Quebec Woman Guilty - Saves Ducks, Two People Dead

[peoples advocate]

On ‎2014‎-‎06‎-‎20 at 2:03 PM, On Guard for Thee said:

I would agree that she made a dumb move, albeit apparently based on on an act of kindness. I have yet to see a picture on the news to get an idea of the actual "lay of the land" where she stopped to try to form my own opinion of just how "dumb" her move was. As G2 pointed out, perhaps the MC driver wasn't being as attentive as he could/should have been which, IMO should have some effect on her guilt. With those guilty findings she could end up the rest of her life in jail,which seems a bit harsh to me. Of course it's a tragedy that two people are dead. Truly a sad story and it will be interesting to see what happens at sentencing.

 so lets get this straight she stops to let a poor creature cross the road and a car coming from the rear ends up crashing? if that is the case how did the car approaching from the rear know why she had stopped ? What if she was stopped because of medical emergency ? or a child ended up some how on the road.

 I might be crazy but when I was taught to drive in this country I was taught to look ahead and expect the unexpected. People are always in a rush and that is why a lot of people never make it home and as for this woman Thank god there are still people out there that put little defenceless animals ahead of others . 

[peoples advocate]

On ‎2014‎-‎06‎-‎20 at 6:07 PM, Hal 9000 said:

She should be found guilty! I'm really sick of people swerving or slamming on brakes to avoid animals. I remember the Vancouver woman who rolled her can into a creek with 2 toddlers inside just so she could avoid hitting some ducks - stupid stupid! I hope they throw the book at her.

Oh my God were you there when it happened were you a witness do tell.

[peoples advocate]

I find it strange that people who were not at the scene of that accident have opinions on what should be done and I am upset that I have not been born with the great insight of all you people.

[Hal 9000]

On 10/20/2017 at 2:57 PM, peoples advocate said:

Oh my God were you there when it happened were you a witness do tell.

This has nothing to do with being a "witness", we know exactly what happened...and why!  

 

On 10/20/2017 at 3:00 PM, peoples advocate said:

I find it strange that people who were not at the scene of that accident have opinions on what should be done and I am upset that I have not been born with the great insight of all you people.

Clearly you lack common sense and the ability to assess facts as well.

[peoples advocate]

2 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

This has nothing to do with being a "witness", we know exactly what happened...and why!  

 

Clearly you lack common sense and the ability to assess facts as well.

oh that hurts , my feelings are now hurt and I am not sure I can deal with your superior intellect. I wont sleep tonight.

Wait before I close off where did you gain such insight into other minds and thoughts ? you are truly a great human that should be bowed to.

[Thinkinoutsidethebox]

From the ducks point of view what she did was perfectly legitimate.

It'll be interesting to see how self driving vehicles will be programmed to interpret ducks crossing a road.

Will the vehicles slow and possibly stop to let the creatures safely cross? On a road with one hundred percent autonomous vehicles communicating with each other with will be a perfectly safe maneuver. Mix in a bunch of human piloted vehicles and this could get very interesting...

Or will these vehicles consider these small animate objects insignificant road hazards and continue unimpeded?

The people designing and programming these vehicles have allot to consider. 

[Altai]

So most of us agreed that even if someones do not have criminal feelings but they cause to death of innocemt people by mistake, they should be sentenced ?

Right ? 

[Jariax]

I read the case, and I think the ruling is fair. 90 days and losing her license for 10 years seems about right.
I don't think she's a bad person. Just a little foolish, and lacking good judgement. 

Still, it's a shame that we deem it irresponsible to do anything other than run over small animals on the road. 
Makes me ashamed to be human. 

Edited November 17, 2017 by Jariax

[blackbird]

On 6/20/2014 at 10:46 AM, Big Guy said:

On June 27, 2010, a Quebec woman stopped her car on Highway 30 in Candiac in an effort to rescue some ducklings. Seconds later, a Harley-Davidson motorcycle struck her Honda Civic. The driver and his daughter died as a result of the collision.

She was arrested and charged with 4 different vehicular crimes. On its fourth day of deliberation, the jury found the 25-year-old woman guilty on all four charges she faced, including criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/06/20/jury-finds-woman-guilty-for-causing-deaths-of-two-bikers-when-she-stopped-to-save-ducks-on-highway/

Yes, two people died because of her actions but is “intent” not to be considered in a verdict?

