rxwine
rxwine
  • Threads: 209
  • Posts: 12166
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 6:50:29 AM permalink
In some cases, I understand how letting the market work is better than a law. Other times, not so much.

If a company dumps dangerous chemicals at the edge of town and it seeps into the water system, everyone can stop dealing with the company, I guess.

So, you DON'T enact inspection laws, what happens? Companies stop doing it. You just put up with whatever happens and sue? You tell your deformed children 3 arms are better than 2 and stop the whining?

Okay, we know dealing with drunk drivers after the fact only deals with repeated series of aftermaths. Because essentially, we all have the freedom to drunk drive up until we're caught or have an accident. I guess that's possibly the price of freedom -- but it's not exactly heaven on Earth?
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 7:03:17 AM permalink
Quote: rxwine

Okay, we know dealing with drunk drivers after the fact only deals with repeated series of aftermaths. Because essentially, we all have the freedom to drunk drive up until we're caught or have an accident. I guess that's possibly the price of freedom -- but it's not exactly heaven on Earth?



Alright, lets take the drunk driving example. Nobody likes drunbk drivers. So we first lower the legal limit to .08, low enough that a large beer with dinner can put you over the limit. Then we have DUI Roadblocks, so if you had this one beer you can more easily get caught. Now CA has proposed puitting those little moniters in ALL cars and you have to blow into them to drive your car ANYTIME, no matter if you had a DUI or not. Where is the limit?

It is even worse with "regulations." Government agencies regulate a little more and a little more. People rate agencies on "how many new regs they have written." It gets to the point nobody can start any business without violating some silly one without knowing it.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 7:07:15 AM permalink
Anyone who chooses to drive drunk should be executed the very first time they get caught. There's just too many innocent people being hurt or killed by these idiots to give them any additional opportunities. There's no such thing as "oops!, I didn't realize 2 beers put me over the limit" being any kind of legitimate excuse. There are no excuses. Buzzed driving is drunk driving and is extremely dangerous. Make this law as tough as drunk drivers are stupid. When I'm out I turn in as many of them as I can.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 7:11:09 AM permalink
I don't know what this thread is about. Perhaps I need my morning coffee but until then I will just deal with the various parts:
>In some cases, I understand how letting the market work is better than a law. Other times, not so much.
The Law of the Market works at all times, in all places whereas one keeps his foot off the gas pedal only when there is a motor cycle cop in sight.

>If a company dumps dangerous chemicals and it seeps into the water system, everyone can stop dealing with the company.
Who knows which companies did the dumping? Who knows where? Does the person born with a birth defect ever get told which company it was? Can the company that dumps chemicals also hire lobbyists who in turn hire the best experts money can buy?

>Okay, we know dealing with drunk drivers after the fact only deals with repeated series of aftermaths.
Drunk drivers, smash and grab burglars, bank robbers, jaywalkers,,, its all aftermaths.
>Because essentially, we all have the freedom to drunk drive up until we're caught or have an accident.
And the freedom to drive sober up until the point someone else T-bones us while they are exercising their freedom to drive drunk until being caught.

Now if you will excuse me, I have to go tell Hot Blonde that I am young, handsome, wealthy, single, witty, charming and ready to commit. Then I have to go out and have a few drinks at a club, but its okay, the bartender will let me just sit there taking up space as I sober up before driving home.
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 8:58:50 AM permalink
Quote: rxwine

If a company dumps dangerous chemicals at the edge of town and it seeps into the water system, everyone can stop dealing with the company, I guess.



No, if a company does that, then the companies in charge of the water supply and their cusotmers can press criminal charges. Poisoning a product, water in this case, that people will consume, either on purpose or by accident, ought to qualify as a crime. The people in charge fo the chemical plant go to jail as a result.

Quote:

Okay, we know dealing with drunk drivers after the fact only deals with repeated series of aftermaths. Because essentially, we all have the freedom to drunk drive up until we're caught or have an accident. I guess that's possibly the price of freedom -- but it's not exactly heaven on Earth?



Drunk driving is properlyc onsidered a crime, because it entails an extremely high risk of death or injury to third parties. You can risk your life if you want, or destroy your life entirely. You don't have a right to risk other peoples' lives. So being drunk is not a crime, but driving drunk is.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
cyclist
cyclist
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 9
Joined: Mar 15, 2011
March 25th, 2011 at 9:02:29 AM permalink
Concerning drunk driving: Consider this, it is one of the few criminal laws in any US state that proposes to punish you based on you having a higher tendency to do something bad. In almost any other case we would find this totally unacceptable, why do we accept this in just this one case? There are other groups of drivers who may be more dangerous than average, but we haven't made it a crime for them to drive yet.
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 9:09:44 AM permalink
Quote: cyclist

Concerning drunk driving: Consider this, it is one of the few criminal laws in any US state that proposes to punish you based on you having a higher tendency to do something bad. In almost any other case we would find this totally unacceptable, why do we accept this in just this one case?



It's not just the one case. Aside the fact that many regulations already impose punishment or restraint for something you're capable fo doing but won't necessarily do, all the laws against drugs punish peolpe who don't do anything to anyone but themselves. Not to mention charges like posession with intent to distribute drugs.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 10:28:29 AM permalink
Quote: cyclist

Concerning drunk driving: Consider this, it is one of the few criminal laws in any US state that proposes to punish you based on you having a higher tendency to do something bad. In almost any other case we would find this totally unacceptable, why do we accept this in just this one case? There are other groups of drivers who may be more dangerous than average, but we haven't made it a crime for them to drive yet.



