this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
1528 points (99.0% liked)

News

23376 readers
3975 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A new law in Texas requires convicted drunk drivers to pay child support if they kill a child’s parent or guardian, according to House Bill 393.

The law, which went into effect Friday, says those convicted of intoxication manslaughter must pay restitution. The offender will be expected to make those payments until the child is 18 or until the child graduates from high school, “whichever is later,” the legislation says.

Intoxication manslaughter is defined by state law as a person operating “a motor vehicle in a public place, operates an aircraft, a watercraft, or an amusement ride, or assembles a mobile amusement ride; and is intoxicated and by reason of that intoxication causes the death of another by accident or mistake.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 58 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I wonder how this will work in practice since most of the time if you kill someone under the influence your life is basically over. Not exactly going to be able to pay a percent of your earnings while you are in jail.

[–] PickTheStick@ttrpg.network 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I have an aunt with six DUIs. After the second, they all become felonies, which are supposed to be 2 years at least in jail. I don't think she's ever spent more than a day in jail. Intoxication manslaughter may be worse, but the courts treat alcohol related incidents with kid gloves a LOT of the time.

[–] klyde@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is it Wisconsin? People up there get like 16.

[–] Raab@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can confirm, from northern Wisconsin. Definitely have seen people with 10+

Can confirm. I'm in southeastern Wisconsin, and DUIs are a normal part of life for many people here. The punishments for DUIs and reckless driving are a joke in this state.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

My brother spent 3 seperate days in jail for 5 drunk driving charges.

I mean he's my brother, but lock that idiot up for a while longer, at least.

[–] lntl@lemmy.ml 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

nah, cyclist here. people "walk" on vehicular manslaughter all the time. it's super fucked up. commonly a suspended sentence is issued.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gee that is just fucking peachy.

Wait until you hear how many people are driving without a license at all.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Vehicular manslaughter !== Killing someone by drunk driving. Drunk driving is clear negligence, hitting someone entirely on accident shouldn't ruin two lives. In those articles it doesn't say anything about the driver being drunk

[–] lntl@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] aidan@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This guy was on drugs and frustrated because a “slow driver” ahead of him.

Ah ok than should do jail time.

[–] lntl@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

i 100% agree with you and 200% disagree with the judge and legal system who let him walk

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a combination of neighbors and vehicular manslaughter.

[–] Skates@feddit.nl -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

hitting someone entirely on accident shouldn't ruin two lives.

Why? Was the victim entirely innocent? Did it result in permanent injury or death of the victim(s)? Would it have been less dangerous if the one who produced the accident did not drive a car? Was the driver incapacitated by alcohol/drugs/anything else? If the answer to ANY of those is "yes", then it should very fucking well ruin two lives. And if the driver had a license, the entire system that granted them the responsibility of handling a few tons of metal should be considered accomplices until they can fucking prove otherwise.

Or at least have the decency to let the victim's family decide, don't take it upon yourself to just casually forgive a mistake if it had no impact on you.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Or at least have the decency to let the victim’s family decide, don’t take it upon yourself to just casually forgive a mistake if it had no impact on you.

No? If you robbed me I shouldn't be able to decide your sentence.

Why? Was the victim entirely innocent? Did it result in permanent injury or death of the victim(s)? Would it have been less dangerous if the one who produced the accident did not drive a car? Was the driver incapacitated by alcohol/drugs/anything else? If the answer to ANY of those is “yes”

I strongly disagree with that, it is unfair to expect people to be infallible, obviously being under the influence is easy to avoid, and so is negligent. But say a mom's driving and one of her kids stands up and starts doing something distracting just as a cyclist blows through a stop sign? Or one of many million more possible scenarios.

[–] Surreal@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So if a person runs and appears out of nowhere in front of a moving car and it results in them being hit, the driver's life should be ruined? It's called accident for a reason, nobody wanted it.

[–] noreason@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I can't count the number of times I've seen a cyclist blow through a stop sign onto through an intersection where one road doesn't have a stop sign.

[–] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It's one of the many benefits of cycling. You get perfect visibility of the driver's anguished expression while they wait in traffic. Unfortunately, the cyclist pays the ultimate price when the driver makes a mistake like having one too many drinky poos at the office party and getting behind the wheel.

[–] atempuser23@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

This creates an incentive to let high earners:wealthy people :off the hook for jail time since they will have to earn money to pay for the support. This of course won’t apply to lower earners which will go to jail.