own opinion on how justice is best meted out to people such as her.
Your quote: That is kinda the point - to protect the public from menaces like this woman as well as punishment - isn't it?
Very true. I was thinking the point of prison is 'rehabilitation' in the most idealistic sense, 'deterrance' with a more pragmatic view. Otherwise, why would you ever let anyone out? But in fact, your interpretation is often the actual outcome (especially in the case of this woman); that it had no effect on her and she was conducting exactly the same behaviour upon release.
I do not know how to best phrase the response to your question about how I characterize which laws I feel should be in place or not. I do wear my seatbelt; I do not agree that there should be a law requiring me to do so. I do agree with driver's ed classes. Do I feel there should be a law requiring car manufacturers to install airbags on all cars? That is a good question; I am undecided. One of my friends in college got a ticket from a cop for jogging while wearing headphones. I (and he) did not feel that such a law should be in place.
Your quote: I do not "gladly pay the extra in insurance and taxes"
I didn't say you did. I said I did. My example was that some laws are passed you agree with, while others you do not agree with. In many cases some of these laws cost you money ("taxpayer's dollars") you don't want to pay. But the way to change that is to change the representatives passing the laws for you.
Interesting, your comment about asking to pay extra for someone else's behaviors. Riding motorcycles in general is an order of magnitude more likely to result in serious injury or death, over cars -- whether you are wearing a helmet or not. Honestly, I would outlaw motorcycling altogether. But to me, infringing on people's freedoms is a bigger evil, so I would never pass that law--just because I don't agree with people's decision to ride them.
Injury is a learning experience. Touch the stove, burn your hand. Children who never experience it while growing up simply won't have learned as well that they can be hurt. They are more likely to assume they are invincible, which is a common belief amongst teenagers. I was not attempting to claim that it keeps all people from drinking and driving. But it undoubtedly would affect the behavior of some.