And if you want to think of it this way...they don't treat everyone the same. It's either you get a DUI or charged for manslaughter. It all depends on the outcome. And it really doesn't matter because the police can give up as many DUIs as they like...it won't stop people from driving drunk.
Well i don't know about the USA but in Canada over .08 = DUI regardless of situation. unless your dad is a judge or sucks a judges cock. So maybe our countries differ on that ....
As for your earlier statment about the cop following a car swerving you are not comprehending the point I made about how people handle thier alcohol. If you are swerving allover while you drive after a few clearly you cant handle it.
And if you want to think of it this way...they don't treat everyone the same. It's either you get a DUI or charged for manslaughter. It all depends on the outcome. And it really doesn't matter because the police can give up as many DUIs as they like...it won't stop people from driving drunk.
Well i don't know about the USA but in Canada over .08 = DUI regardless of situation. unless your dad is a judge or sucks a judges cock. So maybe our countries differ on that ....
As for your earlier statment about the cop following a car swerving you are not comprehending the point I made about how people handle thier alcohol. If you are swerving allover while you drive after a few clearly you cant handle it.
Finally someone who makes sense. DUI laws are bullshit and just designed to take your money. People talking on cell phones, texting, women putting on makeup cause more accidents then Drunk drivers ever do. However you only here about it when DD'ers do it.
Seriously? Are you fucking retarded? They have to have DUI laws because DUI's kill people. Accidents happen and should be punished accordingly. DUI related deaths are not fucking accidents.
Finally someone who makes sense. DUI laws are bullshit and just designed to take your money. People talking on cell phones, texting, women putting on makeup cause more accidents then Drunk drivers ever do. However you only here about it when DD'ers do it.
Seriously? Are you fucking retarded? They have to have DUI laws because DUI's kill people. Accidents happen and should be punished accordingly. DUI related deaths are not fucking accidents.
I cant stand people who drive drunk and put families in risk of being killed. That punk could kill a beautiful little kid or even badly harm a child where he will be in pain for the rest of their life.
How hard is it to call a taxi? We used to do it all the time. There are even alot of taxi services that will take the drunk home for FREE.
Again-- I hate people who drive drunk. Can you imagine the pain you would suffer if you killed a harmless little infant or child.
I cant stand people who drive drunk and put families in risk of being killed. That punk could kill a beautiful little kid or even badly harm a child where he will be in pain for the rest of their life.
How hard is it to call a taxi? We used to do it all the time. There are even alot of taxi services that will take the drunk home for FREE.
Again-- I hate people who drive drunk. Can you imagine the pain you would suffer if you killed a harmless little infant or child.
wow, there really are some stupid ass people who have repsonded in this thread.....I would love to see what these people would say if 1 of these drunks ran over their mother or kid....I think , you would have a vastly different opinion after that happening.
wow, there really are some stupid ass people who have repsonded in this thread.....I would love to see what these people would say if 1 of these drunks ran over their mother or kid....I think , you would have a vastly different opinion after that happening.
Seriously? Are you fucking retarded? They have to have DUI laws because DUI's kill people. Accidents happen and should be punished accordingly. DUI related deaths are not fucking accidents.
No need for name calling now. You make a good point but you have probably driven drunk or after a few drinks before too. You didn't kill anyone did you ?
Seriously? Are you fucking retarded? They have to have DUI laws because DUI's kill people. Accidents happen and should be punished accordingly. DUI related deaths are not fucking accidents.
No need for name calling now. You make a good point but you have probably driven drunk or after a few drinks before too. You didn't kill anyone did you ?
I cant stand people who drive drunk and put families in risk of being killed. That punk could kill a beautiful little kid or even badly harm a child where he will be in pain for the rest of their life.
How hard is it to call a taxi? We used to do it all the time. There are even alot of taxi services that will take the drunk home for FREE.
Again-- I hate people who drive drunk. Can you imagine the pain you would suffer if you killed a harmless little infant or child.
Drunk drivers are sick punks
Have you ever actually experienced a DUI death first hand ?
I cant stand people who drive drunk and put families in risk of being killed. That punk could kill a beautiful little kid or even badly harm a child where he will be in pain for the rest of their life.