"to do something bad" -

Getting in a tonne of metal with out proper control of it is "bad". It heightens the risk to others around you. The law has long covered the ability to stop people harming themselves and others prior to the act.

How drunk drivers don't get done for vehicular manslaughter or beyond more often when they cause death by driving under the influence, I don't know. It's pre-meditated action, and their carelessness has wiped out far too many people who were minding their own.

40% of traffic deaths in the US have alcohol as a factor. 40%. FORTY PERCENT.

In the UK, Drunk Driver are pariahs. I've not seen the attitude in the US or Canada at all.

I'm not a supporter of MADD though, who've become less of a anti-drunk driving group and more of a prohibitionist organization. Breathalyzer interlocks on a car is a bloody stupid idea.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 1:11:40 PM permalink
NYS is now one of the top 5 toughest states when it comes to DUI. Take this with a grain of salt since I dont drink and therefore didn't make it a point to memorize it, but there's no more chances given when you get caught. I'm not even sure if they offer a misdemeanor charge anymore. If you get nabbed, you get a heavy punishment including one of those blow thingies installed in your car, in which YOU have to pay for both the installation and the monthly service fee. If you're caught DUI with a minor under the age of 16, it's an automatic felony with a possible 1-3 years in prison for 1ST OFFENSE. All told, the least severe DUI infraction (couple beers, driving by yourself) will cost about $10,000 when all is said and done.

I must say I'm torn. I'd hate to have a friend of family member catch a rap for having 2 beers over the course of a football game or meal and have their life essentially shattered. On the other hand, I was run off the road with my then-pregnant wife by some boozer, and it took a great effort of self control not to drag him out and literally beat him until he stopped moving. I guess when it comes down to it, it's now law and you have a choice to make. I'd like to curl up on the couch, smoke a bowl and read a good book, but I have a child and I know I could go to jail for doing so, so I choose not to. Riding my bike was not comfortable at 55mph, so I made the choice to ride at 90mph and paid the price over and over and over again. Both laws are stupin IMO. When I was a smoker I was still a productive member of society, I was still respectful, I was successful, I was a model citizen. And driving my bike at 90mph...it's made for performance, to include handling and braking. How should my 300lb rocket be held to the same standards as a 20,000lb big rig? Bah.

Too many laws? Sure, but what's the solution? I've often said the war on drugs is a tragic blunder on all accounts. How is all the money spent on hunting 'em down, prosecuting non violent offenders, taking people out of production and losing the tax revenue, spending the money to fund way overcrowded jails,... how is that helping? Are the streets safer? Is society more productive? Has drug use lowered? I'd think legalizing it would bring in tax money, put people back into the workforce and would kill a large chunk of the cost of jails. All that money saved and produced could be used for true social renovations, most notably our stuggling schools, drug education and rehab, etc and so forth. This like so many other laws just don't seem to be the right answer, or even effective. But as for a solution, I can't think that macro and have no idea.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 1:40:22 PM permalink
Legalizing drugs would make for far easier access by children. A law like that will never pass in this country because there are too many intelligent people. Anyone who smokes weed outside of true Doctor-prescribed medical use or takes any form of illegal drug has little to no brains. If I were an employer, I'd never hire anyone who didn't pass a complete drug test. I wouldn't want idiots responsible for the success of my company.
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 1:50:23 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

Legalizing drugs would make for far easier access by children.



How many children smoke, drink or gamble?
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
timberjim
timberjim
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 398
Joined: Dec 5, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 1:59:22 PM permalink
Yes, there are definitely too many laws.

There has been alot of discussion here about drugs and DUI. I think drugs should be legalized and regulated like alcohol. The monetary savings to our country would be huge. Think of all the people in our legal system for nonviolent drug offenses.

DUI laws should be simple and strict. Prison for a first offense. Subsequent offense, throw away the key.

While I'm at it - legalize prostitution. Anything consenting adults want to do, let them. But still treat the scumbag pimps that prey on vulnerable young women like the animals they are.

I think the Libertarian in me is exposing itself. But, I still maintain that no individual has any "rights" that must be achieved by forcibly taking something from someone else to be distributed "fairly".
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 2:05:38 PM permalink
Quote: Nareed

How many children smoke, drink or gamble?



Children are defined as being under 18--at least in a civilized country such as the US. Gambling isn't the issue and only morons smoke. So go figure it out.
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 2:09:51 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

Children are defined as being under 18--at least in a civilized country such as the US.



Childhood lasts until adolescence. Civilized countires don't let children drive, but they do let teenagers do so. Go figure.

Quote:

Gambling isn't the issue and only morons smoke. So go figure it out.



Gambling, smoking and drinking are legal, at least in several jurisdictions. Cigarettes and acohol are drugs. Gambling isn't, but it can be addictive.

So I ask again: how many children (under age 16) smoke drink or gamble?
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 2:31:02 PM permalink
We'll have to await paco's chart for that.

Gambling usually does not hurt the individual. Drinking usually does not hurt the individual. Drug use usually hurts the individual. Smoking, OTOH, not only hurts the individual--it hurts others. That's why I love to read about anyone who has smoked that dies of lung, esophogeal, or other smoking-related cancers. Justice....without having to life a finger.
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28576
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 2:52:35 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

Anyone who chooses to drive drunk should be executed the very first time they get caught. There's just too many innocent people being hurt or killed by these idiots to give them any additional opportunities. .



Geez, Jerry, get a grip. I owned a bar for 3 years, lots of people don't realize they're too drunk to drive. Especially young people. The reasoning part of their brain isn't functioning correctly. People do make mistakes, executing them for it is just a tad bit harsh.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 2:59:32 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

Gambling usually does not hurt the individual.



