Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/26/2010 10:00:50 PM EDT
http://www.facesofdrunkdriving.com





Let's see how long it takes for someone to play devil's advocate. Molon labe coors light?

 
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 10:08:12 PM EDT
Yikes.....
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 10:13:27 PM EDT
Thanks for brightening up my day...............
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 10:21:28 PM EDT
Aw come on, this is GD. Nobody wants to shit on the parade?
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 10:27:49 PM EDT
What's up with those hats??
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 10:39:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By GC7:
Aw come on, this is GD. Nobody wants to shit on the parade?


What the hell.

Drunk Driving is a victimless crime, and should not be prosecuted.  But if you kill someone while driving impaired, you should be found guilty of premeditated murder, taken to the bar you got drunk at, and hung from a streetlight until dead.  Your body should be left there to feed the vultures and as a warning to those stupid enough to drink and drive.
In this case, as the victim is alive, I see assault with a deadly weapon, attempted murder, and a civil suit big enough to turn the perp into an indentured servant for life.
As the second part of my little "should" is unlikely to happen, I have no problem with the laws as they are today.

Happy now?
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 10:54:17 PM EDT



Originally Posted By ceverett:



Originally Posted By GC7:

Aw come on, this is GD. Nobody wants to shit on the parade?




What the hell.



Drunk Driving is a victimless crime, and should not be prosecuted.  But if you kill someone while driving impaired, you should be found guilty of premeditated murder, taken to the bar you got drunk at, and hung from a streetlight until dead.  Your body should be left there to feed the vultures and as a warning to those stupid enough to drink and drive.

In this case, as the victim is alive, I see assault with a deadly weapon, attempted murder, and a civil suit big enough to turn the perp into an indentured servant for life.

As the second part of my little "should" is unlikely to happen, I have no problem with the laws as they are today.



Happy now?
i think premeditated murder is an accurate charge if you kill someone.



I also think attempted murder  should be applied to drunk driving on a second offense or it you hit but don't kill someone.  first offense is about right here.  short sta in jail to fuck you life up a bit.





 
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 11:24:00 PM EDT
I think you guys would all be livid as fuck if it were  "Faces of Gun Violence".  

I also think that using that girl as a a spokes person against drunk driving is a sick form of exploitation.  They are marching her around like the Brady Campaign wheels around James.  

Drunk driving deaths account for maybe a third of all vehicular deaths yet seems to be the major focus for all of the attention.  Why is that?  Why isn't there a MADTBTWTHATFT (Mothers Against Dipshit Teeny Boppers Talking With Their Hands All The Fucking Time)?  

Last year there were 3 fatalities within 2 miles of my home.  None involved Alcohol, ALL involved people under 25.  Why don't we ban young people from the roads?  And Oooooooooooooooooooooooooold people.  

Drunk driving is fucking stupid and a drunk driver who causes an accident deserves death, but the focus on it is more about revenue generation than safety now.  There is a whole economy based of DUI, and when the DUI rates went down what happened?   They lowered it to .08%.  I betcha within the next couple years a couple shots of Binaca will send you to the pen and your car will get sold to Sleazy Automart.  Might want to use the Listerine before you goto bed then.




Link Posted: 10/26/2010 11:26:46 PM EDT



Originally Posted By yekimak:


I think you guys would all be livid as fuck if it were  "Faces of Gun Violence".  



I also think that using that girl as a a spokes person against drunk driving is a sick form of exploitation.  They are marching her around like the Brady Campaign wheels around James.  



Drunk driving deaths account for maybe a third of all vehicular deaths yet seems to be the major focus for all of the attention.  Why is that?  Why isn't there a MADTBTWTHATFT (Mothers Against Dipshit Teeny Boppers Talking With Their Hands All The Fucking Time)?  



Last year there were 3 fatalities within 2 miles of my home.  None involved Alcohol, ALL involved people under 25.  Why don't we ban young people from the roads?  And Oooooooooooooooooooooooooold people.  



