It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is There an Unfair Bias Against Drunk Drivers?

page: 7
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 02:58 AM
link   
No but there is definitely an unfair bias against drunk bicyclists. Seriously




posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:33 AM
link   
I though the plates were discretionary. That the judge could opt to impose the plates, but weren't automatic.

I think part of this is about the sprawling remoteness of US communities. We have spotty public transportation outside dense urban areas.
Many people in the US can drive to and from bars without seeing another vehicle...except for state troopers. (Ohio)

The plates are potentially problematic if abused. But they will fade. Most chronic DUIers drive illegally, regardless. And so the plates only identify people who are willing to obey the law most of the time.
0.08 in stupid. I know alcoholics who CAN'T drive without some alcohol. More dangerous without booze!



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Driving under the influence is a crime that is not taken seriously enough.

The measures you cite are extreme, but the crime is equally extreme.

A person who drives under the influence is putting everyone in his path in danger.

There is a conspiracy here and it is a justifiable conspiracy.

As a class, drunk or otherwise chemically impaired drivers kill tens of thousands of people each year in America.

What other class of individuals this deathly dangerous would we tolerate?



[edit on 2008/6/21 by GradyPhilpott]


yes i have the same thought



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by rubyesmeralda
 

What about young drivers and old drivers?
Maybe everyone should have a running, observable tally on their vehicle that identifies the nature and quantification of their driving offenses? Blue for speeders. Red for running stop signs, um, green for reckless op. Purple for driving without insurance....
Maybe the driver's age and a special score for their reaction time could also be displayed on the exterior of the vehicle. Maybe only people who make more than x dollars a year or own real estate should be allowed to drive. And vote. Yellow star armbands anyone? Sorry.
But people who display a chronic pattern of disregard for traffic laws should probably have a very hard time legally operating motor vehicles. I think they do, but I don't think a scarlet letter is the answer.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by zigveda
 


Huh, I thought this was a free country? Why is driving a privilege? That's garbage.

Driving is a right. Rights can be taken away if necessary, but it's still a right.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Pfft. Some friend you are. Two drinks and you already bail on him/her. You need to lighten up, my friend.

Maybe you should have a drink?



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:33 AM
link   
I did not have the chance to read the entire thread yet, but first I would like to state, if you can not accept the responsibility's of your actions, then perhaps you should rethink what you do.

You should be so lucky that your "first" drunk driving offense only leaves you with a special license plate, instead of injuring or killing yourself, or more importantly others.

While Sexual offenders will normally have a small number of victims, normally only one, a single drunk driving incident can affect the lives of many people, disfiguring, or killing them.

You obviously are personally affected by the legislation they have passed for first time DUI offenders, and have no personal contact with any sex offenders. I think that you need to do some research on the subject of sex offenders. First off, most offenders are known to there victims, either family members or close friends. Secondly, out of ALL crimes, sex offenders have the lowest revictimization rate of ANY other types of offenders, I do not have the exact numbers in front of me right now, but it is somewhere in the area of < 5%. There is a "Witch hunt" going on for sex offenders, and for every new law that they enact the penalties are being retroactively applied to all offenders.

Do not try to minimize your criminal actions by looking for a scape goat claiming that what you are doing is any better, or more acceptable then the actions of others.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 02:32 AM
link   
There are many,many more dangerous people on the road who should not be driving than just drunk drivers,who kill many more people needlessly than drunk drivers do.

There are many people out there who are registered sex offenders who are guilty of simple public urination or some other inane meaningless infraction,who were simply too poor to get good representation,and not get consumed by the system.

I think that all this drunk driver,cigarette smoker,sex offender BS is just a way to give you chickens something to peck at,when you really should be aiming your beaks at the system itself,and pecking it apart,because the system is the problem,and because you believe in it,it just proves without a doubt you are too ignorant to see the truth.

There are problems out here that cannot be fixed,everyone has to die and or takke damage in one fashion or another,just because,that is reality,that is life.

There is damage done by many people that could be avoided by simply taking control of your own lives,but you choose to leave the task of protecting you from those problems to people and authorities who do not care to protect you any more than you care to protect yourselves.

