SUV Kills 10 in California

[Yonivore]

Courtesy of BlameBush.com (A satirical website)


Chalk up another 10 innocent lives to the red state's vehicle of choice, the deadly SUV. This time, the bloody tiretracks pass through California (a blue state, of course). An SUV parked on some railroad tracks forced a train to derail, killing 10 Kerry supporters on their way to counseling. As usual, the driver of the SUV survived without a scratch. The news says he was "deranged", so five will get you ten there was a "Bush/Cheney" sticker and a "Support Our Troops" ribbon on the SUV's back.

Needless to say, this tragedy never would have happened if there was a more fuel-efficient car on those tracks. While hitchhiking through Tahoe a couple years ago, I watched in horror as an Explorer ran a stop sign and t-boned a Mini-Cooper. The Cooper launched about 30 feet into the air, bounced off a couple of pine trees, rolled down an embankment, and was carried off by squirrels. All 100 clowns inside perished. Meanwhile, the driver of the SUV stood up on the road, laughing his ass off.

Such is the case in any accident in which an SUV is involved. The car is transformed into a mangled mass of smoldering metal, while the SUV that caused the wreck remains virtually unscathed. Is that fair? How many more limbs does Max Cleland have to lose before we ban these expensive death machines from the highway? It's high time we level the playing field so that wealthy, white collar suburbanites and working class families die horrible, screaming deaths in equitable numbers.

[Hook Dem]

:lol :lol :lol I was in Tahoe at the time that happened. I remember seeing that squirrel carry off the mini cooper. It is rumored that the occupants fed his family for the remainder of the winter! Thus, this might explain why Kerry failed to carry Nevada. Is there no justice? :lol

[desflood]

:lmao

[Useruser666]

Actually an SUV did kill 11 in California!!!! Whoa that's a weird coincidence!!!

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050127/D87SGII00.html

Murder Charges for Suspect in Train Crash
Email this Story

Jan 27, 10:31 AM (ET)

By ROBERT JABLON

(AP) In this photo released by the Glendale Police Department, suspect Juan Manuel Alvarez, 25, of...
Full Image

GLENDALE, Calif. (AP) - The suicidal man who authorities say caused the chain-reaction train derailment that killed 11 people has been charged with multiple counts of murder and could face the death penalty, the district attorney said Thursday.

Juan Manuel Alvarez, 25, left his sport utility vehicle on a railroad track Wednesday after changing his mind about committing suicide, authorities said. He was held without bail at a hospital's jail ward after apparently slitting his own wrists and stabbing himself in the chest.

In addition to the 11 dead, a woman remained missing and nearly 200 people were injured.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley said prosecutors filed charges late Wednesday for 10 counts of murder with "special circumstances" of committing murder through a train derailment. Cooley stressed however that the case were still being evaulated. Under state law, special circumstances allegations could make a defendant eligible for the death penalty.

(AP) Emergency workers use a crane to remove debris around a train derailment, Wednesday, Jan. 26, 2005,...
Full Image
Cooley said the complaint would be amended to add another count to refer to the 11th victim, found in the wreckage late Wednesday night. And he said the defendant's suicidal intent didn't make any difference to him.

"He's not going to engage my sympathy because he was despondent. His despondency doesn't move me," the district attorney told The Associated Press.

Arraignment was planned for Thursday afternoon but could be delayed depending on Alvarez's medical condition.

Alvarez, 25, got out of his green Jeep Cherokee before the two commuter trains crashed Wednesday morning in this Los Angeles suburb. He stood by as the gruesome chain-reaction wreck scattered wreckage and bodies over a quarter-mile of track.

The SUV was stuck between tracks away from a crossing and once there, he could not have moved it even if he had tried, Metrolink CEO David Solow said. The southbound train that struck it bolted skyward, hit a parked Union Pacific railcar, then clipped the northbound train.

(AP) An unidentified passenger (not shown) who was injured in a train derailment Wednesday, Jan. 26,...
Full Image
Sheriff Lee Baca said Thursday on CBS'"The Early Show" that "he was rather astounded himself as to what the outcome was" when the train hit the vehicle.

The crash was the worst U.S. rail tragedy since March 15, 1999, when an Amtrak train hit a truck and derailed near Bourbonnais, Ill., killing 11 people and injuring more than 100.