Yeah. No gambling addicts ahve ever ruined their lives gambling. What a relief.

Quote:

Drinking usually does not hurt the individual.



Tell that to people on death's door for liver troubles caused by alcohol. Better yet, to all the families of alcoholics.

Quote:

Drug use usually hurts the individual.



So what? If that's your standard, then you should also favor banning alcohol, tobacco and gambling.

Quote:

That's why I love to read about anyone who has smoked that dies of lung, esophogeal, or other smoking-related cancers. Justice....without having to life a finger.



You're sick and despicable. And if you want to take that as a personal insult and report me, go right ahead.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 3:02:31 PM permalink
People who use many of the legal drugs available are idiots too. It's not the drug use per se that makes them so.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28576
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 3:13:01 PM permalink
Quote: Nareed





You're sick and despicable. And if you want to take that as a personal insult and report me, go right ahead.



If you just give him enough rope, the real Jerry always comes out, he can't help himself.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 4:05:07 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Geez, Jerry, get a grip. I owned a bar for 3 years, lots of people don't realize they're too drunk to drive. Especially young people. The reasoning part of their brain isn't functioning correctly. People do make mistakes, executing them for it is just a tad bit harsh.



Who cares if they realize it or not? All that means is they're not smart enough or valuable enough for society to take any chances with. Making excuses doesn't cut it. Just like you're making up that I'm Jerry because you think I'm bothered by that. All that shows me is a former bartender that msy have had some damage done.
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 4:07:41 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

If you just give him enough rope, the real Jerry always comes out, he can't help himself.



You may have just blooped again. Re-read the handle of the person who made the personal insult by calling me a name. It is kinds funny though....watching him come apart at the seams over an issue. Don't you agree, Bob?
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 4:20:49 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

Who cares if they realize it or not? All that means is they're not smart enough or valuable enough for society to take any chances with.



Valuable to society? Since when do people need to ask permission in order to live?

Sick and despicable, as I said.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
weaselman
weaselman
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 4:32:22 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit


In the UK, Drunk Driver are pariahs. I've not seen the attitude in the US or Canada at all.


Think public transportation.
I don't like driving, period. I HATE driving "drunk", after a beer or two. If there was any way for me to avoid it (other than quitting drinking altogether, that is out of the question l:)), I'd use it. But there isn't. This is only one of many problems caused by US sucking on public transportation such bug time.

Quote:

Breathalyzer interlocks on a car is a bloody stupid idea.


Why though? If you feel so strongly one should not drive drunk, why are you opposed to the measure intended to ensure that exact thing?
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
weaselman
weaselman
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 4:36:54 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

Children are defined as being under 18--at least in a civilized country such as the US.


It's more like 26 now in the civilized country with Obamacare. But I doubt that's the end of it.
In the liquor store near where I live, y you to present an id if you are under 40 ...
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 4:37:04 PM permalink
Mr Singer, I won't debate your opinion as it is an opinion to which you are entitled. However, drug laws are fully enacted as of right now, and if you were to give me a couple bucks and about 20 minutes, I could go out and bring you any single recreational street drug you desire. And I live in a town of about 4,000, not some urban metropolis. Also, since they're illegal period, there is no different punishment if you were to sell to a consenting 40 year old adult or a 10 year old child. Cig's and beer on the other hand are legal but have harsh fines imposed for underage sale, making them much more difficult for a minor to purchase than a bag of weed.

But let me ask....you obviously have a very poor opinion of anyone who uses recreational drugs. And drugs have been used, are being used, and will always be used regardless of all of the inept attempts to stop it. Would you rather have users continue, damning themselves to whatever end befalls them with no consequence to you, or would you rather have the users continue, only with YOU having to continously foot the bill for their persecution, prosecution and detention?
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 4:40:23 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

Think public transportation.
I don't like driving, period. I HATE driving "drunk", after a beer or two. If there was any way for me to avoid it (other than quitting drinking altogether, that is out of the question l:)), I'd use it. But there isn't. This is only one of many problems caused by US sucking on public transportation such bug time.



But you do it anyway? You can either have the beer, or drive the car. Choose. Life sucks that it's a series of choice sometimes.

Quote:

Why though? If you feel so strongly one should not drive drunk, why are you opposed to the measure intended to ensure that exact thing?



Because it wouldn't ensure that (people always fool technology) and I'd prefer the pressure to be exerted by other people (friends, bar men, your self) than a system that is a inconvenience to everyone bar the few idiots who think they can drive fine with a couple of beers, and it's only round the corner, and I'll be fine, Jack.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
weaselman
weaselman
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 4:48:49 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

But you do it anyway? You can either have the beer, or drive the car. Choose. Life sucks that it's a series of choice sometimes.


There is no choice like that. I either do both, or none.
I am perfectly capable of driving a car after a beer or two. That wasn't the point.
I am just telling you why it is thought of generally as more acceptable in the US than it is in Europe - in Europe, you can drink and not drive, while in the US, most of the time, you can drink or not drink, but you can't not drive.

Quote:

Because it wouldn't ensure that (people always fool technology) and I'd prefer the pressure to be exerted by other people (friends, bar men, your self) than a system that is a inconvenience to everyone bar the few idiots who think they can drive fine with a couple of beers, and it's only round the corner, and I'll be fine, Jack.


