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.”

  • gravalicious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    124
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s theater. People go to prison for intoxication manslaughter. How are they making money to pay for child support? What kind of job will they really get after getting out of prison for essentially murder?

    • radix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      109
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      A cynical person might even say this is an attempt by the state and insurance companies to justify not having any sort of security net for victims’ families. If one person can be held financially responsible for the kids, why should anyone else have to step in?

      • snooggums@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        52
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is exactly what it is, aimed at drunk drivers first because everyone will be on board with that demographic first. Then it will be expanded over time.

        • radix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. – H.L. Mencken

    • bobman@unilem.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      How are they making money to pay for child support?

      Doesn’t matter. Seize their assets and auction them off. Use the proceeds to fund the reparations.

      It’s not that difficult to think of solutions if you, you know, want to.

        • bobman@unilem.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So… even if they have assets we shouldn’t seize them because… what?

          Some people might not?

      • caffinatedone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So, if they have a family and kids, I guess they’re on the street now? The parent involved is likely going to prison, so they’re not going to be able to provide support. This is “tough on crime” theater that would likely do nothing but cause more harm.

        • bobman@unilem.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What do you mean? Do you expect the kids to just take care of themselves while their caretaker is in prison?

          Lol. Come on man. Use your brain.