Drunk driving is fucking stupid and a drunk driver who causes an accident deserves death, but the focus on it is more about revenue generation than safety now.  There is a whole economy based of DUI, and when the DUI rates went down what happened?   They lowered it to .08%.  I betcha within the next couple years a couple shots of Binaca will send you to the pen and your car will get sold to Sleazy Automart.  Might want to use the Listerine before you goto bed then.


drunk driving is just like shooting into a crowd. You are much more likely to kill someone. I have no problem with campaigning against stupidity.  Nobody is trying to ban alcohol. Just make people pay according to their abuse of it.



 
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 11:49:47 PM EDT
1)  If drunk driving laws worked this would have never happened.
2) Why is locking up the perp and making her pay the bill as a tax payer even remotely considered logical?  She deserves to be made whole and he is responsible for that.  7 years in jail did jack shit for anyone.  She/We got to pick up his living expenses for nearly a decade.  He should be her fucking financial slave until she is made whole and if she can't be made whole then it is for life.
3) Everyone fucking burnt to death, why is she not campaigning for asbestos upholstery?  
4)I can see it is a campaign against stupidity and I kind of missed that.  I am just sick of seeing tragedies marched out in front of us as examples of why we all must submit to new and more regulation and I jumped the gun in this case.  


Link Posted: 10/26/2010 11:53:27 PM EDT
I've seen that site before but was expecting something else when I clicked.

I get to see the faces of drunk drivers 5 nights a week.  And let me tell you something, their breath stinks!

I also love the mexicans that drink and drive.

Me:  It's about three grand to get out of jail
alien: But why?  I didn't do anything wrong. That's too much money!
Me: You were driving a vehicle while being intoxicated and some other traffic offenses.
alien:  But I didn't do anything wrong.
Me:  It's illegal to drive a motor vehicle while drunk
alien: But I'm not even drunk, I only had 8 beers.
Me:  You blew a .234, it's well over the legal limit
alien: But I didn't do anything wrong, I don't know why I 'm here
Me: I know you don't that's why you should learn the laws before coming to the country
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 11:56:44 PM EDT



Originally Posted By yekimak:


1)  If drunk driving laws worked this would have never happened.

2) Why is locking up the perp and making her pay the bill as a tax payer even remotely considered logical?  She deserves to be made whole and he is responsible for that.  7 years in jail did jack shit for anyone.  She/We got to pick up his living expenses for nearly a decade.  He should be her fucking financial slave until she is made whole and if she can't be made whole then it is for life.

3) Everyone fucking burnt to death, why is she not campaigning for asbestos upholstery?  

4)I can see it is a campaign against stupidity and I kind of missed that.  I am just sick of seeing tragedies marched out in front of us as examples of why we all must submit to new and more regulation and I jumped the gun in this case.  







well you could make that aargument about jailtime for any crime.  if the people feel it is just to rob them of their freedom then so be it.  I think repeat behavior of drunk driving or accidents involving it deserve harsh punishment .



I have more of a problem with the fact that prisoners don't have to pay back the cost of their incarceration then actually making them sit in jail.





I agree the driver should be that womans financial slave and pay her restitution for life for making her a monster. I also think he should get a lot of prison time for it and then pay a tax until his cost of prison is paid off as well.



 
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 12:48:59 AM EDT
FUCK DRUNK DRIVERS
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 12:52:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ceverett:
Originally Posted By GC7:
Aw come on, this is GD. Nobody wants to shit on the parade?


What the hell.

Drunk Driving is a victimless crime, and should not be prosecuted.  But if you kill someone while driving impaired, you should be found guilty of premeditated murder, taken to the bar you got drunk at, and hung from a streetlight until dead.  Your body should be left there to feed the vultures and as a warning to those stupid enough to drink and drive.
In this case, as the victim is alive, I see assault with a deadly weapon, attempted murder, and a civil suit big enough to turn the perp into an indentured servant for life.
As the second part of my little "should" is unlikely to happen, I have no problem with the laws as they are today.