How hard is it to call a taxi? We used to do it all the time. There are even alot of taxi services that will take the drunk home for FREE.
Again-- I hate people who drive drunk. Can you imagine the pain you would suffer if you killed a harmless little infant or child.
Drunk drivers are sick punks
Have you ever actually experienced a DUI death first hand ?
Unless one thing causes another thing to happen 100% of the time, it is not causative. If I go get drunk and drive around the block, I'm not going to kill someone. I know my limits and I know my change in perception and thus would make it around the block no problem.
This argument alone is what ryriggs is trying to get at...
We shouldn't punish the people who can drink and drive responsibly just because of those who can't.
I already know the backlash I'm going to get but if you logically think about it, there are HUNDREDS of things that are dangerous to not only the individual but people around him that are still legal (ex. tobacco smoke, pharms, stunt flying, possessing a firearm, etc.).
DUI laws also put everyone on the same playing field which is stupid since I could be perfectly fine blowing a .08 yet another person could be totally wasted at that level.
Unless one thing causes another thing to happen 100% of the time, it is not causative. If I go get drunk and drive around the block, I'm not going to kill someone. I know my limits and I know my change in perception and thus would make it around the block no problem.
This argument alone is what ryriggs is trying to get at...
We shouldn't punish the people who can drink and drive responsibly just because of those who can't.
I already know the backlash I'm going to get but if you logically think about it, there are HUNDREDS of things that are dangerous to not only the individual but people around him that are still legal (ex. tobacco smoke, pharms, stunt flying, possessing a firearm, etc.).
DUI laws also put everyone on the same playing field which is stupid since I could be perfectly fine blowing a .08 yet another person could be totally wasted at that level.
Hes not an idiot he just has a rough life, parents split started smokin getting into anxietys meds, hes not a bad kid at all he works 7 days a week and gambles outrageoulsy, it was a stupid stupid mistake hes gunna have to pay for , im just lookin for an opinion on what the outcome could be
Hes not an idiot he just has a rough life, parents split started smokin getting into anxietys meds, hes not a bad kid at all he works 7 days a week and gambles outrageoulsy, it was a stupid stupid mistake hes gunna have to pay for , im just lookin for an opinion on what the outcome could be
Unless one thing causes another thing to happen 100% of the time, it is not causative. If I go get drunk and drive around the block, I'm not going to kill someone. I know my limits and I know my change in perception and thus would make it around the block no problem.
This argument alone is what ryriggs is trying to get at...
We shouldn't punish the people who can drink and drive responsibly just because of those who can't.
I already know the backlash I'm going to get but if you logically think about it, there are HUNDREDS of things that are dangerous to not only the individual but people around him that are still legal (ex. tobacco smoke, pharms, stunt flying, possessing a firearm, etc.).
DUI laws also put everyone on the same playing field which is stupid since I could be perfectly fine blowing a .08 yet another person could be totally wasted at that level.
DJ - I see what you're saying but..if you are a little impaired it can cause terrible consequences. I'm all in favor of EVERYone truly being on the same playing field in that if you are impaired while driving (including makeup, eating, texting, etc) you face a STIFF penalty and lose your license for 2 years. I'd say even for people that handle alcohol with the best of them that a few beers impairs them just a little and again thats all it takes. I used to think shooting a text while driving was no problem b/c I'm a good driver but if I look at it objectively I am a freaking moron to put other peoples life at risk doing that.
Unless one thing causes another thing to happen 100% of the time, it is not causative. If I go get drunk and drive around the block, I'm not going to kill someone. I know my limits and I know my change in perception and thus would make it around the block no problem.
This argument alone is what ryriggs is trying to get at...
We shouldn't punish the people who can drink and drive responsibly just because of those who can't.
I already know the backlash I'm going to get but if you logically think about it, there are HUNDREDS of things that are dangerous to not only the individual but people around him that are still legal (ex. tobacco smoke, pharms, stunt flying, possessing a firearm, etc.).
DUI laws also put everyone on the same playing field which is stupid since I could be perfectly fine blowing a .08 yet another person could be totally wasted at that level.
