Diploid said:

1) She got drunk on her own volition.

This is irrelevant, IMO, because she was never intending to drive while drunk, unless I misunderstand the scenario.

She could have stopped driving drunk after a mile or so, but she choose to keep driving while intoxicated

But alcohol impairs judgment. She may not have realized how far she'd driven. Similar to how a person who is unable to distinguish right and wrong cannot be guilty of murder. That's the 'insanity defense' which is apropos to this scenario.

In the final analysis, had she done as she originally intended, no one would have been hurt. It's only when the rapist is in the picture that people died. I still see all the blame on the rapist.

---

Quote:

Im not saying that her actions absolve the rapist of wrongdoing. But I am saying that she (and all of us for that matter) should take responsibility for the situations that our choices put us in.

---

YawningAnus said:

Im not saying that her actions absolve the rapist of wrongdoing. But I am saying that she (and all of us for that matter) should take responsibility for the situations that our choices put us in.

Are you saying that we should be able to make all of our decisions based on the delusion that humanity and society are good? In a perfect world, no one should take my wallet if I leave it on the bar, but that isnt the case, and we still consider it "stealing" if someone does.

I dont go darting out in front of cars on foot even though as a pedestrian, I have the right of way. If I got hit by a car, could I say that I just figured everybody driving a car was aware of this, and they were all thinking "hey, I better watch out for YawningAnus, that crazy pedestrian".
To think that there isnt some bitch putting on her lipstick, not paying attention, out of 30 cars, that would be assinine of me.

---

I agree with you on all of this. But the question you proposed was not regarding whether or not one should take responsibility for one's life situation to such a degree, but rather if this woman should be criminally liable for the deaths resulting from the accident.

If I was on the jury, I'd order to her to receive counseling for the experience and guidance as to how to be more responsible - i.e. perhaps not drinking past the point at which one is rather unable to conduct one's affairs, as well as self-defense.

Quote:

Go home with enough men from bars, and eventually, one will turn out to be a rapist.

---

You continue to assert that this woman was a slut, but I don't see anything in this hypothetical situation that constitutes evidence that she was. What number, do you feel, is "enough"? From what I gather, she had not even intended to "go home" with the man, but simply to receive a ride in his vehicle. The man was sober and, quite possibly, presented absolutely no warning signs that he would engage in this activity before it got past that point.

I think some aspects of your thinking wishes to judge this woman beyond what is reasonable. She was in a vulnerable circumstance, requiring a ride from a stranger, and, coupled with some assistance in coming to terms with the situation, as well as some training as to how to better conduct her affairs (taxi cabs, friends, ensuring one isn't making oneself too vulnerable by entering into situations with too many unknown variables, etc.), it is her lesson to better herself.

Sure, people are dead as a result, but its incidental. She was not capable of acting in a rational manner, and inflicting punishment upon her for being in such a situation, in which another human being had attempted to violate her right to life and liberty, in a severe manner, would not be reasonable, nor would it better anything. The standard that you propose and that I agree with is ideal, and I personally have made it my path, but to think that most human beings, especially in those circumstances, should be held to it, is itself unreasonable. This standard needs to be promoted and aspired to, our race could certainly use an age of reason, yet, in terms of criminal liability, I think it is clear that this woman would not be liable.

By the way, I went to spell-check my post, to catch any of those tiny mistakes that sometimes make their way past one's conscious attention, and I noticed that you do not use apostrophes in your contractions.

Quote:

no, not really. When you are looking solely at choices that you have made and the direct results it created, you only need to go back to the first sequitur decision.
We could say that earlier that day, she chose to watch a movie, or go to McDonalds.... that choice had no bearing on future choices.

---

fireworks_god said:

---