Happy now?


I am.  This post boils it all down to individual freedom and individual responsibility for one's actions.  Me likee.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 1:04:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/27/2010 1:05:11 AM EDT by novaDAK]





Originally Posted By GC7:



Molon labe coors light?  



Just as with firearms, it's the user who uses it irresponsibly.



eta: another F drunk drivers here too.





 
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 1:40:44 AM EDT
Libertarian principles demand that we allow people to drive drunk until they succeed in killing or maiming someone.

Jane
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 1:42:51 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Shooter66:
What's up with those hats??

She's bald due to scarring.  I guess they make her feel prettier.


Jane

Link Posted: 10/27/2010 5:34:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By leadnbrass:
FUCK DRUNK DRIVERS


This.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 5:56:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/27/2010 6:31:55 AM EDT by HKUSP45C]
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Libertarian principles demand that we allow people to drive drunk until they succeed in killing or maiming someone.

Jane


I disagree. I think it's demostrable that driving a motor vehicle while impaired is clearly endangering others.

Libertarian principles wouldn't allow me to fire a gun into a crowd either, even if I didn't hit anyone.

The only thing I take issue with is the arbitrary BAC of .08 to "prove" impairment. Not everone would be impaired to a point of being a clear danger to others at that level. IMHO. Impairment should be pretty easy to prove with FSTs and the police officer's experience and training. If it isn't obvious to an officer that the person is impaired to the point of endangering the public and arbitrary number shouldn't say he's wrong.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 6:29:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/27/2010 6:31:54 AM EDT by Plumbata]
I've met the young lady several times.  I'm active in MADD.  You will find most DWI survivors are.  She's  a beautiful woman inside.

DWI is a lawyer gold mine. THAT's where the problem lies. Myself, I have no problem whatsoever with the lamp post approach, except for the possibility of running out of lamp posts

.As for the .08 number, lawyers again. used to be the FST's and video was a slam dunk.  Not anymore.


BTW:  You guys REALLY need to read the story instead of relying on pictures.  That fuckhead killed her two friends as well.  She survived, they burned to death. Double premeditated murder, missed #3 by a hair.  He's free today.

Link Posted: 10/27/2010 9:34:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By HKUSP45C:
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Libertarian principles demand that we allow people to drive drunk until they succeed in killing or maiming someone.

Jane


I disagree. I think it's demostrable that driving a motor vehicle while impaired is clearly endangering others.

Libertarian principles wouldn't allow me to fire a gun into a crowd either, even if I didn't hit anyone.

The only thing I take issue with is the arbitrary BAC of .08 to "prove" impairment. Not everone would be impaired to a point of being a clear danger to others at that level. IMHO. Impairment should be pretty easy to prove with FSTs and the police officer's experience and training. If it isn't obvious to an officer that the person is impaired to the point of endangering the public and arbitrary number shouldn't say he's wrong.

I'm sorry.  It was a sarcastic reference to the innumerable posts I've seen here made by people sailing under the libertarian flag who stoutly maintain that driving drunk in and of itself should not be a crime.

As for the quantitative standard, arguments can be made either way.  I'm OK with it as opposed to every DUI case being decided based on who can be most convincing in court three months after the fact.

Jane

Link Posted: 10/27/2010 9:37:23 AM EDT
I have Zero Pity for Drunk Drivers.


I have seen first hand too many lives destroyed over it.


In my book anyone who defends drunk driving is a complete Loser

Link Posted: 10/27/2010 9:37:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Originally Posted By HKUSP45C:
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Libertarian principles demand that we allow people to drive drunk until they succeed in killing or maiming someone.

Jane


I disagree. I think it's demostrable that driving a motor vehicle while impaired is clearly endangering others.

Libertarian principles wouldn't allow me to fire a gun into a crowd either, even if I didn't hit anyone.

