|
12-12-2012
|
#31
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Oct 2012 |
Location: | Lewisville |
Posts: | 514 |
|
"10,000 deaths not considered significant."
Wow.
...with "The Little FurBall of HATE" shreding a sports editorial (see avatar)
|
|
|
|
12-12-2012
|
#32
|
|
Senior Member
Joined: | Mar 2009 |
Location: | Chesapeake, VA |
Posts: | 1,017 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackThatOleTimeBoys
"10,000 deaths not considered significant."
Wow.
|
I didn't say it was not significant. Just not as prolific as your making it out to be.
"When debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." ~Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
12-13-2012
|
#33
|
|
Moderator
Years Donated 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 29,580 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denim Chicken
It depends on the State, but it's a pretty safe bet that if convicted your not driving for a while.
|
In New Mexico, you can be stopped and sighted for DWI. You can go to court and actually win the case but your license is still suspended for a year. The body that oversees the license is a MADD board. This is the kind of thing that I believe serves to hurt the process. A person can be found innocent and they will still lose their license. You automatically have to get a device installed in your vehicle or simply wait the year. I don't understand how on earth this is legal but that's how it is here.
The state and the city get paid from the licensed installers of breathalizers and then they also get paid for the reporting functions.
It's all about money. |
|
|
|
|
12-13-2012
|
#34
|
|
Moderator
Years Donated 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 29,580 |
|
A lot of the statistics sighted are skewed. Breathalyzers do not really measure BAC all that accurately. Blood test do. The problem is that a breathalyzer does not account for the time frame of drinking. For example, if you were to sit down and open a beer right now. Take a drink of that beer and drive down the road and get pulled over, you would blow well over the .08 limit, even if you had only taken that one drink. The alcohol will register higher because you just took the drink, even though you didn't drink nearly enough of it to be drunk. Not so with blood tests. They actually measure the amount of alcohol that is in your bloodstream.
|
|
|
|
|
12-14-2012
|
#35
|
|
Banned
Joined: | Apr 2010 |
Posts: | 1,691 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallas
No offense, NOT a good idea. You have no idea what you are saying w/ 1 strike and all that loss. People make mistakes, something you cant obviously comprehend. I mean why not do the same thing w/ someone who gets into a fight and almost hurts someone? Why not put him in jail for life? He almost hurt someone. He could have killed the guy. What about a spouse hurting the other? Why not make them divorce immediately and split the kids up? They could have killed each other. I mean where does it stop? You can take this same neolithic approach to soo many misdemeanor crimes as well. So be careful what you wish for. You could easily get far more reaching effects than you could possibly imagine by doing what you suggest.
[View Full Quote]Now, saying that. I am a fan of more oversight of those who have had DUI's and far more penalties than are in place at this time and they are very solid and hard hitting penalties we have on the books now. MADD has done a fantastic job of strengthening our laws against DUI's. I think things are fine now w/ maybe being a bit more bite. Even w/ all of this, there are still those DUI's happening and situations like Jerry and Josh's.
I just don't think you think it through far enough and speak to much w/ emotion when stating that all DUI's peeps should lose their car forever and the right to drive. A mistake is a mistake and outside yourself, none of us are perfect. |
Slippery slope doesn't work for an argument. The fighting and domestic abuse have no bearing on DUI's and the argument is a logical fallacy. Americans don't take driving serious enough, someone almost ran me off the road because they were texting and picked their head up long enough to laugh about it. People can get by without a car, the law needs to be strict enough that no one will ever want to get caught doing it. |
|
|
|
|
12-14-2012
|
#36
|
|
Moderator
Years Donated 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
Joined: | Apr 2004 |
Posts: | 29,580 |
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cythim
Slippery slope doesn't work for an argument. The fighting and domestic abuse have no bearing on DUI's and the argument is a logical fallacy. Americans don't take driving serious enough, someone almost ran me off the road because they were texting and picked their head up long enough to laugh about it. People can get by without a car, the law needs to be strict enough that no one will ever want to get caught doing it.
|
The problem, at least as I see it, is that the idea is not to get rid of it. The idea is to capitalize on it. |
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:17 AM.
|
