Legalize Drunk Driving

Originally posted by Janky Red


Oh for Cripes sake, this argument and your attempt to achieve a more distilled version of idiocy is way beneath you man...

They are paid to serve and protect - sometimes they achieve this mantra - it is called a job and a social contract with the community.

You are arresting someone for being irresponsible, the act of drinking and driving is the act they are being arrested for.

Never the less - this is a very simian attempt at dramatics,

arresting drunk drivers is not beyond the pale.

Now arresting a drunk walker is different - (ask me and I will have a heart attack!)

To protect and serve is just a catchy little motto police use to make people think they are safe, while in reality they are not.

The Supreme Court found cops have no legal obligation to protect anyone who isnt in their custody.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I believe in "The Law of Trespass".

With that said...

I believe when a drunk drives a motor vehicle he has committed a crime. If someone is firing a gun wildly into a crowd of people but his/her intentions were to just scare people they still committed a crime. That crime escalates if they kill someone.

Getting behind the wheel of a car and driving while drunk through crowds of other cars is a crime. If that person was on a closed course then fine no harm done.

That motor vehicle is a weapon if used improperly and driving while under the influence is intent.

I have no tolerance for drunk driving. It is a serious crime.

It's a good thing stupidity isn't a crime "yet",..............or...

Do the research,do the math,stupid drivers do way more damage than drunk drivers do.

Nobody crunches those numbers though.

30 something thousand fatalities a year due to drunk driving?,way more from just plain old stupidity behind the wheel without alcohol being a factor.

What we have here is someone to marginalize,enjoy!.

Chickens......

Originally posted by TedHodgson
Im sorry Mods but i have to voice my oppinion here, This entire post is Sick and so is anyone that agrees with it.

I allmost lost my familly because of a drunk driver who hit my parents car then drove away.
I dont see how Anyone Would dare agree with this guy, If you do, I hope you find sadness and regret in your lives like so many others have because of drink drivers.
You deserve nothing better, Walk in shame

I'm not being disagreeable here, and if a drunk driver hit your parents and drove off they should be charged with attempted murder, if caught!

But, I'm curious, if they drove off how do you know they were drunk? If it was because they were driving erratically, there's any number of reasosn that could be attributed to other than alcohol, such as: drugs, lack of sleep and/or dozing off, talking on a cell phone, or anything alse that takes away their attention.

reply to post by mark-in-dallas


They were caught Strangely enough a familly freind which was even more infuriating Shed been drinking due to depression because her son (An old freind of mine) Had recently died of Lukemia.
Her excuse was she didnt notice shed driven my parents off the road because she was so wasted (which is pretty un-realistic considering shed taken the front left wing off her car when she crashed into ours), Luckilly we didnt file charges, But havent talked to her since.

Didnt really want to go into detail on the case so much as get my point across sorry for the lack of information

I'm willing to entertain this notion and contemplate the topic. Thanks OP for bringing it up, regardless of the controversy.

Personally, I think DUI laws should (atleast) not be abused by LEOs as they often seem to be. My friend's father, for instance, was put on house arrest and probation, and had his drivers license suspended, for sleeping it off in his truck. He knew he was too drunk (and tired) to drive when the bar closed, he was about 20 miles from home and he didn't have anywhere to go, so he did the right thing (imo) and stayed where he was!

I've heard of the same thing happening to other people too. I wish I could trust LEOs to use their reason while enforcing laws, before they ruin an innocent person's life over a technicality. They need funding that bad?

Originally posted by TedHodgson
reply to post by mark-in-dallas

 

They were caught

Strangely enough a familly freind which was even more infuriating

Shed been drinking due to dispression because her son (An old freind of mine) Had recently died of Lukemia.
Her excuse was she didnt notice shed driven my parents off the road because she was so wasted (which is pretty un-realistic considering shed taken the front left wing off her car when she crashed into ours), Luckilly we didnt file charges, But havent talked to her since.

Didnt really want to go into detail on the case so much as get my point across sorry for the lack of information

edit on 18/12/10 by TedHodgson because: (no reason given)

edit on 18/12/10 by TedHodgson because: (no reason given)

lol.. wow man that sucks.. I'm glade your ok and so is the fam but its always a kick in the ass when it turns out to be a friend.. or lack there of... got to remember she is impaired so she didn't notice.. I once spent the night in jail for drunk and disorderly no charges filled because it turns out that they illigally arrested me.. because the cops were called on my sister.. so I spent a night in the drunk tank and because of my training they had to give me my own cell.. I didn't drive tho but it sucked I had no one to talk to. god did that sucks..

reply to post by mnemeth1


Although I agree with a lot of what you're saying in your post, as well as the article you shared, I just can't see how we can't be responsible adults and not drink and drive. Can't pay that money? Don't drink and drive!

Instead of blaming the government (which I do often too) for everything, why not look at your fellow man and realize he's probably in the wrong? If you've had a few beers, don't get behind the wheel. It's as simple as that. I speak from experience.