You are stupid sheep.

All of you.

Repressed sexuality and other moral/social factors cause most of your problems.

Fear and Ignorance see to the rest.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:08 AM
link   
My apologies whatukno for not taking your obviously satirical post in the spirits as intended.
I can be a little thick.ed at best sometimes. Sorry I drew the saber on you.
Peace

Not one poster here has said 'yea, party on Garth', its way cool to take a fifth with you on the way to the club.
What has been opinionated upon is the obvious revenue generator current dui laws have become, and the disingenious nature of tagging 'everyman/woman' for one beer over the proferred limit or 12.

The reality is; with blackberries, iphones, dvd players techno advances, the foolhardy that text and drive, makeup and drive, read the paper and drive, chow their lunch and drive...they too deserve consequence if involved in accident or recklessness.

Driving always requires respect and absolute attention at all times. I drive my car like I did my kawasaki in college. You make a mistake on your bike, as previously alluded to, is more than likely your last. I worked in the ER at Metro for 2.2 yrs. I've seen plenty of motordonors come in. When I saw gray matter that was once solid state brain pouring out of someone's ears, I sold it the next week.
Unfortunately, most people don't have the common sense to know that driving requires absolute attention.
I also have reservation on some 9 to 5 bloke who wants a pint with friends on a friday night and some chicken wings. And I mean 'responsible' drinking, not binging.

Another night, after a date, with same girl on way to drop her off at home, two young girls were coming out of Great Lakes Brewery on W25th. We were coming other way from Lakewood. This girl driving was weaving over 3 lanes of traffic, badly, and not slowly. I got as far right and pointed nose curb to protect my girlfriend. She did not hit us but jacked my BP up good.

Similar event one new years eve. I haven't left the house on new years in 18 yrs. Shack up with some bubbly and chinese food.

Every two beer drunk is on the road new years.

I appreciate both sides of the coin, I really do. I may be from an older generation type of thinking. If I nip, I do my nipping at home. If I go out with freinds or neighbors, it is 'one beer' with dinner. I could not live with myself taking anothers life for my ignorance.

I'm a slow typer chip. I see you have your own views on the matter. I'm sure you will make many freinds here.
Good luck with that.

[edit on 6/24/2008 by jpm1602]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:23 AM
link   
I'm sorry for being an elitest or what ever, but I fail to see the problem. Personally I think it would be fair to HANG DUI drivers.

They have taken YOUR life in their drunken hands without care for you, so why should you care about them?

It doesn't seem like any real issue. It's an easy fix. If you drink don't drive, and if your driving don't drink.

We're not talking about people with some type of disability, no one is born a DUI driver, they are not a race of people.

First offence at DUI, cut off their foot and take away their PRIVLAGE to drive. Second offence line them up against the wall and shoot them.

What's so hard? I fail to see what is so hard?

I'm not a "drinker", but I do sometimes have a drink. When I want to have a drink, I get a bottle and I drink at my home. If I run out I go to sleep.

Don't drink and drive. It's quite easy.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:34 AM
link   
Is it just me, or does every witchhunter 'hang them, chop them up, disembowel, pour hot oil on them' poster can't spell for junk.
PRIVLAGE!' The outrage.
My third grade spelling teacher would do much the same to me for such spell abominations.
Sorry Incarnate. I see shades of gray, not pure black nor pure white.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Honestly, I have no pity for people who drive drunk; I think that what Ohio is doing is an adequate punishment. I have driven drunk one time, and it was one of the dumbest acts that I have ever perpetrated. Even though my house was only two or three miles away from where I was at, I do not remember the drive. I could have killed myself or someone else all because I didn't feel like staying at the "party-house" or having one of the designated drivers take me home. That's negligence towards the safety of others and myself all for the sake of "convenience".
Getting behind the wheel while intoxicated is a mistake. There is never an excuse for it and offenders should be punished (especially the idiots who it fifteen damn times in a row). If I had been caught that night, I would have gladly accepted the consequences of my actions.

