Texas drunk drivers will now have to pay child support if they kill a parent, guardian

MicroWave@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 1646 points –
Texas drunk drivers will now have to pay child support if they kill a parent, guardian | CNN
cnn.com

A new law in Texas requires convicted drunk drivers to pay child support if they kill a child’s parent or guardian, according to House Bill 393.

The law, which went into effect Friday, says those convicted of intoxication manslaughter must pay restitution. The offender will be expected to make those payments until the child is 18 or until the child graduates from high school, “whichever is later,” the legislation says.

Intoxication manslaughter is defined by state law as a person operating “a motor vehicle in a public place, operates an aircraft, a watercraft, or an amusement ride, or assembles a mobile amusement ride; and is intoxicated and by reason of that intoxication causes the death of another by accident or mistake.”

213

You are viewing a single comment

Punishing drunk drivers is well-deserved, but as long as car-dependent infrastructure encourages drunk driving, it is considerably more difficult to actually decrease the rate of it. Taking a taxi is expensive and being a DD is no fun, so people take stupid risks. If you know you can take public transit home, there's no reason to take such a risk at all.

Could take a Uber/Lyft.

I deal with this issue, the big bus station and my house are divided by a highway. So me and my buddies go out it either has to be very local or I have to take a rideshare for a five minute drive home.

I live in a city where taking an Uber or Lyft a few miles is like $25, maybe $50 at the last call surge. Unfortunately ride-sharing is a lot more expensive in cities that don't also have good transit, so I keep getting reminded that $25 is cheap for a ride share across any distance.

Back when I used to go out drinking, catching the last train home or taking an Uber was my go-to choice. I don't drink much nowadays, but the rush home in an area without good transit infrastructure is still something I think about a lot.

not everyone can justify that every time they go out with friends

People need to live within their means. It's not a human right to go get drunk every weekend. If you can't afford it, you stay home.

This honestly reads like a defense of drunk driving, blaming the lack of infrastructure for bad decision.

Edit: or something very close to that.

But if you’re just saying we should design around stupid, then I guess I can agree there.

You have to design around stupid, because this is the real world. People can only expected to be rational sometimes, and in aggregate, you need systems that expect people to take whatever is the most obvious or easy choice available to them, whether it's actually a good idea or not.

Yeah yeah, public transit good, we know. STFU already. You fuckers are worse than vegans.

user name checks out

It needs to be addressed. Or people are gonna keep voting for pro-car politicians

Yeah. "One more lane" is something that a lot of people unironically think, it's not just a meme, so trying to ensure that everybody knows how silly that is and how much harm it causes is one of the main ways that that line of thinking can be destroyed

1 more...