She is an animal lover and tried to save a duck and her ducklings from being killed.

Was this an accident?

What if the animal on the road was a dog?

What if it was a moose?

This reminds of when I hit the brakes to avoid hitting something, but was fortunate nobody was close behind.   I have decided since to just not hit the brakes next time.   I think it is a natural instinct to want to hit the brakes to avoid hitting an animal, but stopping on a dangerous highway to try to rescue some ducks in a more serious violation.  It is probably better to hit an animal than to risk causing a serious accident.  The way it works is one is responsible for their own actions while operating a motor vehicle and if there is a safe way to avoid hitting an animal that's fine.  But if someone gets injured or killed or we cause an accident, our actions will be put under close scrutiny.

[blackbird]

5 hours ago, Altai said:

So most of us agreed that even if someones do not have criminal feelings but they cause to death of innocemt people by mistake, they should be sentenced ?

Right ? 

Right.  That's how the legal system works.  It is assumed when a person is operating a motor vehicle they are responsible for the safety of everyone else around them.  If you cause an accident, you are responsible.  Doesn't matter if you didn't mean to do it.  If the police think you caused it, you could be charged with an offence and have to go to court and be punished if found guilty. 

I once met a man who worked in Saudi Arabia temporarily.   He heard a Muslim man say he (the Muslim) can drive on the wrong side of the road when he wants  because he won't be killed unless Allah thinks it is his time to die.  He is not concerned about safe driving because he would only have an accident if it's Allah's will.   Is that really how some Muslims think or not?   What do you think about that? 

Edited November 17, 2017 by blackbird

[Altai]

28 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Right.  That's how the legal system works.  It is assumed when a person is operating a motor vehicle they are responsible for the safety of everyone else around them.  If you cause an accident, you are responsible.  Doesn't matter if you didn't mean to do it.  If the police think you caused it, you could be charged with an offence and have to go to court and be punished if found guilty. 

I once met a man who worked in Saudi Arabia temporarily.   He heard a Muslim man say he (the Muslim) can drive on the wrong side of the road when he wants  because he won't be killed unless Allah thinks it is his time to die.  He is not concerned about safe driving because he would only have an accident if it's Allah's will.   Is that really how some Muslims think or not?   What do you think about that? 

So then when we start to judge statesmen and military personels who "mistakenly" bombs civilians ? You said its how the legal system works, lets do that ? Huh ?

 

 

[taxme]

2 hours ago, Altai said:

So then when we start to judge statesmen and military personels who "mistakenly" bombs civilians ? You said its how the legal system works, lets do that ? Huh ?

 

 

If those military and statesmen leaders of ours continue to bomb innocent people, and then get nailed for it, I think pretty soon that all wars would come to an end. Let's do that, unh? 

[blackbird]

10 hours ago, Altai said:

So then when we start to judge statesmen and military personels who "mistakenly" bombs civilians ? You said its how the legal system works, lets do that ? Huh ?

 

 

Not sure what you mean on that.    You didn't answer my question about Allah's will.  What do you think about people who disobey the rules of the road and say if they have an accident, it is Allah's will?

[Altai]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Not sure what you mean on that.    You didn't answer my question about Allah's will.  What do you think about people who disobey the rules of the road and say if they have an accident, it is Allah's will?

So you said that causing people to die by mistake requires to be sentenced. I said when we are going to sentence who "mistakenly" murders civilians in war zones ? 

 

I dont reply your question because you are trolling. Saudis smell soo much petrol and they cant think healthy. Tell him to jump down from the room of the Burj Al Arab. He wont die if his claim is true and he is not a Muslim if he wont jump, tell your friend. 

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, Altai said:

So you said that causing people to die by mistake requires to be sentenced. I said when we are going to sentence who "mistakenly" murders civilians in war zones ? 

 

I dont reply your question because you are trolling. Saudis smell soo much petrol and they cant think healthy. Tell him to jump down from the room of the Burj Al Arab. He wont die if his claim is true and he is not a Muslim if he wont jump, tell your friend. 

LOL.  Good one.  Ok.   When civilians are mistakenly killed in a war zone I honestly don't really know what happens.  I would be just guessing.

The man I met that worked in Saudi Arabia passed away a long time ago.