DJ - I see what you're saying but..if you are a little impaired it can cause terrible consequences. I'm all in favor of EVERYone truly being on the same playing field in that if you are impaired while driving (including makeup, eating, texting, etc) you face a STIFF penalty and lose your license for 2 years. I'd say even for people that handle alcohol with the best of them that a few beers impairs them just a little and again thats all it takes. I used to think shooting a text while driving was no problem b/c I'm a good driver but if I look at it objectively I am a freaking moron to put other peoples life at risk doing that.
Unless one thing causes another thing to happen 100% of the time, it is not causative. If I go get drunk and drive around the block, I'm not going to kill someone. I know my limits and I know my change in perception and thus would make it around the block no problem.
This argument alone is what ryriggs is trying to get at...
We shouldn't punish the people who can drink and drive responsibly just because of those who can't.
I already know the backlash I'm going to get but if you logically think about it, there are HUNDREDS of things that are dangerous to not only the individual but people around him that are still legal (ex. tobacco smoke, pharms, stunt flying, possessing a firearm, etc.).
DUI laws also put everyone on the same playing field which is stupid since I could be perfectly fine blowing a .08 yet another person could be totally wasted at that level.
Unless one thing causes another thing to happen 100% of the time, it is not causative. If I go get drunk and drive around the block, I'm not going to kill someone. I know my limits and I know my change in perception and thus would make it around the block no problem.
This argument alone is what ryriggs is trying to get at...
We shouldn't punish the people who can drink and drive responsibly just because of those who can't.
I already know the backlash I'm going to get but if you logically think about it, there are HUNDREDS of things that are dangerous to not only the individual but people around him that are still legal (ex. tobacco smoke, pharms, stunt flying, possessing a firearm, etc.).
DUI laws also put everyone on the same playing field which is stupid since I could be perfectly fine blowing a .08 yet another person could be totally wasted at that level.
Sure is. Although you are charged w/a DWI you do not officially lose your license until you go to court and are convicted.
If you go to another state prior to your court date your license is recognized as valid still. You can then hand in that license for your new state license assuming you can provide the 6 pts of documentation to the Motor Vehicle Dept. Believe me I did it. You are now legally allowed to drive in 49 states.
I agree with your legal interpretation, however it has already been established that his license was already revoked prior to the accident. With today's nationwide database, no state will issue a license if a suspension/revokation is still in effect somewhere else.
Sure is. Although you are charged w/a DWI you do not officially lose your license until you go to court and are convicted.
If you go to another state prior to your court date your license is recognized as valid still. You can then hand in that license for your new state license assuming you can provide the 6 pts of documentation to the Motor Vehicle Dept. Believe me I did it. You are now legally allowed to drive in 49 states.
I agree with your legal interpretation, however it has already been established that his license was already revoked prior to the accident. With today's nationwide database, no state will issue a license if a suspension/revokation is still in effect somewhere else.
What exactly does this mean? I surely hope you don't think what he did is OK and doesn't deserve a harsh punishment
I don't think what he did is OK by any means, in any situation. I do believe the justice system won't do a thing for him but make it worst. I'm neither here nor there when it comes to giving him a 'harsh' punishment... but that punishment SHOULD NEVER include jail time unless it's a violent crime.
What exactly does this mean? I surely hope you don't think what he did is OK and doesn't deserve a harsh punishment
I don't think what he did is OK by any means, in any situation. I do believe the justice system won't do a thing for him but make it worst. I'm neither here nor there when it comes to giving him a 'harsh' punishment... but that punishment SHOULD NEVER include jail time unless it's a violent crime.
When you can be jailed for a non-violent crime; your justice system is fucked.
DJ - are you serious? I really hope not.
Smoking pot in your basement is non-violent. Driving drunk and crashing into a light pole is only non-violent because no one was hurt. What happens if the light pole was another car, or a dude walking his dog, or a child riding his/her bike? Do you mean that it is only punishable in one of these cases?
Please tell me you are joking.
I believe it is punishable in all circumstances; drinking and driving is stupid. However, jail time is wholly too harsh for a non-violent crime. If it does become a violent crime (by hitting a dude or a child like you say), then it is a violent crime and constitutes jail time, barring his innocence.