The only thing I take issue with is the arbitrary BAC of .08 to "prove" impairment. Not everone would be impaired to a point of being a clear danger to others at that level. IMHO. Impairment should be pretty easy to prove with FSTs and the police officer's experience and training. If it isn't obvious to an officer that the person is impaired to the point of endangering the public and arbitrary number shouldn't say he's wrong.

I'm sorry.  It was a sarcastic reference to the innumerable posts I've seen here made by people sailing under the libertarian flag who stoutly maintain that driving drunk in and of itself should not be a crime.

As for the quantitative standard, arguments can be made either way.  I'm OK with it as opposed to every DUI case being decided based on who can be most convincing in court three months after the fact.

Jane




That's fair.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 9:40:12 AM EDT
jesus this didn't take long to go full retard

fuck drunk drivers

get a fucking cab
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 9:41:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Originally Posted By HKUSP45C:
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Libertarian principles demand that we allow people to drive drunk until they succeed in killing or maiming someone.

Jane


I disagree. I think it's demostrable that driving a motor vehicle while impaired is clearly endangering others.

Libertarian principles wouldn't allow me to fire a gun into a crowd either, even if I didn't hit anyone.

The only thing I take issue with is the arbitrary BAC of .08 to "prove" impairment. Not everone would be impaired to a point of being a clear danger to others at that level. IMHO. Impairment should be pretty easy to prove with FSTs and the police officer's experience and training. If it isn't obvious to an officer that the person is impaired to the point of endangering the public and arbitrary number shouldn't say he's wrong.

I'm sorry.  It was a sarcastic reference to the innumerable posts I've seen here made by people sailing under the libertarian flag who stoutly maintain that driving drunk in and of itself should not be a crime.

As for the quantitative standard, arguments can be made either way.  I'm OK with it as opposed to every DUI case being decided based on who can be most convincing in court three months after the fact.

Jane



If we're going to truly punish Drunk Drivers, then we need a due process.

No due process means administrative punishments only.

As an earilier poster stated, where I live, DWI is a make-work shovel-ready project for attornies and judges.  Its a cash-cow.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:04:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/27/2010 10:05:50 AM EDT by TrojanMan]
No more government subsidized public transportation.
No more free bus passes to the welfare club.

Problem solved.

How?


Why does nobody use public transportation?  Because it's inefficient and a bunch of unsavory people ride it.  The two main problems with public transit are, in order, the government and government teat suckers.

Get that taken care of and people will use public transportation again.


Lower the drinking age to 18.
Beverages under 2.5%ABV are no longer considered alcohol as far as tax/consumption purposes are concerned.
No excise taxes on alcohol or any other products whatsoever.  The government shall not tax one good or service special or distinct from any other.

The DMV is now concerned only with driver education.  They cannot inspect your vehicle or require registration.  Your license consists of a removable plate on your car.  Alternatively, your license number could be displayed on an LED panel or other such device.

The exam to obtain a motor vehicle license requires extensive written and practical demonstration of knowledge and driving ability.  Road course, emergency operations (e.g. changing a tire) and other skills must be demonstrated.  The written portion will not be administered in any language other than English and you are not permitted a translator.  You must renew every 3 years.

EPA is henceforth immediately disbanded.  They have no ability to regulate consumer products.  You want a European diesel?  Buy one.

No more ethanol in gasoline.

If you cause an accident (even a 1-car accident) and you have a BAC of .15 or above, you immediately and irrevocably lose your license for life.  All tests will involve multiple blood, urine and breath samples and they will be double-checked by an independent lab in a name-blind procedure.  You are liable for all damages in civil court and subject to any penalties in criminal court.

No more seat belt laws, helmet laws, speed limits, traffic cameras or nanny policemen.  States are no longer permitted to erect toll structures on interstate highways.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:10:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By yekimak:
I think you guys would all be livid as fuck if it were  "Faces of Gun Violence".  

