Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member vivify
    rain
    06 May '15 13:06 / 2 edits
    http://www.unilad.co.uk/articles/girl-who-tweeted-2-drunk-2-care-before-killing-two-in-crash-sentenced-to-24-years/

    "Girl who tweeted ‘2 drunk 2 care’ before killing two best friends in a wrong-way car crash has been sentenced to 24 years in prison.

    "Kayla Mendoza, 22, boasted on social media about being drunk before she killed Kaitlyn Ferrante and Marisa Catronio in a South Florida road accident back in November 2012.

    "Mendoza pleaded guilty in February to two DUI manslaughter charges, and prior to sentencing she tearfully read a letter to the families of Kaitlyn and Marisa."
  2. 06 May '15 13:19
    This raises an interesting question about responsibility. At university, I often encountered the attitude that a person is not responsible for anything done while drunk. I always thought that the first time might be counted as an accident, but if you know from experience that you do certain things while drunk then the concious decision to get drunk should include the realisation that you will do certain things and thus you are responsible for those actions.
  3. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    06 May '15 13:20
    I bet she cares now.
  4. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    06 May '15 13:59
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    This raises an interesting question about responsibility. At university, I often encountered the attitude that a person is not responsible for anything done while drunk. I always thought that the first time might be counted as an accident, but if you know from experience that you do certain things while drunk then the concious decision to get drunk should ...[text shortened]... the realisation that you will do certain things and thus you are responsible for those actions.
    That reminds me of a time when I was rejected for jury duty because I expressed that exact opinion. Apparently the defense attorney didn't appreciate that point of view. I was the first one out of there that day, which worked for me.
  5. 06 May '15 14:08
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    I bet she cares now.
    She almost certainly cared just as soon as she sobered up. It is a fact that some drugs (alcohol included) can affect how much you care about various things, and most likely that her tweet was the truth. Some medications or medical conditions can result in reduced empathy, increased risk taking or other possibly dangerous side effects.
    The morality of it all can get quite complicated. The case of the German wings pilot for example.

    I can understand someone who takes a new medication and it has side effects that result in something bad may not be held morally accountable. Someone with a medical condition that forgets his meds, may be a more difficult case, but again, there may be instances where we should not hold them morally accountable.
    But willingly taking a drug for recreation that you know results in certain actions should always be considered morally accountable.
  6. 06 May '15 20:13
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    This raises an interesting question about responsibility. At university, I often encountered the attitude that a person is not responsible for anything done while drunk. I always thought that the first time might be counted as an accident, but if you know from experience that you do certain things while drunk then the concious decision to get drunk should ...[text shortened]... the realisation that you will do certain things and thus you are responsible for those actions.
    There's been much controversy about young women drinking excessively.
    On one hand, some people accuse a drunken woman of implicitly 'asking for it' (rape).
    On the other hand, other people dismiss that accusation as unfair 'victim-blaming'.

    1) No sane woman asks to be raped. Most women hardly have to ask for sexual intercourse.
    If a woman were to offer herself in that way, a queue of men would form to take their turns.
    2) A drunken woman has made herself more vulnerable to sexual assault.
    3) A drunken woman is not criminally responsible for being sexually assaulted.
    Only the criminal is responsible for taking advantage of her increased vulnerability.

    Practically speaking, I was careful enough to avoid falling too much 'under the influence',
    even when some men offered me free drinks and encouraged me 'to relax and enjoy it.'
    As a chess player, I suppose that I had become accustomed to thinking a few moves ahead.
  7. 06 May '15 20:47
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    There's been much controversy about young women drinking excessively.
    On one hand, some people accuse a drunken woman of implicitly 'asking for it' (rape).
    On the other hand, other people dismiss that accusation as unfair 'victim-blaming'.

    1) No sane woman asks to be raped. Most women hardly have to ask for sexual intercourse.
    If a woman were to off ...[text shortened]... y it.'
    As a chess player, I suppose that I had become accustomed to thinking a few moves ahead.
    A few of your bullet points are debatable.

    Being drunk isn't "asking for it" with regard to rape, but it does two important things.
    1. Lowers inhibitions
    2. Reduces coordination required to flee or to resist.

    On bullet point one. Depends on definition of sanity. Some otherwise sane women do actually enjoy the rough stuff. They are actually turned on, sexually excited by force. Some can't achieve orgasm other than being raped. This is hardly normal, but I don't know if it defines insanity. Many women do actually have difficulty finding partners for intercourse. They may be shy or ugly, or both, and you are laboring under a myth that males are not selective.

    Point 2 cites what I mentioned above. You are correct that despite her voluntarily making herself more vulnerable, only the criminal is responsible for the crime. We are not responsible for a burglary should we have a wooden door instead of steel.

