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.
Originally posted by Aliensun
In Texas, when I got here, it was legal to drive and drive. Literally with the beer in your hand. Where I came from, Illinois, it was illegal to have a six-pack in the trunk with one can (or more missing).
As a former alcohol and drug counselor, I would say that you are focusing too much on your personal problem.
In answer to your personal dilemma, the answer is quite simple. The laws are made to protect other people, not you. It is called public safety.
[edit on 21-8-2010 by Aliensun]
Originally posted by Come Clean
Problem is, if there is a wreck and bodies are thrown out of the car, how can they tell who was driving?
Originally posted by CaptChaos
But wait, if you kill someone because you are just inept and ran them over because you weren't paying attention and lost control, you will get in NO TROUBLE AT ALL. But if your passenger has a beer in hand, you should be arrested immediately, whether anyone got hurt or not. OK.
Originally posted by LoneGunMan
reply to post by Death_Kron
Sorry but your apartment is not going sixty miles an hour on the same road as children. Your house catches fire and you leave. You hit someone and you are dead. Your house fire analogy is very lame. Your conscience and not sleeping so what you are going to just stand there and let the fire consume you because you set the grease on fire?
Bad logic.
Originally posted by Hefficide
Originally posted by CaptChaos
But wait, if you kill someone because you are just inept and ran them over because you weren't paying attention and lost control, you will get in NO TROUBLE AT ALL. But if your passenger has a beer in hand, you should be arrested immediately, whether anyone got hurt or not. OK.
Vehicular homicide, reckless driving, reckless endangerment, or many other potential charges do not equal "no trouble at all". There are legal repercussions for unsafe driving whether intoxicants were involved or not.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
There are a lot of dumb laws that are enforced but you have to remember the reason they are there is because some dumb ass screwed it for all of us by doing something retarded. Plain and simple. Now if you wanted to change the law, start asking for signatures...
Originally posted by CaptChaos
Originally posted by Hefficide
Originally posted by CaptChaos
But wait, if you kill someone because you are just inept and ran them over because you weren't paying attention and lost control, you will get in NO TROUBLE AT ALL. But if your passenger has a beer in hand, you should be arrested immediately, whether anyone got hurt or not. OK.
Vehicular homicide, reckless driving, reckless endangerment, or many other potential charges do not equal "no trouble at all". There are legal repercussions for unsafe driving whether intoxicants were involved or not.
Oh really? Because I know personally of two incidents where people died due to idiots losing control for no reason and there were no arrests, let alone jail time.
Hell, Dick Cheney shot his buddy dead "by accident". This should have been reckless endangerment or "reckless firearm discharge". What about that?
Oh, wait. He's one of those people that the rest of the morons rely on to tell them what to do and not do. So then it's ok. HE knows what he is doing. He is above the law.
Originally posted by Mike Stivic
--- Thank you for your advice.
Your input was appreciated and perhaps one day I will act upon some of the great advice fellow ATSer's have tried to give .
_______________________________________________________
Also I would like to take this time to thank everyone who has participated in the discussion regardless if we agree or not
Respectfully,
~meathead