"I hope that we're able to assess this in a way that we can figure out: Is there a way that we can stop one crazed individual from creating this kind of carnage?" Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn told reporters.

Among the two women and nine men killed was a Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy on his way to work. About two dozen people were hospitalized in critical condition.

Glendale Fire Chief Christopher Gray said early Thursday that authorities were still actively looking for a 12th person who remained missing.

(AP) Officials from left: Glendale Police Chief Randy Adams, Special Agent in Charge of the Criminal...
Full Image
Alvarez's estranged wife, Carmelita Alvarez, had ordered him out of her home months ago, her family said, and in December she obtained a temporary restraining order keeping him away from her, their 3-year-old son and other family members.

"He is using drugs and has been in and out of rehab twice," she said in asking for the restraining order. "He threatened to take our kid away and to hurt my family members." She said he was "planning on selling his vehicle to buy a gun and threatened to use it."

Carmelita Alvarez, who lives in a converted garage behind her sister's home in suburban Compton, also told the court her husband had threatened to seek revenge on people he suspected of introducing her to another man. She said his drug use was triggering hallucinations.

She went into seclusion shortly after the crash.

"Whether we make any comment right now depends on my sister," her brother, Ruben Ochoa, told The Associated Press outside the family home on Wednesday. "We're not commenting right now."

(AP) Los Angeles County Sheriff officer Robert Delgadillo releases the photo of suspect Juan Manuel...
Full Image
The crash victims included several public employees, including Los Angeles County sheriff's Deputy James Tutino, 47, whose flag-draped body was saluted by law enforcement officers and firefighters as it was carried from the wreckage.

The force of the collision, which happened about 6 a.m., hurled passengers down the trains' aisles.

"I heard a noise. It got louder and louder," said Diane Brady, 56, of Simi Valley. "And next thing I knew the train tilted, everyone was screaming and I held onto a pole for dear life. I held on for what seemed like a week and a half, it seemed. It was a complete nightmare."

First on the scene were workers at a Costco store next to the tracks, who helped remove some of the injured in shopping carts. Uninjured passengers also joined the rescue effort.

Costco employee Hugo Moran said an elderly man, covered in blood and soot and with apparently broken arms and legs, was pulled out of the wreckage but died soon after. Before he died, he thanked his rescuers and asked them to pray for him.

Another trapped man had used his own blood to write a note on a seat bottom. Using the heart symbol, he wrote "I love my kids" and "I love Leslie."

The man's identity wasn't known, but Los Angeles Fire Department spokesman Capt. Rex Vilaubi said he was removed from the wreckage alive.

[MannyIsGod]

So, they want to charge him with murder but they won't let him commit suicide.

I guess they'll be going for the death penalty.

[MannyIsGod]

You know, the more I think about this, the dumber it is. The man was obviously not in a frame of mind to commit murder. He was negligent, but wtf is the state going to accomplish by doing this?

Achieve righteous justice?

[Spurminator]

Pacify the people's thirst for vengeance.

[Useruser666]

You know, the more I think about this, the dumber it is. The man was obviously not in a frame of mind to commit murder. He was negligent, but wtf is the state going to accomplish by doing this?

Achieve righteous justice?

He was going to kill himself and then decided against it at the last moment. He was in a frame of mind that allowed him to make a choice between his living and his dying. Isn't that sane?

[Spurminator]

I don't think that's what he's saying... I think what he means is why are they charging him with murder for what was clearly an accident? He wasn't trying to kill anybody.

I think it's a bit of a harsh punishment for stupidity. If I've heard correctly, Alvarez was frantically running around the wreckage apologizing and trying to help. Certainly doesn't excuse his negligance or free him from responsibility, but I think "murder" is a pretty harsh charge.

[Hook Dem]

I don't think that's what he's saying... I think what he means is why are they charging him with murder for what was clearly an accident? He wasn't trying to kill anybody.

I think it's a bit of a harsh punishment for stupidity. If I've heard correctly, Alvarez was frantically running around the wreckage apologizing and trying to help. Certainly doesn't excuse his negligance or free him from responsibility, but I think "murder" is a pretty harsh charge.
Well, he did show total disregard for others safety while trying to kill himself and then thought better of it. Couldn't he just cap himself in the head? That way no one else would have suffered except for his family. There are all kinds of ways to kill yourself without endangering others. It would be like a pilot driving his plane into the ground. At the last minute, he changes his mind and bails out. What about the passengers?