But it's not mutually exclusive ... You can still have pressure from other people, and all that. It would be just an additional deterrent.
I'll tell you why, I think, most people don't want it (yet, they won't admit it). They just think "well, what if I drink a little, and I HAVE TO drive? I mean, I am not drunk, I just had a few beers, and I don't do it all the time, I just HAVE TO now ... I am a responsible individual, not some alcoholic, I don't want a stupid device to have a power of decision over me".
Can you really honestly tell me that nothing like this plays a part in your dislike of those devices? Not even a little bit?
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 5:20:09 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

There is no choice like that. I either do both, or none.



There really is a choice. You can go to a bar and not drink. I know that's a radical idea, but it can be done. If you can't physically go into a bar and not drink a beer... I'm misunderstanding something very vital about your life.

Quote:

I am perfectly capable of driving a car after a beer or two. That wasn't the point.



You think you are. Your not as good a driver as you think. Test after test show this.

Quote:

But it's not mutually exclusive ... You can still have pressure from other people, and all that. It would be just an additional deterrent.
I'll tell you why, I think, most people don't want it (yet, they won't admit it). They just think "well, what if I drink a little, and I HAVE TO drive? I mean, I am not drunk, I just had a few beers, and I don't do it all the time, I just HAVE TO now ... I am a responsible individual, not some alcoholic, I don't want a stupid device to have a power of decision over me".
Can you really honestly tell me that nothing like this plays a part in your dislike of those devices? Not even a little bit?



Actually, my dislike is I don't want to blow in a tube to drive to work. Or the shops. Or to drive my friends to the pub. Or to then have to f-around with clean tubes and gauges. Or the faults they have. Bad idea.

I don't drink and drive. I've managed to avoid it for all my adult life. I suspect I can carry on doing it for the rest. Especially as the most I have ever had (and it was once) before getting into a car and driving was a half pint, as I was not expecting to have to drive again that day.

And I'm not a temperance queen.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 5:28:13 PM permalink
Quote: Face

Mr Singer, I won't debate your opinion as it is an opinion to which you are entitled. However, drug laws are fully enacted as of right now, and if you were to give me a couple bucks and about 20 minutes, I could go out and bring you any single recreational street drug you desire. And I live in a town of about 4,000, not some urban metropolis. Also, since they're illegal period, there is no different punishment if you were to sell to a consenting 40 year old adult or a 10 year old child. Cig's and beer on the other hand are legal but have harsh fines imposed for underage sale, making them much more difficult for a minor to purchase than a bag of weed.

But let me ask....you obviously have a very poor opinion of anyone who uses recreational drugs. And drugs have been used, are being used, and will always be used regardless of all of the inept attempts to stop it. Would you rather have users continue, damning themselves to whatever end befalls them with no consequence to you, or would you rather have the users continue, only with YOU having to continously foot the bill for their persecution, prosecution and detention?



I imagine Nareed is feeling a bit small right now seeing that you're able to discuss this with me without calling me names.

By "recreational street drug" I believe you're referring to grass? It's a very complicated issue so what I do is defer it to the laws in place that deal with it. If someone's professional life get ruined because of a weed bust, too bad. If a spouse leaves because of it, tough love Charlie. If someone loses a job because they have it on their record, live & learn. The laws are there to protect us, and there are studies I've seen many times on TV that grass use absolutely leads to hard drug usage in just too large a percentage of users for comfort. Just like in gambling where a big win on a smaller denomination makes people need to play larger denominations to keep their thrills coming. It doesn't happen any more at the lower level. And it's the crystal meth and other drug users that present the greatest dangers to society. In N. Phoenix this year a trash truck driver plowed over a dozen Harleys waiting at a light because he was too high on the stuff to stop. 6 or 8 dead. And this horror is repeated all the time all over the country.

I don't care about the cost. Detain and throw away the key.
weaselman
weaselman
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 5:55:59 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

There really is a choice. You can go to a bar and not drink. I know that's a radical idea, but it can be done.


Not so much "radical", as kinda "stupid", I would say. Why would I go to the bar if I wasn't going to drink? You could go to casino, and not gamble, sure, but don't you have anything better to do with your time?



Quote:

You think you are. Your not as good a driver as you think. Test after test show this.


I beg to differ. All due respect, I will maintain I know better what kind of driver I am than you do.


Quote:

Actually, my dislike is I don't want to blow in a tube to drive to work. Or the shops. Or to drive my friends to the pub. Or to then have to f-around with clean tubes and gauges. Or the faults they have. Bad idea.


But why? How is blowing in a tube different from turning a key? It's just a procedure.


Quote:

Especially as the most I have ever had (and it was once) before getting into a car and driving was a half pint, as I was not expecting to have to drive again that day.


Aha! So even you, and even here (in a thread where you are arguing hard against it) admit that you did it.
Quod erat demonstrandum. Surely, you would not like a stupid tube stop you from driving then. Especially, since you knew perfectly well it was ok, and were not expecting to drive again that day (I fail to see how that matters, but anyhow...). After all, who knows better - you, or the tube?
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 5:56:02 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

I imagine Nareed is feeling a bit small right now seeing that you're able to discuss this with me without calling me names.



Small? I don't need to take swipes at you while talking to other people. I'm quite capable of confronting you to your face, which is something that seems to frighten you, Jerry.

What penalty would you propose for people who sell scam "systems"? Be honest.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 6:34:31 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

I imagine Nareed is feeling a bit small right now seeing that you're able to discuss this with me without calling me names.