When you can be jailed for a non-violent crime; your justice system is fucked.
DJ - are you serious? I really hope not.
Smoking pot in your basement is non-violent. Driving drunk and crashing into a light pole is only non-violent because no one was hurt. What happens if the light pole was another car, or a dude walking his dog, or a child riding his/her bike? Do you mean that it is only punishable in one of these cases?
Please tell me you are joking.
I believe it is punishable in all circumstances; drinking and driving is stupid. However, jail time is wholly too harsh for a non-violent crime. If it does become a violent crime (by hitting a dude or a child like you say), then it is a violent crime and constitutes jail time, barring his innocence.
So it is OK with you to defraud old people out of their life savings?
It is not OK to fraud anyone... but is it OK to send someone to an under-resourced torture institution just for frauding someone? I think fines and retribution would be a much more meaningful and effective punishment.
So it is OK with you to defraud old people out of their life savings?
It is not OK to fraud anyone... but is it OK to send someone to an under-resourced torture institution just for frauding someone? I think fines and retribution would be a much more meaningful and effective punishment.
most ridiculous post of the month award goes to destroyer anyway ive had a friend killed by a drunk driver so throw the book at people that drink and drive in my opinion
I knew a friend that killed a group of our friends drinking and driving (and died himself)... but no matter how long you send them to prison for (unless its life, and even then), they WILL get out one day. Do you think prison taught them not to drink and drive? There are hundreds of better ways to punish and rehabilitate drunk drivers.
most ridiculous post of the month award goes to destroyer anyway ive had a friend killed by a drunk driver so throw the book at people that drink and drive in my opinion
I knew a friend that killed a group of our friends drinking and driving (and died himself)... but no matter how long you send them to prison for (unless its life, and even then), they WILL get out one day. Do you think prison taught them not to drink and drive? There are hundreds of better ways to punish and rehabilitate drunk drivers.
The give jail time so these people don't do the same thing again and end up dead or end up killing an innocent family of 5.
Alcohol is a huge problem and not enough is ever going to be done about it because it brings in so much money.
Jail may be intended for the purposes you mentioned above, but there are numerous studies that prove that this is not the case. Prisons make people worst, not better.
The give jail time so these people don't do the same thing again and end up dead or end up killing an innocent family of 5.
Alcohol is a huge problem and not enough is ever going to be done about it because it brings in so much money.
Jail may be intended for the purposes you mentioned above, but there are numerous studies that prove that this is not the case. Prisons make people worst, not better.
Jail may be intended for the purposes you mentioned above, but there are numerous studies that prove that this is not the case. Prisons make people worst, not better.
I've always agreed with that last statement. One weekend in the slammer for a non violent crime should be sufficient to scare a person straight, but several months for a minor offense is more likely to screw their future up permanently, resulting in more criminal activity, often out of necessity.
Jail may be intended for the purposes you mentioned above, but there are numerous studies that prove that this is not the case. Prisons make people worst, not better.
I've always agreed with that last statement. One weekend in the slammer for a non violent crime should be sufficient to scare a person straight, but several months for a minor offense is more likely to screw their future up permanently, resulting in more criminal activity, often out of necessity.
They should jail these fuckin drunk driving douchebags the 1st time for a while and fine the f*ck out of them
inexcusable crime, pisses me off when people laugh it off or the posts that will follow this the jerkoffs that say "oh i suppose youve never done anything wrong?" or "everyone does it"
go f*ck yourself
You are whats wrong with the United States and the American justice system.
They should jail these fuckin drunk driving douchebags the 1st time for a while and fine the f*ck out of them
inexcusable crime, pisses me off when people laugh it off or the posts that will follow this the jerkoffs that say "oh i suppose youve never done anything wrong?" or "everyone does it"
go f*ck yourself
You are whats wrong with the United States and the American justice system.
DJ - I see what you're saying but..if you are a little impaired it can cause terrible consequences. I'm all in favor of EVERYone truly being on the same playing field in that if you are impaired while driving (including makeup, eating, texting, etc) you face a STIFF penalty and lose your license for 2 years. I'd say even for people that handle alcohol with the best of them that a few beers impairs them just a little and again thats all it takes. I used to think shooting a text while driving was no problem b/c I'm a good driver but if I look at it objectively I am a freaking moron to put other peoples life at risk doing that.