I also think that using that girl as a a spokes person against drunk driving is a sick form of exploitation.  They are marching her around like the Brady Campaign wheels around James.  

Drunk driving deaths account for maybe a third of all vehicular deaths yet seems to be the major focus for all of the attention.  Why is that?  Why isn't there a MADTBTWTHATFT (Mothers Against Dipshit Teeny Boppers Talking With Their Hands All The Fucking Time)?  

Last year there were 3 fatalities within 2 miles of my home.  None involved Alcohol, ALL involved people under 25.  Why don't we ban young people from the roads?  And Oooooooooooooooooooooooooold people.  

Drunk driving is fucking stupid and a drunk driver who causes an accident deserves death, but the focus on it is more about revenue generation than safety now.  There is a whole economy based of DUI, and when the DUI rates went down what happened?   They lowered it to .08%.  I betcha within the next couple years a couple shots of Binaca will send you to the pen and your car will get sold to Sleazy Automart.  Might want to use the Listerine before you goto bed then.



Masterful rant. 10/10 with a chaser.

Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:15:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By HKUSP45C:
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Libertarian principles demand that we allow people to drive drunk until they succeed in killing or maiming someone.

Jane


I disagree. I think it's demostrable that driving a motor vehicle while impaired is clearly endangering others.

Libertarian principles wouldn't allow me to fire a gun into a crowd either, even if I didn't hit anyone.

The only thing I take issue with is the arbitrary BAC of .08 to "prove" impairment. Not everone would be impaired to a point of being a clear danger to others at that level. IMHO. Impairment should be pretty easy to prove with FSTs and the police officer's experience and training. If it isn't obvious to an officer that the person is impaired to the point of endangering the public and arbitrary number shouldn't say he's wrong.


Well, that's the rub. And the problem with arbitrary statutes enforced against victimless crimes. The punishment should fit the crime. No harm, no foul.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:18:52 AM EDT



Originally Posted By PlaneJane:


Libertarian principles demand that we allow people to drive drunk until they succeed in killing or maiming someone.



Jane


That sums up the attitude some have here.  Of course it would be interesting to see if they or one of their children were the ones burned up if they would have the same opinion.



 
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:38:17 AM EDT



Originally Posted By yekimak:


I think you guys would all be livid as fuck if it were  "Faces of Gun Violence".  



I also think that using that girl as a a spokes person against drunk driving is a sick form of exploitation.  They are marching her around like the Brady Campaign wheels around James.  



Drunk driving deaths account for maybe a third of all vehicular deaths yet seems to be the major focus for all of the attention.  Why is that?  Why isn't there a MADTBTWTHATFT (Mothers Against Dipshit Teeny Boppers Talking With Their Hands All The Fucking Time)?  



Last year there were 3 fatalities within 2 miles of my home.  None involved Alcohol, ALL involved people under 25.  Why don't we ban young people from the roads?  And Oooooooooooooooooooooooooold people.  



Drunk driving is fucking stupid and a drunk driver who causes an accident deserves death, but the focus on it is more about revenue generation than safety now.  There is a whole economy based of DUI, and when the DUI rates went down what happened?   They lowered it to .08%.  I betcha within the next couple years a couple shots of Binaca will send you to the pen and your car will get sold to Sleazy Automart.  Might want to use the Listerine before you goto bed then.









In Ontario it's down to .05 now.





 
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:43:02 AM EDT
fuck drunk drivers... fucking selfish assholes who think they can drive.. then kill someone
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:07:12 PM EDT
This is why I can't stand libertarians... so many of them will outright support the most heinous things, simply because "no one was hurt".



I've actually once heard a libertarian argue that it should be perfectly legal to threaten to kill someone, conspire to kill someone, and even begin to carry out the conspiracy. At that point, in his f****ed up mind... no "crime" has been committed. Only AFTER the person is killed, should the law do anything about it. See, if you do anything before the actual crime is committed, your "violating" the individuals right to free speech/thought (IE the right to plan a murder).