By "recreational street drug" I believe you're referring to grass? It's a very complicated issue so what I do is defer it to the laws in place that deal with it. If someone's professional life get ruined because of a weed bust, too bad. If a spouse leaves because of it, tough love Charlie. If someone loses a job because they have it on their record, live & learn. The laws are there to protect us, and there are studies I've seen many times on TV that grass use absolutely leads to hard drug usage in just too large a percentage of users for comfort. Just like in gambling where a big win on a smaller denomination makes people need to play larger denominations to keep their thrills coming. It doesn't happen any more at the lower level. And it's the crystal meth and other drug users that present the greatest dangers to society. In N. Phoenix this year a trash truck driver plowed over a dozen Harleys waiting at a light because he was too high on the stuff to stop. 6 or 8 dead. And this horror is repeated all the time all over the country.

I don't care about the cost. Detain and throw away the key.



No, by 'rec street drug' I meant anything. Weed, coke, crack, meth, LSD, MDMA (X), ANYTHING. In my very much rural town, I can get any one of them faster (and often cheaper) than Domino's can deliver a pizza. It is obvious that the current system fails in every aspect. It doesn't prevent, there's no avenue for cure or prevention, and there's no financial benefit. At least if they made bank on fines and penalties, at least then I could see a reason, albeit a shady political one.

In my post I didn't clarify that I didn't mean for the gates to be thrown wide open, allowing anyone to sit at a park and blow coke until their hearts explode. Free-for-all drug laws would be worse than our current situation, I think on this we all would agree. As I said, I cant think big picture enough to come to a reasonable solution, but my idea goes something like legalizing marijuana. Tax the everloving hell out of it like we do with cigarettes. Release all the non-violent offenders in the prisons on a simple weed rap. Drop all the investigations and wide area sweeps hunting down the farmers who grow the stuff. Take all the money from the sales taxes, all the money saved from the corrections end and all the money saved on the stings and sweeps and pile it into education and drug awareness. As the last 5 years of anti-cig campaigns are showing, this type of stuff works, and it just HAS to be more effective than the current plan of just saying 'dont do that or you're in trouble!' As all the parents here know, that just doesn't work on the teenage mind.

I won't disagree with you that there are some drug addicts that really don't deserve anything. The theiving, abusing, predatory kind is hard to have sympathy for. But imagine someone got ahold of him before he became that. Could his life taken a turn for the better? Maybe, maybe not, but with the programs that I alluded to before, the chances absolutely increase. I'm not getting all kumbaya and saying 'aw man, just give 'im a chance', I'm just saying it seems a better course of action than our current one.

In reference to the other post about the blowy-tube, they require constant updates to prevent people from having a friend blow for you to get it started. By 'constant' I mean like every 10-15 minutes. You have to reblow otherwise the car shuts off. I'm not taking sides in your conversation, but it is more involved a procedure than turning the key.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 6:46:54 PM permalink
""What penalty would you propose for people who sell scam "systems"? Be honest.""

You're referring to what I have developed? I can't tell because I don't sell my strategy, and that's because I don't need the money from selling my strategy.


Nareed, you again may have the last word, as usual. I'd hate to creep into your sleep.
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 6:48:50 PM permalink
Quote: Face

No, by 'rec street drug' I meant anything. Weed, coke, crack, meth, LSD, MDMA (X), ANYTHING. In my very much rural town, I can get any one of them faster (and often cheaper) than Domino's can deliver a pizza. It is obvious that the current system fails in every aspect. It doesn't prevent, there's no avenue for cure or prevention, and there's no financial benefit. At least if they made bank on fines and penalties, at least then I could see a reason, albeit a shady political one.

In my post I didn't clarify that I didn't mean for the gates to be thrown wide open, allowing anyone to sit at a park and blow coke until their hearts explode. Free-for-all drug laws would be worse than our current situation, I think on this we all would agree. As I said, I cant think big picture enough to come to a reasonable solution, but my idea goes something like legalizing marijuana. Tax the everloving hell out of it like we do with cigarettes. Release all the non-violent offenders in the prisons on a simple weed rap. Drop all the investigations and wide area sweeps hunting down the farmers who grow the stuff. Take all the money from the sales taxes, all the money saved from the corrections end and all the money saved on the stings and sweeps and pile it into education and drug awareness. As the last 5 years of anti-cig campaigns are showing, this type of stuff works, and it just HAS to be more effective than the current plan of just saying 'dont do that or you're in trouble!' As all the parents here know, that just doesn't work on the teenage mind.

I won't disagree with you that there are some drug addicts that really don't deserve anything. The theiving, abusing, predatory kind is hard to have sympathy for. But imagine someone got ahold of him before he became that. Could his life taken a turn for the better? Maybe, maybe not, but with the programs that I alluded to before, the chances absolutely increase. I'm not getting all kumbaya and saying 'aw man, just give 'im a chance', I'm just saying it seems a better course of action than our current one.

In reference to the other post about the blowy-tube, they require constant updates to prevent people from having a friend blow for you to get it started. By 'constant' I mean like every 10-15 minutes. You have to reblow otherwise the car shuts off. I'm not taking sides in your conversation, but it is more involved a procedure than turning the key.



Yes, a very complicated issue. Let's hope someday it gets resolved in a way the majority can live with.
weaselman
weaselman
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 7:22:59 PM permalink
Quote: Face


In reference to the other post about the blowy-tube, they require constant updates to prevent people from having a friend blow for you to get it started.


If you have a friend to blow for you, just ask him to drive :)
Quote:

I'm not taking sides in your conversation, but it is more involved a procedure than turning the key.


