If you could decide this person's penalty, what would it be?

[Aggrophobic]

Stopping an emergency vehicle, involuntary manslaughter, driving recklessly. 6 to 10 years then a driving license ban for 5 years.

This sounds fair.

[Twix]

Fine for illegal U-turn

[Azadina]

They are professional drivers trained to avoid these kinds of accidents. While we're at it, how is the u-turner supposed to know that an ambulance is arriving at high speed on the wrong side of the road?

And the dude won't walk free. You're thinking that just because I reject one punishment I exclude all of them. I'm not. I'm rejecting this punishment in favour of a different one that applies to the situation. He will get punished. Just not for a crime he didn't commit (direct manslaughter).

That is completely irrelevant, as he was NOT ALLOWED to do that turn in the first place.

[Venant]

Assuming that this person basically killed somebody because of a moment of impatience, and assuming that my 'ability to decide this person's penalty' means in this scenario i'm some sort of god that can do literally anything:

I would make the person have enough of a conscience that this person would feel deep regret every day of his/her life, the type of regret that mirrors the feelings of the people who cared for the person who died as a result of the driver's reckless actions.

[AeneasBK]

I'm a bit unusual in that I don't view use of a motor vehicle as some inherent right. Thousands of people are killed by careless motorists every year and peoples attitude towards driving is still pretty casual.

As an example, people seem to thinmk doing a u-turn on a 2lane highway as "no biggy", despite the fact that it caused the death of an injured driver as well as other injuries.

What logic is there in letting such a driver behind the wheel of a car ever again? Do you guys just not have any public transport in the states anymore?

[Slant]

the dude knows because its an emergency situation, making emergency vehicles a likely event.

Yes. And also he wasn't allowed to make a u-turn. And he'll get punished for that and for the accident with the emergency vehicle.

I think the problem is that laymen like you like to reduce every situation described on these forums to the one or two "crimes" they know from series or movies. It's either murder or assault. There's no in between for you, while for lawyers there's a whole different arrays of different manslaughters and assaults. Everyone tailored to the situation, tools, circumstances and what the lawmakers consideres appropriate responses/verdicts for them.

You do not get to press any situation just into the box "manslaughter" because that's the only box you know. That's not how it works. The situation that developed can't be squeezed, it's fixed. What you need to do is find the correct box that this fits into the best and do with that as much as you can. And if you don't find any box this fits into, then yes, he goes free. That's how it actually works.

No offense, nobody needs a law degree to talk here and these discussions are kinda fun.

- - - Updated - - -

That is completely irrelevant, as he was NOT ALLOWED to do that turn in the first place.

So? He'll get punished for making that u-turn, because that's what the law is for. To punish you for the u-turn. That particular law doesn't mean anything else happening is automatically your fault. It means you're wrong in making that u-turn. Then he caused an accident, that is another set of laws that he'll get punished for. And that accident accidentally (or coincidentally?) led to the death of another person unrelated to that accident. He'll get punished for that as well. But he won't be near the same ballpark that the dude is going to find himself in who caused the original accident. And that is the whole point.

[AeneasBK]

They are professional drivers trained to avoid these kinds of accidents. While we're at it, how is the u-turner supposed to know that an ambulance is arriving at high speed on the wrong side of the road?

I *suspect* that is why the maneuver is illegal. Because he can't, and in unlucky cases doing a youee on a one way street is fuckign retarded.

[Slant]

I'm a bit unusual in that I don't view use of a motor vehicle as some inherent right. Thousands of people are killed by careless motorists every year and peoples attitude towards driving is still pretty casual.

As an example, people seem to thinmk doing a u-turn on a 2lane highway as "no biggy", despite the fact that it caused the death of an injured driver as well as other injuries.

What logic is there in letting such a driver behind the wheel of a car ever again? Do you guys just not have any public transport in the states anymore?

Oh, it is a biggie. I'm just here to educate people about separating actions properly and dishing out appropriate punishment instead of venting rage and asking for blood.