My uncle had a major drinking problem in the 80's and 90's. He lost his eye in a car accident when he wrapped his car around a tree nearly killing himself and two passengers after driving home drunk. I can't forgive him for that, I can't forgive him for endangering his own life and everyone else on the road because of his stupidity.

Drunk drivers get exactly what's coming to them. There's a reason why the price is so high, hopefully to deter others from doing it. Plus, you can't put a price on a human life.

reply to post by mnemeth1


Great post.. Alcohol has been around for what 3000 or so years? And these draconian drug laws have been around for what? 50 if that? Not to mention that both founders of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) the watchdog group that acts as an enforcer monitoring CB transmissions from police officers and using their sway to force judges and officers of the law to enforce harsher penalties, have DUI's themselves! I know it would be a lot harder to teach your kids not to drive around at 2:30 in the morning.

As a deterrent, the DUI laws have failed... rehabilitation does little to solve recidivism rates, and as a result we have a prison industrial complex now where we have private companies (a lot of them owned by judges themselves) which profit from the suffering and inhumane treatment of human beings.

If your contention that somehow impaired driving is such a HORRIBLE issue then why give anyone over the age of 55 a drivers license? These people have their physical faculties impaired by age and hey everybody knows a story about the old man who drove his car into a flea market killing and maiming 50 people.. How many accidents are caused from our Pharmacutical industry because somebody took a medication and got behind the wheel... Well thats refreshing because DUI laws have recently been changed to OVI or Operating a Vehichle Intoxicated whch means that if you take cold medicine and get behind the wheel you will face the same penalties as someone who had a beer with dinner... Good...

If it is 'illegal' to drink and drive then why is it that bars have parking lots?

About 10-11 years ago one of my old drinking buddies had a bit too much to drink at a local club. He went out to the car to pass out until we were all ready to leave. Keys in the ignition, radio on, someone backed into the car. The police arrived, in short, he was issued a DUI simply because the keys were in the ignition. The kicker is that he was even in the backseat at the time laying down. That is a true incident of someone having too much to drink, attempting to do the correct thing according to the law but still got screwed. If I recall, it cost him about $7k

idk people are stupid

they will do stupid things


the problem is when their stupidity affects unsuspecting others.

reply to post by Reaper2137


Aye that sort of thing really makes you evaluate who you consider to be freinds, luckilly i wasnt in the car at the time, But my parents and 2 sisters were, All the windows fragmented on impact and everyone ended up swallowing the stuff, So yeah chaos, Luckilly no-one was injured severely but looking at the state of the car its bloody surprising, Dad managed to control the car effectively it would seem

reply to post by xtcsx


The reason for alcohol being around 2000 years old, and the DWI laws being only 50 years old, is probably due to automobile's being less than 100 years old.

I don't see why they don't have alcohol sensors in cars that either disable the vehicle if it detects alcohol in the air, or sets the speed plateau on the vehicle to 25 mph.

reply to post by Xiamara


wouldn't the building be damaged? i think that's a crime. we all know that it would be considered attempted murder. so that argument is a little iffy. i think what the op is trying to say is that there are a lot of laws in this country which are victimless laws. jaywalking, license plate tags, speeding, etc. i'm sure i could name more but i've just woken up.

not that i'm for driving drunk. it's incredibly stupid and endangers other people. but, because of dui laws you can be pulled over for merely over-correcting your vehicle and crossing the yellow line. that's a complete waste of time and i've had it happen before.

i understand, though, why driving drunk is illegal.

reply to post by sliceNodice


why not cameras also to check for other illegal activity?

Originally posted by Kaiju
I'm guessing you're against the "reckless discharge of a firearm" law as well? That keeping people from shooting guns off whenever and where ever they like in order to prevent the possibility of an innocent person from being killed, is wrong?

Bad analogy. If you take a blank firing pistol and fire it in a neighborhood you can be arrested for "reckless discharge of a firearm"....even tho said firearm is not capable of firing a projectile. It's a blank gun merely meant to scare.

Laws against DUI's are not applied to Kennedy's, Hollywood residents, Congressmen, or anyone with money. DUI's are only applied to poor people. I have an uncle who's been arrested for DUI 3 times and bought his way off each and every time.

DUI laws is a class warfare tool.

reply to post by xtcsx


Not to mention, how about this "express consent" crap they're pushing everywhere?
If operating a vehicle, in most states, you are now considered to have already given legal consent to allow a blood or breath test.
This opens the door to "If you are driving, you are considered to have given legal consent to vehicle search."
Which opens the door to "If you live in town, we have a right to search your house."

This is how the banksters work. Give them an inch, and they'll take a foot.

reply to post by Pervius

BEDFORD, N.Y. (CBS/AP) Mary Richardson Kennedy, the wife of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., was arrested Saturday for drunken driving after a police officer saw her run over a curb outside a school in Westchester County, authorities said.
According to police, Kennedy's blood-alcohol level was over the legal limit of 0.08 at 0.11 percent. She had said she was headed to pick people up at a fair.

Source

A Kennedy with a DUI.

~Heff

reply to post by Pervius
Regarding the last line of your reply.

Bout time somebody brought that up.......