THANK YOU. You are the epitome of my views on life. We need more people like you who make the right decision for the sake of greater good, not because you're scared to go to jail. We need people to do things for the sake of doing the right thing.
If everyone thought like you, people would only drink and drive when they knew it wasn't going to put anyone else at a greater risk, say after a beer or two. I know you said this could still raise the risk but that's your opinion, you have no idea how much an individual can handle. In fact, NO ONE knows better than the individual himself, so why leave the decision up to anyone else? The counterargument would be that the few 'rotten apples' ruins the whole bunch but we cannot punish the good because of the bad, because then you are punishing the good as well.
Example: A teacher is writing on the chalkboard and a student throws something at him or her... No one rats and no one confesses so the teacher suspends everyone. Obviously this is outrageous, so why is it any different now? We're punishing the masses for the actions of a few.
I'm even open to never giving a convicted drunk driver a licence again... but only because driving is a privilege whereas freedom is a right. Society (through the justice system) shouldn't be arbitrarily taking freedom away unless it is truly a serious offence; and nothing is serious enough unless a person's body is infringed upon.
DJ - I see what you're saying but..if you are a little impaired it can cause terrible consequences. I'm all in favor of EVERYone truly being on the same playing field in that if you are impaired while driving (including makeup, eating, texting, etc) you face a STIFF penalty and lose your license for 2 years. I'd say even for people that handle alcohol with the best of them that a few beers impairs them just a little and again thats all it takes. I used to think shooting a text while driving was no problem b/c I'm a good driver but if I look at it objectively I am a freaking moron to put other peoples life at risk doing that.
THANK YOU. You are the epitome of my views on life. We need more people like you who make the right decision for the sake of greater good, not because you're scared to go to jail. We need people to do things for the sake of doing the right thing.
If everyone thought like you, people would only drink and drive when they knew it wasn't going to put anyone else at a greater risk, say after a beer or two. I know you said this could still raise the risk but that's your opinion, you have no idea how much an individual can handle. In fact, NO ONE knows better than the individual himself, so why leave the decision up to anyone else? The counterargument would be that the few 'rotten apples' ruins the whole bunch but we cannot punish the good because of the bad, because then you are punishing the good as well.
Example: A teacher is writing on the chalkboard and a student throws something at him or her... No one rats and no one confesses so the teacher suspends everyone. Obviously this is outrageous, so why is it any different now? We're punishing the masses for the actions of a few.
I'm even open to never giving a convicted drunk driver a licence again... but only because driving is a privilege whereas freedom is a right. Society (through the justice system) shouldn't be arbitrarily taking freedom away unless it is truly a serious offence; and nothing is serious enough unless a person's body is infringed upon.
And for the record, it may seem like I'm contradicting myself by saying this: "I believe it is punishable in all circumstances; drinking and driving is stupid." in post #67 and then saying elsewhere that it should be up to individuals what their limit is. Again, just to clarify:
If you can drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion, then that is your decision.
If you can drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion, but are pulled over for a non-alcohol related reason (expired tags, smashed headlight, speeding, etc.), the alcohol should not be considered a factor in the case.
If you can't drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion, then you should be held liable, though never through the use of incarceration.
If you can't drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion and happen to cause injury, then you should be held criminally liable with harsh punishments, including the use of incarceration where necessary.
And for the record, it may seem like I'm contradicting myself by saying this: "I believe it is punishable in all circumstances; drinking and driving is stupid." in post #67 and then saying elsewhere that it should be up to individuals what their limit is. Again, just to clarify:
If you can drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion, then that is your decision.
If you can drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion, but are pulled over for a non-alcohol related reason (expired tags, smashed headlight, speeding, etc.), the alcohol should not be considered a factor in the case.
If you can't drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion, then you should be held liable, though never through the use of incarceration.
If you can't drink and drive without causing a disturbance or suspicion and happen to cause injury, then you should be held criminally liable with harsh punishments, including the use of incarceration where necessary.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.