[AeneasBK]

Oh, it is a biggie. I'm just here to educate people about separating actions properly and dishing out appropriate punishment instead of venting rage and asking for blood.

Earlier you started getting into the semantics of "crime" "offense" "felony" over this issue. Reads like you're downplaying reckless driving. W/e just hope it isn't ever anyone close to you killed by some dumb-ass making a stupid decision in a motorvehicle

[Slant]

I *suspect* that is why the maneuver is illegal. Because he can't, and in unlucky cases doing a youee on a one way street is fuckign retarded.

We don't know the circumstances or the environment. From what the OP says, it could either be a narrow section of street that has a good reason for this u-turn law or it could be just that it's generally not allowed, despite everyone having 50m of free space around them and the law making no practical sense except it being a generally good idea not to have vehicles slow down for u-turns as they please.

It's retarded, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying when you are so easy about assigning blame and expand it to whatever follows as a consequence...

Well, in that case, he's also responsible for the downfall of that victim's family if he's the sole earner in the house. Imagine his son growing up to be a criminal and shooting people, he'd be responsible for that, too. Perhaps he even shoots the next president and drags the world into WW3, he'd be responsible for that. We'd have to talk about drawing and quartering to be reintroduced to properly punish all the things he would be responsible if you don't put a limit to such responsibility.

Look at actions, not the outcome. If you just look at outcomes, I could twist your head into a nightmare of consequences that you haven't even begun to think about.

- - - Updated - - -

Earlier you started getting into the semantics of "crime" "offense" "felony" over this issue. Reads like you're downplaying reckless driving. W/e just hope it isn't ever anyone close to you killed by some dumb-ass making a stupid decision in a motorvehicle

Oh, i'm still not sure how the street looks like. If I make an illegal u-turn in my city, it'll be a misdemeanour. If I do it on a highway, I may or may not be doing a crime... it depends really, and it's not as black and white as people think it is. So, a picture of the scene would certainly help.

[AeneasBK]

It was a 4 lane highway (2 each way) from the OP.

Also I'm ranting off topic about the laxness of road crimes and their sentencing, because of, I don't know, the convenience of having a car, or it's popularity, people *in general* seem to think that killing someone with a car is obviously much less of a crime than killing them in any other way, which just strikes me personally as bizarre. As a result, people will talk comfortably about speeding at dangerous levels; or just generally having a lax attitude towards road safety laws, and its pretty socially acceptable to do so; despite cars killing so many people every year. This guy made a stupid irresponsible decision that smashed up a fricken ambulance. Ban him from driving for life as an example to other motorists and make him pay for a new ambulance even taking a few euros every week out of his paycheck if he isn't a big earner (but hey he could afford his own car/insurance so he can't be too skint ). Fuck dumb motorists, really.

[Slant]

I'm with you on that.

People underestimate cars all the time. I sometimes drive around and remind myself that I'm actually moving close to 3 tons with just a flick of my wrist and minimal pedal movement at easily 60 kph. The kinetic energy stored in that is rather immense. Helps me calm down once the third idiot cuts in front of me or does other stupid stunts to endanger me and the other vehicle drivers around him.

About the street, in Germany we have barriers so you can't actually u-turn. In the US, I've seen highways that have like 50m grass between those 2 main directions. Making a u-turn there would be incredibly stupid still, but a lot safer than in Germany. Hence our barriers.

[Azadina]

It was a 4 lane highway (2 each way) from the OP.

Also I'm ranting off topic about the laxness of road crimes and their sentencing, because of, I don't know, the convenience of having a car, or it's popularity, people *in general* seem to think that killing someone with a car is obviously much less of a crime than killing them in any other way, which just strikes me personally as bizarre. As a result, people will talk comfortably about speeding at dangerous levels; or just generally having a lax attitude towards road safety laws, and its pretty socially acceptable to do so; despite cars killing so many people every year. This guy made a stupid irresponsible decision that smashed up a fricken ambulance. Ban him from driving for life as an example to other motorists and make him pay for a new ambulance even taking a few euros every week out of his paycheck if he isn't a big earner (but hey he could afford his own car/insurance so he can't be too skint ). Fuck dumb motorists, really.