[Spurminator]

I'm not arguing the stupidity and carelessness of it all... But who knows whether or not he knew his car would actually derail the train?

[Hook Dem]

I'm not arguing the stupidity and carelessness of it all... But who knows whether or not he knew his car would actually derail the train?
Well, thats kinda like the "unloaded gun".

[MannyIsGod]

You could make a much better case for manslaughter way before murder where the death penalty is considered.

Whatever, it's an ass backward decision, but I'm not going to argue the justification because it's very subject.

[Useruser666]

If he shot himself and the bullet killed someone else and he lived, what type of crime is that? If you are covicted of multiple counts of manslaughter should the death penalty not be an option?

[Yonivore]

I bet the guy walks...

1) He's charged with murder and, at best, his actions were criminally negligent homicide, manslaughter, or reckless endangerment;

2) The train company failed to mitigate the disaster by continuing an unsafe practice of pushing trains instead of pulling them. Chances are if the trains had been pulled by the engines no derailment would have occurred (the idiot who chickened out at suicide could not have forseen such a hazard and, as has been already reported, is completely baffled, distraught, and greiving over what his action caused. This is probably what will save his bacon because he can reasonably claim that he thought the train would merely push the SUV off the track.);

3) The train company pays millions in settlements for their reckless behavior because document will surface showing unions have been warning them for years to quit pushing trains; and

4) The guy is convicted of some misdemeanor and melts into obscurity -- provided, of course, he doesn't off himself in jail.

[desflood]

But, see what his own wife (albeit estranged) says about his "frame of mind"? He's an addict. He's been in and out of drug rehab. Now, will that hurt him or help him in court?

[Useruser666]

I go out totally wasted and drive home. I lose control and hit a bus filled with 40 people. They all die, I live. What crime did I commit and what should my punishment be?

[Spurminator]

It depends on whether or not you believe it's common knowledge that an automobile can derail a passenger train.

Even in your scenario, I wouldn't charge you with murder. But you would serve the maximum possible penalty for DWI and manslaughter.

[bigzak25]

tie him to the tracks. justice is served.

[Spurminator]

I won't pretend to be an expert in criminal justice. I couldn't really tell you what the law says constitutes mruder/manslaughter/reckless endangerment/etc. But in my opinion, you should not be charged for the consequences of an illegal action... you should be charged for the illegal action itself.

Should this person spend any more time in prison than someone who (hypothetically) does the same exact thing but does not cause the train to detrail? I don't think so. Nor do I necessarily think someone who drives with a 1.5 blood alcohol level without consequence should get any more leniency than someone who drives with a 1.5 BAL and kills a family of five.

[Useruser666]

So Spurm, what would you say to life in prison for any of these cases?

[Samurai Jane]

I won't pretend to be an expert in criminal justice. I couldn't really tell you what the law says constitutes mruder/manslaughter/reckless endangerment/etc. But in my opinion, you should not be charged for the consequences of an illegal action... you should be charged for the illegal action itself.

Should this person spend any more time in prison than someone who (hypothetically) does the same exact thing but does not cause the train to detrail? I don't think so. Nor do I necessarily think someone who drives with a 1.5 blood alcohol level without consequence should get any more leniency than someone who drives with a 1.5 BAL and kills a family of five.

I don't know the specifics but I believe that a drunk driver that kills a family is subject to harsher punishment, involuntary manslaughter or something. Is this an additional charge, on top of the DWI charge levied in both cases?

[Spurminator]

So Spurm, what would you say to life in prison for any of these cases?

If it's a first-time conviction, I would say no. Second time, most definitely.


I don't know the specifics but I believe that a drunk driver that kills a family is subject to harsher punishment, involuntary manslaughter or something. Is this an additional charge, on top of the DWI charge levied in both cases?

Yeah, and to be honest, I've never been a fan of the "Involuntary Manslaughter" charge. I think it would make more sense to make the punishments stiffer for negligent actions that carry a high risk of bad consequences. I don't think someone who has done something illegal and reckless should get off light just because they were fortunate enough to not kill anybody.

[Useruser666]

What about the cop death penalty. If a cop dies while trying to apprehend a criminal, the criminal is charged with killing the cop.

So Spurm, you're saying life in prison should only be an option if someone drives drunk and kills people on two seperate occasions?