I know many libertarians aren't that F****ed up in the head, but I have come to realize that almost every single libertarian I have met,... has at least a handful of really far-off whacked up ideas. The prominence is much greater than I have found amidst regular run of the mill conservatives.





Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:13:25 PM EDT
Drunk drivers are reckless sociopaths.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:23:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ColonelHurtz:
Drunk drivers are reckless sociopaths.


What if your just a little drunk?
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:28:08 PM EDT
When will the "faces of texting while driving" be posted?
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:35:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By wc22312:
Originally Posted By ColonelHurtz:
Drunk drivers are reckless sociopaths.


What if your just a little drunk?


It doesn't matter if you're a little person or an NBA giant. Drunk driving is still a horrible crime.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:41:53 PM EDT
one problem to consider.......

you go to a bar with no intentions of getting drunk. after a couple hours go by with friends and colleagues, now lets say your drunk.  didnt mean too, didnt plan too, blah blah blah! You now in your drunken state make the irrational decision to drive home which is 2 blocks or 100miles away doesnt matter one way or the other. You made the decision to drive when you were not in your right sober mind, and if you had the mind of a sober person you would have never made the decision to drive drunk.

i guess however im talking about being completely pretty much blackout drunk, not like where you know you probably shouldnt be driving but your just going to risk it and use your two thumbs to stay in the lines(only have tried that at my ranch and it dont work worth a shit).
I once tried to drive home and thats something i would never do, however i was so wasted, blackout drunk that all my friends said i kept trying to get in my truck. They stopped me and put me in a cab which they graciously paid for to take me on home which was 5 blocks away. However, i couldnt tell the cab driver where i lived. go figure. so he pulled over one block away from my house and kindly called the cops while i just sat there waiting for them to arrive. The booked me in for a public intox and was released the next morning. (of coarse i learned all the details later in the week by asking various people and police friends that i knew)

I am, i guess should say I was a complete fucking retard that night, and im lucky that no one got killed by me trying to go home.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:49:21 PM EDT
So, did she ever learn English?

Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:56:39 PM EDT
Poor girl.

Her dad sounds like a good man. God bless them both.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 10:57:16 PM EDT
one problem to consider.......

you go to a bar with no intentions of getting drunk. after a couple hours go by with friends and colleagues, now lets say your drunk.  didnt mean too, didnt plan too, blah blah blah! You now in your drunken state make the irrational decision to drive home which is 2 blocks or 100miles away doesnt matter one way or the other. You made the decision to drive when you were not in your right sober mind, and if you had the mind of a sober person you would have never made the decision to drive drunk.

i guess however im talking about being completely pretty much blackout drunk, not like where you know you probably shouldnt be driving but your just going to risk it and use your two thumbs to stay in the lines(only have tried that at my ranch and it dont work worth a shit).

I once tried to drive home after i was very drunk something like .36 and thats something i would never do, however i was so wasted, blackout drunk that all my friends said i kept trying to get in my truck. They stopped me and put me in a cab which they graciously paid for to take me on home which was 5 blocks away. However, i couldnt tell the cab driver where i lived. go figure. so he pulled over one block away from my house and kindly called the cops while i just sat there waiting for them to arrive.

The booked me in for a public intox and was released the next morning. (of coarse i learned all the details later in the week by asking various people and the arresting officers, saw the same guys on patrol a week later at one of our college parties, i was sober so i figured i'd make nice and see what all information they had for me) They told me the general scenario and im lucky i had someone there watching out for me cause if they werent there i never would of made it home that night, and who knows what kind of damage I could of done with my truck in a small town with a big college.

I never ever would of ever drove home in that condition but i was obviously so far gone that it seemed ok for me to try and drive on home. I wasnt by any means ok to drive let alone walk. But to this day i still dont get it, my mind most likely didnt have the capacity to decide and weigh the options of if it was a good idea or a bad idea. Most likely went something like. "well the bars closed now... so lets go home!"

