Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Legalize Drunk Driving

page: 5
64
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Should I be charged with attempted murder if I put a half-loaded revolver to your head, pulled the trigger once, and nothing happened? I wouldn't imagine that you'd be very comfortable with that, in the same way I wouldn't imagine the general population being very comfortable with drunk drivers legally driving everywhere.

I understand that you are an anarchist and that you don't particularly care for anyone other than yourself and your ability to keep yourself from being harmed, having your money taken, etc, but the truth is not all organization and law is bad. I know that's probably a big one for you to swallow as well because it would require you to look out for someone other than yourself or you immediate family, but just remember you aren't the only one who exists. Thanks.




posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reaper2137
I am an old solider.. I've seen a lot of death and destruction.. so it doesn't faze me any more.. I view humans as animals. no better, no worse.


Ahh, I see the issue.
I apologise for spouting off at you (even though you deserved it).
The military does a great job in ripping the humanity from a person so they are conditioned for war...they just do a really shyte job in giving the person their humanity back.

Humans are of course animals, and more. the militarys job is to remove that "and more" part from the soldier...the trick is, once your back into civilian life, to do whatever it takes to regain that humanity...force yourself to do some charity work at a abused children shelter..allow yourself to gain emotional attachment to others and their well being. deprogram yourself from the governments steel arm...then you may wake back up into your true form.

I remember talking to my father (ex marine Sg who did 3 tours in vietnam). a few years back. we were discussing his trips and he was talking about the action he seen..I asked him the normal questions one would (how did it feel? -like I was superman to be honest..exciting- How did it feel seeing the dead? -no connection to them as humans-)
I kept asking things, eventually we started talking about the familys of the soldiers they left behind and things changed dramatically. I think it was the first time ever he truely and honestly sat down and considered the family left behind of the young soldiers that went out to fight.

It was also the second time I seen him cry in my life...it was like he suddenly got a part of him back he had to cut out decades ago just out of survival necessity. He is a curiously happier man now..not saying it was that one night that changed his outlook...but I do think that was a start

Seek help...don't let the government keep part of your soul.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
most intoxicated drivers are caught by doing something wrong in the first place, so even though no one has been hurt beforehand, they have infringed on some other traffic rule to warrent them being pulled over. it is an accident waiting to happen, whether its liked or not, they need to be kept off the roads and not allowed to drive while under influence of alcohol or drugs. not given free will to do as they please.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by For(Home)Country
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Should I be charged with attempted murder if I put a half-loaded revolver to your head, pulled the trigger once, and nothing happened? I wouldn't imagine that you'd be very comfortable with that, in the same way I wouldn't imagine the general population being very comfortable with drunk drivers legally driving everywhere.

I understand that you are an anarchist and that you don't particularly care for anyone other than yourself and your ability to keep yourself from being harmed, having your money taken, etc, but the truth is not all organization and law is bad. I know that's probably a big one for you to swallow as well because it would require you to look out for someone other than yourself or you immediate family, but just remember you aren't the only one who exists. Thanks.


I don't think he is selfish.. I think you are people who want to be "safe" at the cost of liberty deserve neither I think you have a narrow mind and if you die it wouldn't faze me... your are selfish for thinking that your life matters more than any other animal on the planet your not the only being on the planet.. thanks



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   

MOD NOTE: ATTENTION!!!



Whether you agree with the topic or not, please be respectful of other members.
Please discuss the topic and not other members.


That means no belittling, off topic posts, casting aspersions on another's character, talking down to other members, harassing or ridiculing others.

Further such remarks can and will result in warnings and/or post removals.

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Courtesy Is Mandatory

Ad Hominem Attacks And You

Posting Jokes, Ridiculing, Making Fun of Others in Threads...



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by Reaper2137
I am an old solider.. I've seen a lot of death and destruction.. so it doesn't faze me any more.. I view humans as animals. no better, no worse.


Ahh, I see the issue.
I apologise for spouting off at you (even though you deserved it).
The military does a great job in ripping the humanity from a person so they are conditioned for war...they just do a really shyte job in giving the person their humanity back.