The guy who parked his truck there doesn't deserve to be charged with murder because "he didn't know his actions would kill those people in the train"? So if I didn't know my actions could be the cause of someone's death, then I don't have to face any harsh punishment? I can go and take a pistol and shoot it randomly in the air and since I don't think it will kill anyone I would only get a slap on the wrist if it would?

Sorry for the babbling! :lol

[Spurminator]

So if I didn't know my actions could be the cause of someone's death, then I don't have to face any harsh punishment?

Harsh, sure, but not Murder harsh.


What about the cop death penalty. If a cop dies while trying to apprehend a criminal, the criminal is charged with killing the cop.

The criminal should be charged with his crime, compounded by whatever crimes caused the cop to die... speeding on the wrong side of the highway, for instance.

[MannyIsGod]

It's media justice plain and simple.

The courst system for the most part does take entire situations into consideration in situations such as this. But when there is a case that a garners a large amount of media attention, principles are out the window. We become a knee jerk society who believes they can impliment a zero tolerance judicial system at whim. And that is pretty contradictory.

The man was suicidal. There is no finite line between the frames of mind where you are capable of making rational decisions and those in which you are not.

I just find it amazing that people can sit there and say that he was in a decision making frame of mind becaue he walked away from his suicide and completely ignore that a person in good mental health does not even CONSIDER suicide.

[bigzak25]

:cry that poor poor suicidal man....he didn't know what he was doing....he didn't mean to kill 10 people....

a fuckin river....cry me one.

[Spurminator]

That response was both brilliant and relevant.

I'm pretty sure no one involved in this discussion has any pity for this guy.

[bigzak25]

spurm, your thought process in this thread is whacked.

let me ask. what do you suggest for this guy?

[Spurminator]

spurm, your thought process in this thread is whacked.

How so?


let me ask. what do you suggest for this guy?

Whatever jail time you'd typically give to someone for leaving their automobile on train tracks. And counceling.

[Useruser666]

How so?



Whatever jail time you'd typically give to someone for leaving their automobile on train tracks. And counceling.

Spurm, I can try and understand your logic, but I think the punishment needs to be much harsher than this. What if a 1,000 people were killed? Just because you say you didn't think a particular outcome was going to come of your actions, you still need to be held responsible for that outcome.

[bigzak25]

so you think the penalties should be stiffer, kind of assume the severity that is the unintended death of innocent people...for things such as drunk driving and car on tracks.....

i'm more of the no harm, no foul mentality. the more severe the RESULTS of negligent or illegal actions, the more severe the punishment. i hope he's charged with 10 counts of negligent homicide or whatever the term for it is.....

[Spurminator]

Just because you say you didn't think a particular outcome was going to come of your actions, you still need to be held responsible for that outcome.

What do you hope to accomplish by this? I can see no reason for punishing someone based on the effects of their actions beyond simply satisfying our craving for revenge. It's emotional, nothing more.

I'm sure he will be hit with civil suits as well. That's where the consequences are punished. Emotions should not come into play during a Criminal hearing.


i hope he's charged with 10 counts of negligent homicide or whatever the term for it is.....

As long as it's not murder, that seems fine to me.

[bigzak25]

semantics.

[Samurai Jane]

so you think the penalties should be stiffer, kind of assume the severity that is the unintended death of innocent people...for things such as drunk driving and car on tracks.....

i'm more of the no harm, no foul mentality. the more severe the RESULTS of negligent or illegal actions, the more severe the punishment. i hope he's charged with 10 counts of negligent homicide or whatever the term for it is.....

Sounds to me like the difference between something like Murder and Attempted Murder.. the intentions were the same, but the results differ.

[Spurminator]

semantics.

Murder and Manslaughter differ in more ways than semantics.

[Useruser666]

I'm sorry Spurm, but emotions are very deeply involved with a criminal case. That's why people can be declared temporarily insane for finding their spouse in bad with another person and then killing them. If a drunk driver kills a family of people, that driver is responsible for every death in that family. The driver should be punished for knowingly taking that risk. Maybe not the death penalty, but certainly life in prison. The man who wanted to kill himself knew the train would hit his truck, it's not like accidently being hit by a train and causing the outcome.

[bigzak25]

"I can see no reason for punishing someone based on the effects of their actions beyond simply satisfying our craving for revenge."


i hope he's charged with 10 counts of negligent homicide or whatever the term for it is.....


