Doug Miller wrote:
In article , Jack Stein wrote:
I think because their was no intent it was an accident. Webster agrees
with me.

The aspect of this that you are missing is that an act can be a crime even
*without* intent.

But, the part I'm not missing is without intent, it is an accident. I
said it was an accident, he said it wasn't. He said it was no different
than if he put a gun to her head and shot her, or something stupid along
those lines. Obviously, he, and anyone that thinks these two types of
incidents are the same, is simply wrong.


For example, even though it's vanishingly unlikely that any
drunk driver ever actually intends to kill someone, causing a death while DUI
is a felony in every state.

Perhaps, but that does not change the fact it was, by definition, an
accident. If our legal system wants to put people in jail for getting
in an accident, that doesn't change the fact it was an accident, by
definition. The law could say if you choose to drive while it is
snowing, and get in an accident, you have committed a felony. Still,
unless you deliberately got in the wreck, it's an accident.

Most people are prosecuted and imprisoned when
this occurs; exceptions are often made in the cases of the wealthy and the
politically connected.

Negligent homicide is another example in which an act (or failure to act) is
criminal, even in the complete absence of intent to cause death.

Personally, I think Kennedy was a criminal simply based on his left
wing, socialist, anti-American beliefs. That in no way changes the fact
that the wreck that got Mary Jo killed, was most likely just an accident.

--
Jack
Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/
http://jbstein.com