I've also thought that, but now I'm reconsidering my view on DWI. That should of only been murder considering the circumstances; 3 people were killed. But there is no point punishing someone for a crime they commited if they can't even accept that they deserved it.
Unless I'm reading what you're saying wrong (and it's late, so that may be the case) you are suggesting that we shouldn't punish criminals if they think that their actions should go unpunished. Please clarify your position.
It just seems unfair to punish someone for something they didn't mean to commit. The end does no justify the means, or something like that.
But then another part of me says that they should get punished for murder, for the same reasons you said.
If, while walking through your home, accidentally knock over and break a vase, even though it was not my intent, and I didn't mean to, it is still my responsibility to replace the vase, either directly or through monetary compensation. The fact that I did not intend to break the vase is irrelevent: I destroyed someone else's property, therefore I am responsible for replacing it.
That example is incredibly benign, however, next to the case posted. You can't buy someone a new life. Also, I don't buy the "didn't mean it" line of reasoning in drunk driving cases. It is well known that alcohol is an intoxicant. I won't say that people behave exactly the same while intoxicated as while not intoxicated, that would be absurd. However, since it is known that alcohol is an intoxicant, and this person voluntarily consumed it, buy doing so, he was implicitly accepting responsibility for any action he performed while intoxicated, whether or not he would have performed it sober. He then operated a vehicle, which, through his incompetence, lead to the loss of human life. With his recklessness, he killed innocent people in cold blood. There is no question of his guilt or responsibility. He is guilty, he is responsible.