"that seems fine to me."





which is it?

[Spurminator]

You're right, I was inconsistent. I would not charge him with any kind of homicide.

[Spurminator]

I'm sorry Spurm, but emotions are very deeply involved with a criminal case. That's why people can be declared temporarily insane for finding their spouse in bad with another person and then killing them.

That's not the kind of emotion I'm talking about. I'm talking about taking out our anger in the Criminal Court, beyond punishing the crime. Not the emotions that caused the crime itself.


If a drunk driver kills a family of people, that driver is responsible for every death in that family. The driver should be punished for knowingly taking that risk. Maybe not the death penalty, but certainly life in prison.

You just said it yourself... "The driver should be punished for knowingly taking that risk." That's exactly what he should be punished for. Why should the penalty differ if he happened to hit one person, a family of five, or a bus full of children? The crime was the same.


The man who wanted to kill himself knew the train would hit his truck, it's not like accidently being hit by a train and causing the outcome.

And that's why it's a crime. If his car stalled on the tracks and he could not move it, we probably wouldn't be talking about handing down any punishment at all, beyond Civil Court.

What if the train derailed, slammed into a government disease research facility and set off a chain reaction where millions of people died of the Ebola virus? Should we hang him on national television?

[Useruser666]

That's not the kind of emotion I'm talking about. I'm talking about taking out our anger in the Criminal Court, beyond punishing the crime. Not the emotions that caused the crime itself.



You just said it yourself... "The driver should be punished for knowingly taking that risk." That's exactly what he should be punished for. Why should the penalty differ if he happened to hit one person, a family of five, or a bus full of children? The crime was the same.



And that's why it's a crime. If his car stalled on the tracks and he could not move it, we probably wouldn't be talking about handing down any punishment at all, beyond Civil Court.

What if the train derailed, slammed into a government disease research facility and set off a chain reaction where millions of people died of the Ebola virus? Should we hang him on national television?

So you're saying it doesn't matter how many people he killed, because he didn't think it would kill anyone when he parked the truck there?

There should be greater penalties if more harm was to have come from his actions. That's like saying, I went up the front door of a building that was dark and threw a grenade in. I didn't think anyone was home, but 5 people inside were killed who were asleep. Is that manslaughter? What should be the punishment?

[bigzak25]

or michael jackson saying he was thrusting upward in bed and little mccauly just jumped up there unexpectantly.....

[Spurminator]

So you're saying it doesn't matter how many people he killed, because he didn't think it would kill anyone when he parked the truck there?

There should be greater penalties if more harm was to have come from his actions.

Why? What purpose does that serve for the Greater Good? Is he a more dangerous person because of the people who died or because he left his SUV on train tracks?


There should be greater penalties if more harm was to have come from his actions. That's like saying, went up the front door of a building that was dark and threw a grenade in. I didn't think anyone was home, but 5 people inside were killed who were asleep. Is that manslaughter? What should be the punishment?

I'm not trying to present a Utopian/Naive philospohy where this applies to every conceiveable example. If so, any criminal could bring forth the excuse that it was an accident. I think the hypothetical situations you are suggesting would be laughed out of any court room. A more realistic comparison might include someone leaving their car parked in fire lane, preventing access to a hydrant... resulting in the deaths of several families in an apartment complex.

I think in this particular case, assuming it was accidental, a charge of Murder is too harsh. I don't think it accomplishes anything except revenge. And that's what Civil Court is for, to some degree.

[bigzak25]

what it hopefully accomplishes is keeping other loonies off the tracks and keeping shit like this from happening again...

in your firehydrant example, i would hope they would throw the book at the guy or girl to keep other inconsiderate and unthinking aholes from parking there to raise the awareness of such negligence......and in this case, they usually break the windows of the car don't they? that's how it's done in the movies....

[Spurminator]

what it hopefully accomplishes is keeping other loonies off the tracks and keeping shit like this from happening again...

Do you mean the specific person in this case? Or are you thinking that a harsher penalty would deter future wackos from leaving their cars on the tracks?

Because no matter what punishment is handed down, I doubt it's going to make much difference in preventing future copycats.

[Useruser666]

Spurm, are you going to sue for your loved one's life back? Civil court is not punishment.

[Spurminator]

Civil court is not punishment.

It absolutely is punishment. If I have to pay you out of my ass for harming you in any way, I am being punished.