If you think that my "side" is for the tubes, you are wrong.
What I am trying to demonstrate, is that the reason most people are opposed to them, despite all the attempts at rationalizing, is the same basic and natural opposition to having the big uncle control your every step and decide for you what you should and should not do. The concept is naturally repulsive to any normal, responsible and reasonable adult.
Those who call for more government control do so only in those areas they think will never affect themselves.
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 7:32:37 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

If you have a friend to blow for you, just ask him to drive :)



Ah yes, common sense. Someone needs to rename the term as it doesn't seem so common anymore.

Quote: weaselman

If you think that my "side" is for the tubes, you are wrong.



Not at all. I honestly didn't even recall who was on what side at the time I posted that. The 'simple procedure' part just caught my attention. No offense my good man.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 7:33:35 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

You're referring to what I have developed?



I'm asking a simple question. Why are you evading an answer? You could just ignore it.

Quote:

I can't tell because I don't sell my strategy, and that's because I don't need the money from selling my strategy.



I believe that as much as I believe water isn't wet. But if you think you have to comit a crime in order to pass judgment on it, then perhaps you should consider what you're giving opinions on in this thread: drunk driving and drug dealing, Jerry? I expected better of you.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
thecesspit
thecesspit
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 7:45:34 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

Not so much "radical", as kinda "stupid", I would say. Why would I go to the bar if I wasn't going to drink? You could go to casino, and not gamble, sure, but don't you have anything better to do with your time?



I go to the bar to see my friends, chat, and have a beer. The beer's the reason we choose a bar, but the company is why I go. If it was just for the beer, I can drink at home.

You have options, you just choose to take ones I wouldn't take, and ones I think are wrong, for a reason I've hope made clear. Go ahead, live your life how you want. I think drink driving is stupid and selfish. If you get arrested for being over the limit, there will be zero sympathy from me.

I am sure you can cope with my scorn down there :)

40% of deaths on the roads in the US have alcohol as a factor. Just to let you know that again. If I'd had just two beers, and hit someone, and killed them... I'd always be thinking "maybe I shouldn't have had those beers".

Quote:

I beg to differ. All due respect, I will maintain I know better what kind of driver I am than you do.



With all due respect, that may indeed be the case. But if I had a dollar for every person whose told me, that "they can drive okay after two beers" who clearly can't (and that tests show can't) I'd be a couple hundred dollars better off. So maybe YOU are the exception to the rule. Reaction times slow even after 1 pint.

Quote:

But why? How is blowing in a tube different from turning a key? It's just a procedure.



How many breathlyzer tests have you done? To get a good result, you have to do more than just blow in a tube between tests. I'm sure you wouldn't want to do it after every time I get in a car. I'm sure you wouldn't either.

Quote:

Aha! So even you, and even here (in a thread where you are arguing hard against it) admit that you did it.
Quod erat demonstrandum. Surely, you would not like a stupid tube stop you from driving then. Especially, since you knew perfectly well it was ok, and were not expecting to drive again that day (I fail to see how that matters, but anyhow...). After all, who knows better - you, or the tube?



I had started to have a beer as I was not expecting to drive again that day. That's what I meant. Turns out, I had to move a car from one car park to another, about 2 miles apart on private property. If it had been anything more (either distance or beer wise), I wouldn't have done it.

In 19 years of driving, that's the one time. Over ten years ago. I think I can cope with your QED on that one. No-one is perfect, least of all me.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
nullzero00
nullzero00
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 22
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
March 25th, 2011 at 8:34:52 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

Anyone who chooses to drive drunk should be executed the very first time they get caught. There's just too many innocent people being hurt or killed by these idiots to give them any additional opportunities. There's no such thing as "oops!, I didn't realize 2 beers put me over the limit" being any kind of legitimate excuse. There are no excuses. Buzzed driving is drunk driving and is extremely dangerous. Make this law as tough as drunk drivers are stupid. When I'm out I turn in as many of them as I can.



please. drunk "buzzed" driving is no more dangerous than people who talk on their cell phones while driving, or texting while driving, or putting on makeup while driving, or eating while driving, or changing the radio or fishing around in the glove box, or trying to pick up something you dropped while driving.

the easier way would be to have an international "i'm drunk" signal for everyone else - like hazards on, dome light on, drive in right lane. you see that, you stay away & avoid.

the reason people drive drunk is because of the hassle involved the next day - if you get a ride, then someone has to bring you back and get your car. yeah, that's what you want to do with a hangover. they may also have to come get you too, so now they've made 2 inconvenience trips.

there are many people who can successfully drive drunk, just like there are many people who can successfully drive in ice & snow. why punish everyone for the actions of several?
nullzero00
nullzero00
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 22
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
March 25th, 2011 at 8:48:43 PM permalink
Quote: weaselman

Quote:
I am perfectly capable of driving a car after a beer or two. That wasn't the point.


You think you are. Your not as good a driver as you think. Test after test show this.



I beg to differ. All due respect, I will maintain I know better what kind of driver I am than you do.




exactly - just because your reaction time slows down doesn;t mean that you can't drive slower, thereby increase your chance to slow down in case of a quick stop.
Or you wait till a time where there are lesser cars on the road to drive home.
no one is asking you to drunk drive home as if you were in the Indy 500, just make it home period. and yes, there are lots of people who can do just that, especially with practice. it's not difficult.
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 25th, 2011 at 8:55:03 PM permalink
Quote: nullzero00

please. drunk "buzzed" driving is no more dangerous than people who talk on their cell phones while driving, or texting while driving, or putting on makeup while driving, or eating while driving, or changing the radio or fishing around in the glove box, or trying to pick up something you dropped while driving.

the easier way would be to have an international "i'm drunk" signal for everyone else - like hazards on, dome light on, drive in right lane. you see that, you stay away & avoid.

the reason people drive drunk is because of the hassle involved the next day - if you get a ride, then someone has to bring you back and get your car. yeah, that's what you want to do with a hangover. they may also have to come get you too, so now they've made 2 inconvenience trips.

there are many people who can successfully drive drunk, just like there are many people who can successfully drive in ice & snow. why punish everyone for the actions of several?