I guess if you dont have any self control or feel that just for tonight im going to let myself go, that you are going to have to have a chaperon.

I am, I guess I should say I was a complete fucking retard that night, and im lucky that no one got killed by me trying to go home. Lessons learned dearly even though i got out ok and no one got hurt.

Link Posted: 10/27/2010 11:08:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/27/2010 11:10:20 PM EDT by sleepdr]




Originally Posted By wc22312:



Originally Posted By ColonelHurtz:

Drunk drivers are reckless sociopaths.




What if your just a little drunk?


I'll go ask the family of a patient who is just a little dead, and get their opinion.



I legally intoxicate people for a living, and know very well that someone's subjective assessment of their own intoxication is not an accurate measure. Just because you feel fine doesn't mean you are safe. Note that I'm not stating a particular BAC for that, as people respond differently.



Drink all you want. Burn out your liver and make your sweat so ethanol-filled that it's not safe to light a match. Do it without endangering others, and we have no beef. You don't have the inalienable right to endanger others by getting behind the wheel of a vehicle. I've taken care of many DUI victims. I had a friend kill himself on a motorcycle while intoxicated, and personally know other victims. Spare me the "it's not bad if I don't hit anyone" justification. Just because you got away with something doesn't make it right, safe, or morally defensible.



Link Posted: 10/28/2010 12:31:33 AM EDT
7 years for this. He should have never gotten out again. I have no sum-pacy for drunk drivers.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 1:32:49 AM EDT
I hate the people that truely drive drunk.

I also hate the people that drive and text, drive and yammer on their cell phones, drive in a manner likely to cause accidents, and just fucking drive clueless.

I also fucking absolutely hate arbitrary BAC laws, and even more than that, I hate the abusive laws, that as far as I can tell, only increase the probability that an actual dangerous drunk will drive, rather than encouraging them to stay static until they're good to go.

Here's my issue with DUI laws:
Any abritary BAC level does not effect everyone equally - in fact, there's people that can factually drive safer at .15 than the average teenage girl texting OMG, or the average teenage boy trying to race his average teenage boyfriends.

The guy that has 3 or 4 beers at the bar after work and drives the same route home every night is far less dangerous than the soccer mom that goes out for a few martinis on girls night out and is tottaly pumped up on her way home.

Now lets get to the laws surrouding drunks (and other intoxicated).

Around here, there's often no parking on city streets between 2AM and 5AM.  Interestingly enough, those are the same hours that no alcohol can be sold.  Let's do the math here: A parking ticket is $75, that I will get busted with. A cab ride home is $15. Total cost is $90, plus whatever it takes to get my car back the next morning.

On the other hand, a DUI costs somewhere around $10,000.  No brainer, you say?  It would be, if the chances of a marginal DUI were so fucking slim as to approach zero. Around here, any bar hopper knows what roads to take, and what roads to avoid, and let's be honest, if you aren't going outside your lane, or driving at 5mph, getting stopped is generally not a big risk, if a cop is ever seen, which is not likely. DUI starts to become a sound financial decision to a drunk.

So... minimum $100 or so for doing the right thing, or taking a minimal chance and getting off scott free?  What does the inoxicated person, who by all propaganda claims can't make a good choice, make?  

To top it off, just being in a car with keys in the car is sufficient for a DUI.  Try to do the right thing, and sleep it off?  DUI for you, do not past go, do not collect $200. More than one LEO in GD has tried to justify this practice with "Well, they might drive" and "What if they're passed out at a stop light" neither of which come anywhere close to addressing the actual problem, and frankley out them for the JBT's that they are.

BUI?  I have met people that got a biking under the influence charge.  It's a lot like DUI, but no motor is involved. That's right, they got a DUI on a fucking bicycle.  Around here, it's a "vehicle", other than that pesky little bit about needing a license, and not driving a car, and having the potential danger to hurt... what, exactly? but getting fucked the same way none the less.  Hell, I've known a girl that almost got a DUI on a fucking horse.  A horse!  How can you drunk drive an animal into oncoming traffic at 70MPH?!?!? How?