It's not restitution, but then again, neither is Criminal Court. You won't get your loved ones back after a certain amount of time served either.

[MannyIsGod]

what it hopefully accomplishes is keeping other loonies off the tracks and keeping shit like this from happening again...


Yes, I'm sure the next suicidal person who thinks about killing themselves on train tracks is going to stop and question the reprocussions of their actions based on any outcome of this case.

Because you know, as I pointed out before, suicidal people are the best at excercising sound judgement because of their excellent and very stable mental condition.

[MannyIsGod]

Spurm, are you going to sue for your loved one's life back? Civil court is not punishment.

Then explain wrongful death suits.

[Samurai Jane]

Unless you have nothing to lose...

Sounds like that guy wasn't exactly rolling in the dough. Those families won't see a red cent from him.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm sorry Spurm, but emotions are very deeply involved with a criminal case. That's why people can be declared temporarily insane for finding their spouse in bad with another person and then killing them.
Yes but they also don't qualify for the death penalty because of the lack of predetermination.


If a drunk driver kills a family of people, that driver is responsible for every death in that family. The driver should be punished for knowingly taking that risk. Maybe not the death penalty, but certainly life in prison. The man who wanted to kill himself knew the train would hit his truck, it's not like accidently being hit by a train and causing the outcome.

Must be nice to live in a world with no grey areas.

[MannyIsGod]

Unless you have nothing to lose...

Sounds like that guy wasn't exactly rolling in the dough. Those families won't see a red cent from him.

Well, it's not about financial gain either way.

[Useruser666]

Yeah it's about a person who's actions killed 11 other people. He knew by parking that truck there the train would hit it. Cause, effect. He purposely put his truck there. Maybe it wasn't to derail the train, but the effect of the train hitting his truck was his accomplished goal. If I were to purposefully run a red light so I didn't have to wait and ended up hitting a car that was going the other way, killing the poeple inside, what should my punishment be? Is it my fault they died? I never intended to kill them, so should I be let off with a slap on the wrist and some counseling?

[Spurminator]

He knew by parking that truck there the train would hit it. Cause, effect. He purposely put his truck there.

And he should be punished for that.

[MannyIsGod]

Why the fuck have different degree's of murder and seperate manslaughter crimes if you are going to paint every crime where someone dies with the same fucking brush then?

WHY?

[MannyIsGod]

You know, Yonivore gets it rather well in this thread.

Nice.

[Yonivore]

Nah, If I were a family member of one of those who were killed or injured, I'd want the guy tied to the tracks and run over by Metrolink train traveling about 2 miles an hour.

The guy is toast, I suspect he'll either kill himself or God will find a creative way to remove him from the gene pool. I just don't think there's justice to be had in a criminal court on this one.

[Nbadan]

I go out totally wasted and drive home.

Yeah, big surprise there. Ironical, this also helps explains why SW is able to spend so much time with us here - performance anxiety brought on by heavy drinking.

[Jekka]

Yeah, big surprise there. Ironical, this also helps explains why SW is able to spend so much time with us here - performance anxiety brought on by heavy drinking.

Uh, I wonder who's going to tell you that you're an idiot first. Chris or SW.

[Useruser666]

Uh, I wonder who's going to tell you that you're an idiot first. Chris or SW.

That would be me! Dan you are a moron! Have you ever heard the word hypothetical before? I never drive intoxicated. That was the most taken out of context thing I have ever heard from you.

Back to the real topic.

If somebody commits multiple manslaughters should life in prison not be an option? Life with parole in 30 years?

[SpursWoman]

Yeah, big surprise there. Ironical, this also helps explains why SW is able to spend so much time with us here - performance anxiety brought on by heavy drinking.


Even more ironical, since I've been seeing Chris I've spent at least 85% LESS time online.

But props to you, Nbadan, for keeping up with your astute observations....per usual.

:)

[Spurminator]

If somebody commits multiple manslaughters should life in prison not be an option?

Depends... Do you mean one crime resulting in multiple deaths, or two separate crimes which each result in deaths.

In the case of the latter... This person probably qualifies as a danger to society and should be kept in prison for a very long time (which could be life, depending on the circumstances.)

[Useruser666]

So multiple deaths from a single event is ok, from multiple events is not ok?

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Dan,

You really are a fucking idiot, aren't you?

Signed,

Everybody