You're trying to justify driving drunk because of inconvenience, or because some people who are drunk don't drive drunk because they think they can outsmart the buzz? Huh? I have to believe you drive drunk and think you will never regret it. Think of my words when you eventually get caught.

People who do all that stuff you mentioned while driving are idiots. No doubt about it. But if any of them are illegal then they should be removed from the road permanently.

I purposely locate a good spot outside of bars around here and look for drunks to get behind the wheel. Then I call it in. There's a group of us who do it and we do it as a community service. We're not allowed to chase anyone but we're allowed to follow at a safe distance. Most of the time I don't, because the call and identification is all that's needed to take the drunken jerk off the road. Every time one of them is thrown in Sheriff Joe's tents and/or his or her life becomes a living, wrecked hell because of it, I praise the Lord.
Wavy70
Wavy70
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 907
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 11:46:01 PM permalink
Quote: RobSinger


I purposely locate a good spot outside of bars around here and look for drunks to get behind the wheel. Then I call it in. There's a group of us who do it and we do it as a community service. We're not allowed to chase anyone but we're allowed to follow at a safe distance. Most of the time I don't, because the call and identification is all that's needed to take the drunken jerk off the road. Every time one of them is thrown in Sheriff Joe's tents and/or his or her life becomes a living, wrecked hell because of it, I praise the Lord.



The best part is when Sheriff Joe pulls over Deputy Dan he looks the other way.

But this is what happens when we lose all of the quality drama on TV. People get bored and start stalking.
I have a bewitched egg that I use to play VP with and I have net over 900k with it.
boymimbo
boymimbo
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 11:48:49 PM permalink
I'm very split on this. In my life, I remember driving drunk three times over a span of 25 years behind the wheel. The last time was about 12 years ago. It is nothing like driving buzzed or driving while talking on your cell phone -- you are lucky to make it home, because your judgement is impaired for the entire length of the drive. I'm glad I wasn't pulled over, because I would have been SCREWED.

The stats show that drunk driving deaths have decreased dramatically in the last 20 years. In 1982, 21,113 of 43,945 (48 percent) deaths from motor vehicle accidents (MVA) died in motor vehicle accidents where alcohol was a factor. In 1991, the number was 15,837 of 41,508 (38 percent) . In 2009, the number is 10,839 of 33,508 (31 percent). Compare this to around 10,000 gun related homicides in the United States in 2005. You can see that if you replaced the 2009 drunk driving death number to the 1982 number, you would roughly the same number of deaths per year and therefore one could make the claim that the reduction in vehicle deaths from 1982 to 2009 was solely because of a reduction of drunk driving deaths. Of course we would need to see all the data set to make that claim.

That said, there are plenty of studies that show that the risk goes up exponentially as your BAC level goes up. Most states and provinces have now enacted hand-held laws for cell phones and other devices which fines you for having these in your car. I support this law as well. However, I do not support suspending driver's licenses long term or ruining one's driving career or criminal record because one has consumed a couple of beers and has a BAC of .07. When you are at .15 (twice the legal limit), your risk of being in an accident is 200 times higher than a sober driver. I do support a fine at a BAC of anything above 0.02 and a very hefty fine/short term suspension at 0.08. Why? We don't take away driver's licenses for speeding (unless it's at least 50km over the limit in Ontario) nor for fatigued driving (truck drivers) nor for texting / talking on a cell phone. All of these things represent distractions and carry lower penalties yet have the same accident risks as someone with a BAC of .05. And those who have been convicted (for .08 or higher) probably should be forced to buy the blower on their car and have other penalties to seriously prevent them from doing it again.

As for drugs and driving, absolutely people drive on medications that make them drowsy. Marijuana is probably by the far the most used illegal drug in the United States but the driving fatalities for this drug are not measured or are very low... and I don't know why that is.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
Wavy70
Wavy70
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 907
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
March 25th, 2011 at 11:57:16 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo


As for drugs and driving, absolutely people drive on medications that make them drowsy. Marijuana is probably by the far the most used illegal drug in the United States but the driving fatalities for this drug are not measured or are very low... and I don't know why that is.



Well the effects of marijuana are completely different than alcohol. The best quote is from John Finalator Nixon's Head of the bureau of dangerous drugs and narcotics when he said "I would rather drive with someone who smoked marijuana than someone who just had a martini."

Ah those by gone years of hanging at the bar all night and doing the mystery walk in the morning to see what the car looked like.
I have a bewitched egg that I use to play VP with and I have net over 900k with it.
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28576
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
March 26th, 2011 at 12:24:41 AM permalink
Quote: boymimbo



The stats show that drunk driving deaths have decreased dramatically in the last 20 years. In 1982, 21,113 of 43,945 (48 percent) deaths from motor vehicle accidents (MVA) died in motor vehicle accidents where alcohol was a factor. In 1991, the number was 15,837 of 41,508 (38 percent) . In 2009, the number is 10,839 of 33,508 (31 percent). .



