>>>>>Killing somebody while dui should be murder, not manslaughter, not 'dangerous driving causing death'.
>>>>>
>>>>>Pushing somebody down the stairs as a joke that ends up killing the person should be called 'murder'.
>>>>
>>>>But you still have to draw a difference between accidental death and 'death by purpose', don't you think?
>>>>
>>>>Many states will prosecute on 1st and 2nd degree charges with the major difference being that 1st degree carries the death penalty while the 2nd degree does not. That way, if they have a jury that will not (or cannot) agree on the death penalty, they can still get a conviction. Several states will go ahead and throw in 'manslaughter' on that same logic.
>>>
>>>The death penalty should go the way of high button shoes. The system should just forget about the death penalty. It's a pointless act of revenge. Killing someone while committing an illegal act (whether that act is the murder itself, or driving drunk) should be called murder because that's what it is. Doing away with the death penalty will also help to get rid of the jury problems too.
>>>
>>>The victim doesn't really care about the fine nuances of the legal system. He/she is just dead and won't be back partying with friends or caring for his/her children any time soon. And as I said before, when he/she is back with us, the murderer should be let out of jail. Fair's fair.
>>
>>But again, there must be a difference between accidental death and 'death by purpose'. I'll agree that in dying by accident, you're still dead, but the legal system isn't really here for the dead. Much like funerals, it's for the living and somehow providing 'justice' for the act. Now, driving into a group of people at 50 mph would qualify (to me) as 'death by purpose' whereas driving down the road, getting T-boned by someone and getting knocked into a group of people also qualifies as 'death by purpose' if I'm understanding your statement correctly. However, there is a world of difference between the two actions and while the people are still dead, there is a world of difference.
>
>I don't think I said that. I'm pretty sure I said killing someone while committing an illegal act, whether the act is the killing itself or killing someone because of being drunk while driving. I don't see being t-boned and being knocked into a group of people as qualifying for what I said I'd call murder. Same as if you're installing a chimney and you accidentally drop a brick and it kills someone. I wouldn't call installing a chimney, an 'illegal act'. A pure accident is what it is. Driving drunk and killing someone is (imho) tantamount to premeditated murder.
>
>>
>>Based on your logic, my cousin would have spent the last 30 years in prison for 'murder' because a drunk ran out in front of her car while she was driving home from work and, because of the icy road conditions, she couldn't stop in time even though she was driving well under the speed limit. Accidental death.
>
>I think you need to re-read my previous messages.

Please, please, please, people, can you not see that this is an honor killing? Just look the other way and think of something nice. Sharia is law for the man therefore he cannot be guilty of anything but being insulted. Of course we could always have him burried up to the neck and have his friends stone him. Sharia law must be banned. Geez! The Pakistani government has just allowed Sharia in the Swat valley to appease the Taliban. They won't be appeased, they'll just ask for more and more and more. These Muslim folks need to forget the honor and go for a beer instead.