To sum it up:

Fuck drunk drivers.

Fuck even harder stupid ass laws, and those that gleefully enforce said stupid ass laws.

Cheers to those of us that know when we've had too much, and walk/cab/bus/motel it

Fuck even harder the useless punks and twats that think that yapping on a cell phone, texting their fucking whatever, putting on makeup, eating breakfast, or doing whatever of the 9 million habits that will lead to negligent crashes. Fuck all of you, I want to start the social ]
group "Decent Drivers Against Self-Absorbed Twats"  DDASAT has a ring, don't you think?

Libertarian checking out.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 1:59:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:

Originally Posted By yekimak:
I think you guys would all be livid as fuck if it were  "Faces of Gun Violence".  

I also think that using that girl as a a spokes person against drunk driving is a sick form of exploitation.  They are marching her around like the Brady Campaign wheels around James.  

Drunk driving deaths account for maybe a third of all vehicular deaths yet seems to be the major focus for all of the attention.  Why is that?  Why isn't there a MADTBTWTHATFT (Mothers Against Dipshit Teeny Boppers Talking With Their Hands All The Fucking Time)?  

Last year there were 3 fatalities within 2 miles of my home.  None involved Alcohol, ALL involved people under 25.  Why don't we ban young people from the roads?  And Oooooooooooooooooooooooooold people.  

Drunk driving is fucking stupid and a drunk driver who causes an accident deserves death, but the focus on it is more about revenue generation than safety now.  There is a whole economy based of DUI, and when the DUI rates went down what happened?   They lowered it to .08%.  I betcha within the next couple years a couple shots of Binaca will send you to the pen and your car will get sold to Sleazy Automart.  Might want to use the Listerine before you goto bed then.





drunk driving is just like shooting into a crowd. You are much more likely to kill someone. I have no problem with campaigning against stupidity.  Nobody is trying to ban alcohol. Just make people pay according to their abuse of it.
 


There is a strong anti-alcohol element to much of the anti-drunk driving "movement" don't let them fool you.

These pictures and stories are rolled out whenever they try to pass new legislation - it is an emotional appeal meant to demonize anyone who opposes it.  For example, the move from .10 to point .08 as the "standard."  

How many of these people were hurt by a guy who was between .08 and .10?  You would think that is a perfectly logical question, when that is the issue at hand.  I was living in Texas when the MADD campaign was in full swing for that.  After a particularly emotional story about some poor gal who was seriously injured for life by a drunk, I simply asked what the drunk driver tested at - and in that case his BAC was over .2!  Yet when I asked how the story was relevant to the political debate about lowering the legal limit from .10 to .08, you would have thought I was advocating sunning over babies with lawnmowers.  Make no mistake, when it comes to groups like MADD, there are plenty of members who will stop at nothing to lower the accepted BAC to zero.

I have no problem with using these pics and stories in campaigns to hopefully shame those who break the law into realizing what might happen, but I am not going to sit here and deny that the appeal to emotion has not been and will not continue to be misused in political campaigns.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 2:19:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/28/2010 2:25:41 AM EDT by NathanJK]
Well, looks like the libertarians handled this one nicely.  I'm with them, good job guys, keep fighting the good fight.

Oh, we seem to be saying fuck (whatever we hate) in this thread, so here goes:

Fuck MADD
Fuck drunk drivers
Fuck lawyers
Fuck the .08 BAC that somehow you can get a DUI if you are lower than...
Fuck politicians
Fuck that stupid website that the OP linked to and their emotional horseshit commercials.
Fuck the guy who did that to that girl and her friends. May he slowly roast to death to end his life, and in death burn for all eternity in hell.
Fuck this whole fucked up issue and people who won't just do the right thing.  Don't endanger others lives, how fucking difficult should that be?  Selfish assholes.
Top Top