I agree. The non caring attitude is really sad when people are killed by reckless drivers.

[Aeula]

Depends how much they're willing to bribe me.

[Slant]

I agree. The non caring attitude is really sad when people are killed by reckless drivers.

Caring != overly dramatising the punishment. I do care about things like these. Doesn't mean my emotions should guide the punishment.

[Azadina]

Caring != overly dramatising the punishment. I do care about things like these. Doesn't mean my emotions should guide the punishment.

The thing is, I care about the victim more than the law seems to. The victim in this case is not worth any less than another person killed in a crossfire of a mob hit.

[Slant]

The thing is, I care about the victim more than the law seems to. The victim in this case is not worth any less than another person killed in a crossfire of a mob hit.

The law cares about the victim before it becomes a victim. Whatever punishment you apply, it won't bring dead people back. That's where your emotions seem to run amok and you seem to apply arbitrary punishment just to get revenge. It may even be appropriate in this case, emotionally, but it'll leave you wide open for abusive law interpretation in other fringe cases. That's something you want to avoid, lest you want to turn a court trial into a circus of emotions.

No offense, but that's something US courts already seem to suffer from. As this thread continues, I can see why. Not sure if that's a goal worth achieving.

[Azadina]

The law cares about the victim before it becomes a victim. Whatever punishment you apply, it won't bring dead people back. That's where your emotions seem to run amok and you seem to apply arbitrary punishment just to get revenge. It may even be appropriate in this case, emotionally, but it'll leave you wide open for abusive law interpretation in other fringe cases. That's something you want to avoid, lest you want to turn a court trial into a circus of emotions.

No offense, but that's something US courts already seem to suffer from. As this thread continues, I can see why. Not sure if that's a goal worth achieving.

That much is true. Would you argue then, that there's no point in punishing anyone, because it won't bring the victim back?

I'd argue that there's no point in being lenient and look the other way, because that person lost their life just the same as another person who was murdered. Again, neither can be brought back to life, the result is the exact same.

[Stormdash]

I told this story here 2 years ago, but today, I found out that the injured party died, as a result ( so I was told )...... I don't have any details other than what I saw with my own two eyes. Just go with what I give you.

It was POURING RAIN like the proverbial cats and dogs, and I was driving west on a 4 lane road - 2 lanes each way..... traffic was stopped for a car accident....... the police had us waiting for about 5 minutes or so..... The guy behind me decides he won't wait any longer and does a fast U-Turn..... and don't you know, the ambulance that was coming to help smashes right into the car that did the illegal U-Turn. The car and the ambulance are pretty darn messed up. They will need another ambulance and personnel to help the person from the original accident ( the guy who I was told died )

At that point the police blocked the area off and made us all turn around and go another way.

What penalty would you assign to the guy who did the illegal U-Turn into the path of the ambulance?

Not knowing the applicable statutes, at a glance there's some form of reckless/careless driving, interference with emergency services, criminal negligence perhaps, or even assault if the statute there is written broadly enough. Enough for a few years prison time if the prosecutor was intent enough.

EDIT: If the U-Turn resulted in the death of someone in the ambulance, that's manslaughter of some degree. If it resulted in the death of whomever the ambulance was coming to help, that is a much tougher case to articulate to the judge (law) or the jury (fact).

[Vilendor]

I want to ask people who say things like
"don't think the fate of the victim in the earlier crash influences the level of punishment for this action"

What if that victim is your loved one and you 100% know he/she would be alive if the ambulance can reach its destiny.
Your mother could hug you every morning, but instead she is in a grave because of the actions of 1 person.
You could kiss your boy who instead died slowly on the road in great pain.

What's your answer now?