User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 6:57:16 PM EDT
[#1]
I'm thinking that you would have to have a pretty large GI tract for a brewery to set up housekeeping there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 6:58:40 PM EDT
[#2]
She has to have a hell of an attorney and a super shitty doctor to make that argument.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:05:59 PM EDT
[#3]
Maybe she needs to stop eating so much barley?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:06:30 PM EDT
[#4]
She was charged with DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED. How you get to that state is usually immaterial. Even if someone else dosed you to get you drunk, or your gut naturally produces alcohol to keep you hammered (talk about a cheap date) you should discontinue operating a motor vehicle until you're sober.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:08:45 PM EDT
[#5]
I am sure there is a market for her bottled piss.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:12:26 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
She has to have a hell of an attorney and a super shitty doctor to make that argument. it is NYS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:28:22 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She was charged with DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED. How you get to that state is usually immaterial. Even if someone else dosed you to get you drunk, or your gut naturally produces alcohol to keep you hammered (talk about a cheap date) you should discontinue operating a motor vehicle until you're sober. ...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:34:26 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: She was charged with DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED. How you get to that state is usually immaterial. Even if someone else dosed you to get you drunk, or your gut naturally produces alcohol to keep you hammered (talk about a cheap date) you should discontinue operating a motor vehicle until you're sober. ...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:35:41 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
She was charged with DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED. How you get to that state is usually immaterial. Even if someone else dosed you to get you drunk, or your gut naturally produces alcohol to keep you hammered (talk about a cheap date) you should discontinue operating a motor vehicle until you're sober. ...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. The criminal intent is her getting in the car and driving. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:39:11 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The criminal intent is her getting in the car and driving. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: She was charged with DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED. How you get to that state is usually immaterial. Even if someone else dosed you to get you drunk, or your gut naturally produces alcohol to keep you hammered (talk about a cheap date) you should discontinue operating a motor vehicle until you're sober. ...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. The criminal intent is her getting in the car and driving. Apparently not in the opinion of the judge who dismissed the case. Again, presuming the facts of the case are true as reported, you would have to prove she was even aware of being in an intoxicated state if her body is somehow constantly keeping her BAC up. But reading further into the case it seems like she was drinking earlier in the day, so perhaps she really was a legitimate DUI and this medical condition is simply being used to attack the BAC results as inaccurate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:53:54 PM EDT
[#11]
My father is a retired leo. He actually was involved with a dui stop with a person that had this disorder. She blew some rediculously high number, north of 3, so he arrested her. Turned out that she though it was normal to feel like that, and many medical test later she found out that her body caused this problem. I don't know what the outcome was, I guess will ask.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 7:59:23 PM EDT
[#12]
Calling BS. Good attorney shitty doctor maybe.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 8:00:04 PM EDT
[#13]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 8:00:40 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
She has to have a hell of an attorney and a super shitty doctor to make that argument. boom 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 8:01:45 PM EDT
[#15]
You need a working knowledge of the statue in the particular State.
Most: Drugs/alcohol + operating a motor vehicle + improper operation of vehicle If she can't drive properly with that BAC, she's done. Intent is not required for motor vehicle violations...hence faulty equipment infractions |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 8:04:40 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You need a working knowledge of the statue in the particular State. Most: Drugs/alcohol + operating a motor vehicle + improper operation of vehicle If she can't drive properly with that BAC, she's done. Intent is not required for motor vehicle violations...hence faulty equipment infractions The argument could be made that driving with that condition constitutes general intent by way of negligence, but again, how do you prove that if a doctor will testify the individual is kept at that state by her body and thus would not know she is intoxicated? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 8:06:17 PM EDT
[#17]
Life hack umber 74638-
Enable stomach to permanently produced alcohol. Benefits- 1) continual inebriation 2) immune to DWI/ DUI 3) chance to steal (sue) based on potential discrimination ( profit?) Negatives- 1) cognitive abilities will decline at a higher than average rate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2016 8:28:05 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
DUI is a misdemeanor crime, not an infraction. Intent, be it specific or general, is a required element of a crime. The argument could be made that driving with that condition constitutes general intent by way of negligence, but again, how do you prove that if a doctor will testify the individual is kept at that state by her body and thus would not know she is intoxicated? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You need a working knowledge of the statue in the particular State. Most: Drugs/alcohol + operating a motor vehicle + improper operation of vehicle If she can't drive properly with that BAC, she's done. Intent is not required for motor vehicle violations...hence faulty equipment infractions The argument could be made that driving with that condition constitutes general intent by way of negligence, but again, how do you prove that if a doctor will testify the individual is kept at that state by her body and thus would not know she is intoxicated? Correct, a misdemeanor motor vehicle offense. The violation is defined by conduct only "operating" & "under the influence". The "intent" isn't like the "intent" we're used to in an assault (for instance)...where your conscious effort is to reach a certain outcome. That's why there's no intent. I don't know how you guys do it, but BAC alone is insufficient...you need observed improper observation. If the ability to drive is affected there's a problem. The woman stated she had 3 or 4 drinks earlier in the day...good enough for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2016 2:23:26 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
DUI is a misdemeanor crime, not an infraction. Intent, be it specific or general, is a required element of a crime. The argument could be made that driving with that condition constitutes general intent by way of negligence, but again, how do you prove that if a doctor will testify the individual is kept at that state by her body and thus would not know she is intoxicated? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You need a working knowledge of the statue in the particular State. Most: Drugs/alcohol + operating a motor vehicle + improper operation of vehicle If she can't drive properly with that BAC, she's done. Intent is not required for motor vehicle violations...hence faulty equipment infractions The argument could be made that driving with that condition constitutes general intent by way of negligence, but again, how do you prove that if a doctor will testify the individual is kept at that state by her body and thus would not know she is intoxicated? No ones knows their actual level of intoxication when they get caught DUI, and plenty who do claim that they thought they were no longer drunk. Is this a valid excuse or not? Apparently, you can have a legit .3 BAC, and not know your intoxicated. Does that sound right to you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2016 2:25:20 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: She was charged with DRIVING WHILE INTOXICATED. How you get to that state is usually immaterial. Even if someone else dosed you to get you drunk, or your gut naturally produces alcohol to keep you hammered (talk about a cheap date) you should discontinue operating a motor vehicle until you're sober. ...Um no? Criminal intent is required for a crime. Intent is presumed to exist for DUI cases because you make the decision to consume the substance. If you have a medical condition causing your body to constantly maintain an elevated BAC not only can you not form the intent, you are very likely incapable of realizing you are intoxicated since that would presumably be your default state. That said, a disease induced constant .33 BAC sounds hinky to me and not conducive to long term survival, but I am not a doctor nor did I stay at a Holiday inn last night. ETA: All state DMVs I am aware of would administratively revoke this individuals driver's license until she is signed off by a doctor, just like someone who experiences a seizure that causes an accident. LoL.... bullshit as long as mere possession laws exist. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
