I'm a hypocrite....... and I'm cool with it.

A couple of months ago Ontario brought in very strict drinking and driving laws.

Starting August 1 young drivers in Ontario will be facing tough anti-alcohol rules. Drivers 21 and under will be required to have a zero blood alcohol level when they get behind the wheel.
Under the new rules those who break the law will lose their licence immediately for 24 hours, have a 30-day licence suspension and be subject to up to $500 in fines.

www.digitaljournal.com...

The article goes on to show the stats on alcohol related accidents. What's this deal about being a hypocrite? Back in the 70's, when I was in this age group, drinking and driving was the norm. Happened all the time. The thing is that now 2 of my 3 kids are in this age group. I've seen what alcohol can do to family, friends and the community. Even though I was a drunken driver back then I'm ALL for this new law. I tell my kids to not even get into a car with someone who's been drinking. I'll pick them up, or preferably, drink at home.

Call me a hypocrite. I'm totally OK with it on this issue.

Your a hypocrite. But I'm all for this law also. During my younger days, my own mother would drop me off and pick me up after hours from local bars. She rather be driving me rather than risk my stupid drunk ass in a car with other drunk asses.

reply to post by intrepid


I won't call you a hypocrite. Merely an adult who was once a teenager. I also drove (practically every night) drunk, to some degree. We would stop to urinate on the doors of churches, as well. Heehee.
Now I am an adult and you couldn't make me get behind the wheel when I've been drinking.
Teenagers will get away with whatever they can, it's only natural. They feel invulnerable, as a rule. But the drinking age was 18 when I was a youngster, and I do have a problem with allowing 18 year olds to serve in the military, while denying them age appropriate equality in other areas. There's true hypocrisy in that.

Unless this law is for all ages and requires the locked blow breathylizer before car starts, yes hypocritical does come to mind.

No one should drink and drive it is not good for young or old.

I think this is just another sick discriminatory law against young people.

Alright, this is one of the few type of infractions that I have an unease of with my belief in Libertarian ideals.

Criminal behavior REQUIRES a victim. If no one's rights are infringed or harm done to another, there is no criminal act.

I also believe that travel is a right not a privilege.

Anyway, the creation of all these DUI type legislation, were created in the US right when I was turning of age. I got caught in a snowstorm that dumped 6 feet and I could not go anywhere except my vehicle. The vehicle could not move and I used it to stay warm. Well I received a DUI for that. I think that was the beginning of the journey to my beliefs.

In the US we have more people in jail per capita than any other country. I would imagine about 25% of those in jail have not really committed a crime. In the natural law definition.

Just so you know, if I am ever on a jury trial where the defendant is charged with a crime, where there is no victim, I will find them not guilty. Anyway, they are charged with breaking a contract not a criminal act. That is what traffic laws are, contract law. You sign on the dotted line to agree with the rules of the road, a contract.

Been on jury trials before and I will act as the protector of our rights.

Damn hypocrites, just kidding by the way.

You know there are certain times in life where being a hypocrite is the right thing to do, all the more so if you've been in the opposite shoes once or twice.

My kids know the dangers and the consequences, although rest assured they are far more scared of the ones that come from me and their father, then the law.

I am all for tough drinking and driving laws. IMO you should have your license revoked minimum 1 year if you are over the limit. Too many people die from drunk drivers who are repeat offenders.

~Keeper

Originally posted by hotbakedtater


I think this is just another sick discriminatory law against young people.

I have to disagree. I remember what I felt as a teen. INDESTRUCTIBLE. I also remember friends that lost their lives and those of their passengers because they felt that they could do anything with impunity. Most kids may be smart but that doesn't they have wisdom and good judgment, especially when drinking.

reply to post by intrepid


I know it's an over-used cliche but things are a lot different now than they were back then. I too grew up in the 70's and drove after pounding down a few but.............I wasn't brought up in all the 'fear' like today either.
People are down right paranoid. I am not saying you should drive drunk but c'mon....wearing helmets while bike riding or roller blading? Sure sure sure.....'it's for our own protection' but, people are overly fearful. Fearful of their safety and fearful of the law.

But I do know what you mean as far as being a hypocrite. It's a different world now and I thank GAWD I grew up in the 70's. That was the last best era................ever!!!!

Here's what I'm talking about:

TO ALL THE KIDS WHO SURVIVED the 1930’s 40’s, 50’s, 60’s and 70’s !!

First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they were pregnant.

They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn’t get tested for diabetes.

Then after that trauma, we were put to sleep on our tummies in baby cribs covered with bright colored lead-based paints.

We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention the risks we took hitchhiking.

As infants & children, we would ride in cars with no car seats, booster seats, seat belts or air bags.

Riding in the back of a pick up on a warm day was always a special treat.

We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle
We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE actually died from this.

We ate cupcakes, white bread and real butter and drank kool aid made with sugar, but we weren’t overweight because WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING !

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.

No one was able to reach us all day and we were O.K.

We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.