My post may seem hypocritical, but I speak from a point where I have personally seen the damage I could have caused if anyone else had been on the road that night.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Drunk Driving is a big money scam. That's all they want. Everyone i know that has alot of money has it taken off there record and it "never" happened, and everyone that doesnt have alot of money has to pay for it and it never goes away. Drunk drivers are put in a category with rapist and murderers. now that f'ed up!



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jpm1602
 


first off, try to be bigger then cheap personal attacks...

secondly, seeing "black or white" vs "shades of grey" has nothing to do with DUI.

sure if I'm having a couple of drinks at my home and my wife cuts her hand off and needs to be rushed to the hospital, and the phone lines are down so I can't call 911, and I can't do the doctoring myself, I'll need to drive her to the hospital.

Other then that, your shades of grey is a lame cop out. Are you unable to control and know consciously that you drink?

It's very simple. If you DRINK don't have the car keys. If you drive, drink sodas. I don't see the shades of Grey.

Drinking isn't mandatory in our society. If you are one of those people that "need" to drink to "be social" or what ever lie people tell themselves so they don't have to face the fact that they are out of control of drinking, then just don't drive. It's Simple.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by zigveda
 


Huh, I thought this was a free country? Why is driving a privilege? That's garbage.

Driving is a right. Rights can be taken away if necessary, but it's still a right.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by Sublime620]



Uh sir, driving is a privilege. Theres no law that protects your right to drive. That kind of thinking is just pathetic.

A car is just as powerful as a weapon people. When someone drinks and drives, they are moving around in a a weapon. They are not only endangering themselves, but those around them. Would you go to a shooting range with some drunk guy 8 shots deep into the night? No, same goes for the road. How someone can defend someone who drinks and drives is appalling to me.

When I have people over, I make sure I have enough room for people to stay until they are sober. I take everyones keys in the beginning of the night and hide them. The only way they get them back is if they can pass a Breathalyzer I have.

ITS CALLED RESPONSIBILITY FOLKS> LEARN IT!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


Guns are pretty powerful and dangerous. Yet they are a right... are they not?

Drinking and driving has nothing to do with it. It's a right, not a privilege. This is a free damn country.

If someone is driving crazy and out of control (or raging drunk), his/her right to drive can be revoked. Not sure where privilege came from. I'm a grown man and as long as I am capable - which is proved by taking the driving tests - then I have the right to own and operate a vehicle.

To believe that anything is a "privilege" is cowardly. What's next, the right to own property is a privilege? I bet you'd accept it.

[edit on 24-6-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublime620
 


You represent all that is wrong with this world. ITs pathetic. You sir, make me sick. Apparently you have not been near the travesty of a drunk driving accident. Sad it takes that to make people understand.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublime620
 


Where, name one place in the constitution where your RIGHT to drive is protected???? You have a right to own a vehicle. You DO NOT have a right to operate it. You EARN the privilege by passing a driving test and obeying the law. Any man or woman of the law would agree.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 02:38 AM
link   
i call bull# on madd,first off let me sayive never gotten a dui. but i know people who have. The fines and racketeering involved have turned this into an billion dollar industry by the state. Secondly, we all now ..08 is not impaired. Its just bull#, studies show the phenlythaline in a listerine strip has that much alcholol in it. Thirdly, if the state really, really, cared. They would mandate bar tenders to turn over keys before drinking. But they dont, the state is just as happy to profit from this as the bartenders.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Yep, all those cops love it when a drunk driver kills a van full of kids. Those fines are just sooooo important to them.

And calling bull om MADD?? Really, the people who started and and continue to join who had their lives turned upside down cause some reckless idiot drank and rove killed their love one, are just in it for the money? Are you kidding me?
Sickening.

This thread is great for showing who is who on this site. Mister John Doe was too cowardly to show his face, but others at least have the gumption to have an account when they defend this horrible practice.

Doesn't make it right though.





Another lam mis spelled post from an anonymous poster. Theres a shocker. Ya know what, .08 is the LAW, dont like it???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????/




DON'T GO OUT AND DRINK AND EXPECT TO DRIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




top topics



 
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join