    Actually, alcohol is only one factor that might cause women to be more vulnerable. Depression would be another, or often the feeling of being unattractive, either actual or perceived could lower natural inhibitions. Thinking a few moves ahead is a good practice anytime when potential danger exists.
  8. 06 May '15 21:05
    Originally posted by normbenign
    A few of your bullet points are debatable.

    Being drunk isn't "asking for it" with regard to rape, but it does two important things.
    1. Lowers inhibitions
    2. Reduces coordination required to flee or to resist.

    On bullet point one. Depends on definition of sanity. Some otherwise sane women do actually enjoy the rough stuff. They are actually turne ...[text shortened]... nhibitions. Thinking a few moves ahead is a good practice anytime when potential danger exists.
    Normbenign apparently fails to comprehend the significant difference between a woman
    having consensual 'rough stuff' in bed and a woman being raped, forced to have sexual
    intercourse without her consent. (With his usual abysmal 'reading comprehension',
    Normbenign also fails to understand the distinction between 'most' and 'many'.)

    Some women enjoy acting out their rape fantasies with their trusted partners.
    But a consensual 'rape fantasy' is a far different experience from a real rape.
  9. 06 May '15 22:54
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Normbenign apparently fails to comprehend the significant difference between a woman
    having consensual 'rough stuff' in bed and a woman being raped, forced to have sexual
    intercourse without her consent. (With his usual abysmal 'reading comprehension',
    Normbenign also fails to understand the distinction between 'most' and 'many'.)

    Some women enjoy a ...[text shortened]... usted partners.
    But a consensual 'rape fantasy' is a far different experience from a real rape.
    I don't disagree with you on this, and it is you reading comprehension that is questionable.
  10. 07 May '15 14:37
    And for every person who does this, there are thousands who do the same without killing anyone and get away with it.
  11. 07 May '15 15:05 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    This raises an interesting question about responsibility. At university, I often encountered the attitude that a person is not responsible for anything done while drunk. I always thought that the first time might be counted as an accident, but if you know from experience that you do certain things while drunk then the concious decision to get drunk should ...[text shortened]... the realisation that you will do certain things and thus you are responsible for those actions.
    No.
    Under the law intoxication on drugs or alcohol is not a defense, unless someone slipped you something without you knowing it.
    The reasoning is you knowingly put yourself in that state and cannot claim you aren't responsible for your actions later, otherwise we could all get drunk as a lord and claim we didn't mean to kill/rob/rape whatever because we wouldn't have done it if sober.
  12. 08 May '15 06:51
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    There's been much controversy about young women drinking excessively.
    On one hand, some people accuse a drunken woman of implicitly 'asking for it' (rape).
    On the other hand, other people dismiss that accusation as unfair 'victim-blaming'.
    Its a tricky question. If I was to go to certain areas of Cape Town at night and walk around with a fancy cell phone on me, I would get robbed. No doubt about it.
    Would I be 'asking for it'? Would I be criminally responsible?
    I would say that a woman who gets drunk with men who can't be trusted is partly to blame for the consequences. That does not mean that she wanted to be raped. It could mean she simply didn't think it through, or was too trusting. The rapist remains fully criminally responsible for the action and cannot use 'but she was asking for it' as a defence.
  13. 10 May '15 18:12
    Originally posted by vivify
    http://www.unilad.co.uk/articles/girl-who-tweeted-2-drunk-2-care-before-killing-two-in-crash-sentenced-to-24-years/

    "Girl who tweeted ‘2 drunk 2 care’ before killing two best friends in a wrong-way car crash has been sentenced to 24 years in prison.

    "Kayla Mendoza, 22, boasted on social media about being drunk before she killed Kaitlyn Ferrante and Mar ...[text shortened]... ges, and prior to sentencing she tearfully read a letter to the families of Kaitlyn and Marisa."
    22? That's not a girl. That's a woman. Sentence like an adult.

    And drunk? That's neither an accident nor manslaughter. That's murder. Sentence like murder.

    Sixty to life. Let the tw*tting bitch rot.
  14. 10 May '15 18:12 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    I bet she cares now.
    Doubtful. She reads a letter - written for, not by, her, I don't doubt - and pretends to care. But really? She doesn't.
  15. 10 May '15 18:16 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    There's been much controversy about young women drinking excessively.

    Only the criminal is responsible for taking advantage of her increased vulnerability.
    Yeah, and in this case the murderous bitch is the criminal. She's not a poor ickle patriarchy-addled victim of her own feebleness, no matter how much you rabid pseudo-feminists want to pretend she is. She wasn't raped, apparently your favourite subject (ask your psychiatrist about this fixation, it's not good for you); she herself murdered someone.

    Equal rights means equal responsibility. If this had been a man, you'd have been baying for his blood already. Have the common decency and at least the attempt at honesty to ask for the same treatment for this woman.