We did not have Playstations, Nintendo’s, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 150 channels on cable, no video movies or DVD’s, no surround-sound or CD’s, no cell phones, no personal computers, no Internet or chat rooms…….

WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!

We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents.

We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.

We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with sticks and tennis balls and, although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.

We rode bikes or walked to a friend’s house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just walked in and talked to them!

Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn’t had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!

The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!

These generations have produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever!

The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned

The problem with alcohol restrictions is not with the alcohol, but the unfairness of the treatment. I have two family members currently lost in California's court system due to DUIs that both happened in 2006- one of them can't get his license back because the case against him mysteriously disappeared without being heard, but remained on his record, and the other has been thrown back in several times and refined a number of times for things like tardiness to classes and in one case a bank error that caused a payment to be late.

I'm all for making and enforcing agreements that make the world happier and more full of life, but it seems that with any substance, a degree of humanity is denied to the offender simply because his mindset cannot be related with by the sober. The treatment of DUIs and other related issues crosses a line normally reserved for violent/antisocial offenses.

Originally posted by intrepid

Even though I was a drunken driver back then I'm ALL for this new law. I tell my kids to not even get into a car with someone who's been drinking. I'll pick them up, or preferably, drink at home.

Call me a hypocrite. I'm totally OK with it on this issue.

I wouldn't call you a hypocrite, you aren't preaching it and then doing it these days, are you?

I personally think MAAD has gone too far here. Legal driving age is 16, by 20 you have been driving for 4 years. 0.00% blood-alcohol means that a 20 year old adult cannot have one beer after work and then drive to the supermarket to get a box of KD and some Mr. Noodles. I remember when I was 21, if they slapped a $500 fine on me -- that's a hungry month. Of course I don't condone drunk driving; I've known three friends to die to it, but this law is a little radical with 0.00%; this law won't be helping as much as it hurts.

I've never driven while drunk. But I have gotten drunk and then pretended to drive..

According to my mom I yelled at a cop car as we were passing by on the freeway "We need to push it to 88 miles per hour"

Despite that, I realize what a serious issue this is. I've stumbled in the door without thinking Im drunk. How could I try to control a car like that?

Sometimes you don't even know how much you drank until the next morning..

No, it's not being a hypocrite; it's called growing up and we all do it. I'm with you, I'm all for strict drinking and driving laws. As a parent I always told my daughter even now that's she's legal if you've been drinking call me. I'll come get you no matter the time; no questions and no lectures.

Too many of our best and brightest our future if you will die because of this. Or if they are the ones who cause the deaths pay a heavy price for a moment of stupidity.

Laws don't solve complex social problems.

Ever.

There will be no decrease in deaths/injuries related to underage drunk driving because of this law.

There will be no decrease in the number of underage drunk drivers.

There WILL be an increase in the amount of teens charged with criminal offenses.

There WILL be an increase in the number of families that are financially ruined because of court costs, lawyers fees, fines, and possible jail time.


Basically, the law is retarded.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I respectfully disagree with you. The law may make them think twice about it; contrary to popular opinion our teens are not completely brain dead they are well aware that such charges will have drastic consequences; it may make parents sit up and take notice as well. In the end if it prevents only one death, one underage drinker driving then the law is well worth it.

What is the legal drinking age, 21? I can understand people UNDER 21 having a zero tolerance policy leveled against them, but it seems ridiculous for someone who is legal to drink to have to conform to a different set of rules based on age alone. It's probably a good idea either way. Looking back on that age makes me shudder.

reply to post by abrowning


The legal age for drinking in Ontario is 19.

reply to post by gallopinghordes


Why not punish those that have actually committed a crime.

You know, when someone harms another or infringes on their rights.

As my example earlier, caught in a blizzard, I used the vehicle to stay warm. Sleeping in the back seat.

The state always passes legislation that supposedly protects us, yet only infringes on our rights.

Are there any laws against say putting on your makeup while driving? How bout reading your e books?

Is there any plans on throwing these folks in jail?

Why not simply enforce the original damn laws like vehicular manslaughter? Or negligent homicide or when less injury or property damage is caused, enforce the damn statutes that are there.

Crime and punishment legislation in this day and age, has nothing to do with preventing crime or problems.

All about control.

reply to post by intrepid

I'm a hypocrite....... and I'm cool with it.

No, you are not a hypocrite because people are allowed to change and mature with age. you are not the same person you were back in those immortal days.

To be honest, I can identify with what you offer from my own life and... I don't feel hypocritical. I was just young and ate up with stupid then... like all those today subject to the same thing.

Stupid is part of youth. Wisdom comes from experience, not books.

reply to post by saltheart foamfollower


Its a new law dude to prevent those with limited experience with cars and booze. The legal limit for those over 21 is still .08.

reply to post by intrepid


Well, I am a few decades older and actually remember the time when people were not arrested when no crime was committed.

When crime was defined as Requiring a victim.

Now folks are locked up in the states where there is no victim and Real criminals are released to make room.

You are not getting my position. I do not believe operating a motor vehicle under the influence of a drug is a crime. Doing harm while under that condition is a crime. Why not just enforce that?