Very interesting. Thats when I owned the bar, in the early 80's. Drunk driving was just starting to be severely punished, but nothing like it is now. In the 70's it was still a little more than a slap on the wrist. I knew four customers in the 3 years I was the owner, that got killed by driving drunk. One was on a motorcycle. They were all habitual drunks, it was only a matter of time. So stiff punishments have paid off, its cut down on the drunk drivers. I remember in the movie North by Northwest when they get Cary Grant drunk and he gets arrested for drunk driving. He fights it and the next day his mother tells him to pay the two dollars and forget about it. That was the 50's..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
timberjim
timberjim
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 398
Joined: Dec 5, 2009
March 26th, 2011 at 3:07:52 AM permalink
Quote: nullzero00

exactly - just because your reaction time slows down doesn;t mean that you can't drive slower, thereby increase your chance to slow down in case of a quick stop.
Or you wait till a time where there are lesser cars on the road to drive home.
no one is asking you to drunk drive home as if you were in the Indy 500, just make it home period. and yes, there are lots of people who can do just that, especially with practice. it's not difficult.



OK - I'm going to call BS on this guy. Got to be a troll trying to stir things up. No one can be this dumb.
RobSinger
RobSinger
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 199
Joined: Oct 6, 2010
March 26th, 2011 at 3:32:43 AM permalink
I agree there are a lot of people who shouldn't be driving on prescription medicine, and that riding with a driver who's high from grass is not as bad as driving with a drunk. I just believe that there are a lot more impaired drivers out there on any given day or night than people realize, and we can never have too many laws. Before I had a family I didn't care about the danger much at all; since then it's been a major concern. The laws have changed a lot too.

When I was 19 and a student at a college in Boston in the late 60's I was driving up in Beverly, Mass. with a buddy and 2 girls we picked up from Endicott Jr. College. We had a bottle of S. Comfort, 2 six-packs, and some Jack. I was completely out of it but still drove. Some locals wanted to race from a stop light and I obliged. They cleaned us out and disappeared, but I got stopped by the cops for speeding, going thru a stop sign, drag racing, extreme drunk driving, underage drinking, and mouthing off to the cop. So what did they do? They took the 2 girls (who later told us they partied with them) and told me to get back to Boston and out of their town. If that has happened today I'd be in jail for a very long time.
Nareed
Nareed
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
March 26th, 2011 at 7:30:10 AM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

If that has happened today I'd be in jail for a very long time.



Ah, so because you're an immature person with a propensity to show depraved indifference to the lives of other people, you'd have everyone else also be placed under the control of a nanny state. Figures.

Tell you what. You and all other people who feel this way ought to be declared yourselves legally incompetent and become wards of the state, and leave the rest of us alone.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
nullzero00
nullzero00
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 22
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
March 26th, 2011 at 8:09:06 AM permalink
Quote: timberjim

OK - I'm going to call BS on this guy. Got to be a troll trying to stir things up. No one can be this dumb.



what i am talking about is the reaction time involved with hitting the brakes and the time that the car slows down to a stop.
you can be perfectly sober and hit the brakes at 30 mph, and the car will take x feet to come to a stop, as opposed to braking at 40mph, where the car will come to a stop at a greater distance. it's the old "if a kid darts out into the road, will you have enough time to stop". it depends on the closing distance and the speed you are traveling. you can't control where the impediment comes from, but you can change the variable of the vehicle's speed.
your reaction time is diminished by drinking, so if you travel slower, you incease your chance of stopping the vehicle quicker. i;m not saying it's a one-for-one ratio, but every little bit helps. it's like driving on an icy road - you giove yourself more room, you give yourself more time to brake, you accelerate and brake slowly.

also, if you drive home after happy hour buzzed, there will be a lot more to "dodge" (not cops, i mean people/vehicles/etc) than there would be at 3am.

and if calling out a guy who says that people who drive drunk should be executed, than yes, i am a troll.
nullzero00
nullzero00
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 22
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
March 26th, 2011 at 8:20:13 AM permalink
Quote: RobSinger

You're trying to justify driving drunk because of inconvenience, or because some people who are drunk don't drive drunk because they think they can outsmart the buzz? Huh? I have to believe you drive drunk and think you will never regret it. Think of my words when you eventually get caught..




i'm not trying to "justify" it, i'm saying WHY people do it.

i'm not "outsmarting" the buzz, i am compensating for it. when i used to go out to drink, it was a 20 minute drive to my friend's house, and we'd drink near his house. i always would cut mysef off, start drinking water to rehydrate. afterwards, we'd go to a diner and get some food. the only thing that helps the BAC get better is time. i would try to let 2-3 hours go by before driving home. i would also drink slower after learning my tolerance. dozens, if not a hundred or so times later, you learn when it works and when it wouldnt. was it the wisest thing to do? probably not. i never got into an accident because over time i learned my limits and when i should or shouldnt drive after drinking. sometimes i would crash at my friend's house, other times i would drive home.

Quote: RobSinger

I purposely locate a good spot outside of bars around here and look for drunks to get behind the wheel. Then I call it in. There's a group of us who do it and we do it as a community service. We're not allowed to chase anyone but we're allowed to follow at a safe distance. Most of the time I don't, because the call and identification is all that's needed to take the drunken jerk off the road. Every time one of them is thrown in Sheriff Joe's tents and/or his or her life becomes a living, wrecked hell because of it, I praise the Lord.



i guess everyone has their own brand of fun on a saturday night.
isn't it a little hypocritical to praise the lord over wrecking someone's life?
sounds a little too similar to the westboro baptist church's "preaching" about how fags will burn in hell at miitary funerals.
why don't you instead offer to take them home?
  • Jump to: