NWP's post on upsetting statements has me wondering - Should people who break the law avoid the legal consequences of their actions if they are victimized by another person?
Scenario 1: Driver A is drunk. He is driving his family home from a Christmas Party. While driving home, Driver A's car is hit by Driver B, who is also drunk, and who has run a red light. Driver A's entire family is killed, but he survives. Assume that a traffic camera shows that Driver A could not have avoided the accident if sober. His BAC is .17 - more than twice the legal limit in most states. Should Driver A be charged with driving drunk, or is the loss of his family punishment enough?
Scenario 2: A 19 year old college student is drinking at a party. She leaves with several males. Her BAC is also .17. The legal drinking age is 21. She is raped and beaten by the men she left with. She is found lying on the sidewalk in a pool of vomit by a beat cop. Her statement is taken, and she is given a breathalyzer test, which shows that she is legally intoxicated. Should the girl be charged with underage consumption?
Scenario 3: A teen jumps a fence to toilet paper a house. The homeowner's dog, which has previously attacked two other people, and which he has been ordered to remove, attacks him and he is badly injured, requiring surgery. The teen meant no real harm, but the attack would never have happened if he had followed the law. Should he be charged with trespassing, or is his injury punishment enough?
Assume that the other parties in all 3 scenarios were charged, convicted, and sentenced. Should the people who didn't "cause" the harm also be charged? Why or why not?