Humans are of course animals, and more. the militarys job is to remove that "and more" part from the soldier...the trick is, once your back into civilian life, to do whatever it takes to regain that humanity...force yourself to do some charity work at a abused children shelter..allow yourself to gain emotional attachment to others and their well being. deprogram yourself from the governments steel arm...then you may wake back up into your true form.

I remember talking to my father (ex marine Sg who did 3 tours in vietnam). a few years back. we were discussing his trips and he was talking about the action he seen..I asked him the normal questions one would (how did it feel? -like I was superman to be honest..exciting- How did it feel seeing the dead? -no connection to them as humans-)
I kept asking things, eventually we started talking about the familys of the soldiers they left behind and things changed dramatically. I think it was the first time ever he truely and honestly sat down and considered the family left behind of the young soldiers that went out to fight.

It was also the second time I seen him cry in my life...it was like he suddenly got a part of him back he had to cut out decades ago just out of survival necessity. He is a curiously happier man now..not saying it was that one night that changed his outlook...but I do think that was a start

Seek help...don't let the government keep part of your soul.


I still have a soul..lol.. I just find it weird that humans as a whole have the mental mind set that because we are smarter we are not animals.. so their fore we are better than animals.. and should care if a human dies.. its life.. there are still tribes that eat humans..



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


You bring up an important issue. I think people have been convinced that drunk driving is a far more serious issue then it truly is. So much so, in fact, that few have any issue with DUI checkpoints. Despite the detainment of citizens with zero probable cause people, generally, see checkpoints as something necessary for the 'greater good'. However when you examine the data produced by these checkpoints it becomes apparent that they are largely ineffective at both the prevention of drunk driving and the apprehension of drunk drivers. What they do seem to be effective at is generating revenue through the issuance of citations for minor infractions.

With the blatant and increasing encroachment on American ideals of a free society I have to wonder if it is worth it?



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by worlds_away
The best way to stop drinking and driving is to act against it.

In the case of a friend who wants to drive home drunk from anywhere:

1. Take their keys.
2. Call a cab. Call a sober friend. Call their parents.
3. Put them to bed. In a bed, on a couch, or on the linoleum floor in the kitchen.

Doing these things can be hard, they can tear friendships apart.
Not doing these things and getting a phone call later is harder.


That's great advice, and I think most sane people would agree and do adhere to such. The unfortunate thing is, alot of the time people who get drunk at bars may not have anyone to be so kind to them. Perhaps that is why they are drinking in the first place. What do we do then? Maybe bars could take keys from people as they enter, but that's impractical and far too easy to circumvent.

Then we look at those same people on the road after they've been liquored up. Should we put them in jail for having a crappy life? Or maybe we should look at rehabilitation programs, like AA maybe but I think AA is largely ineffective.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SyphonX
 


I completely understand your point. Nobody here is actually condoning the action of driving drunk. Since everyone else has a story full of emotion, here is one that is my own little emotional story.

My brother, some other friends, and I were hanging out in Tulsa OK, going around bar hopping. My buddy Cory drank maybe a beer per bar and we only went to 3, he was our DD and since he drinks alot more than I do, it was not enough to phase him at all.. Even though the owner of the car, my friend Tim, got sideways drunk, Cory drove the car home. On the way home to Bartlesville, about an hour from Tulsa, we passed a Deputy Sheriff and he pulled a U turn and started to tail us for 3.2 miles. It didn't make sense since Cory was driving perfect the entire way home. At about the 3 mile mark, we passed 2 cop cars who were just sitting by the road. They started following the deputy until he kept going strait after we turned at an intersection. The 2 regulars kept following us though for another 3 miles until my brother, like an idiot since we didn't have ashtrays in the car, through his burnt out ciggarette butt out the _ The cops pulled us over for that and then proceeded to give us the 3rd degree of BS. When we couldn't find the insurance papers (later we found out that the new verification was at his house), the cops were complete Arses and said things like "Wow how good was the dope?"

This is the part that it got interesting because this all happened about 3:30am. They, for no reason, tell cory to get out of the car and start giving him the field sobriety tests. It was around this time that i noticed that, not only was the deputy who tailed us there, but so was the sheriff himself, another deputy, and 3 more cop cars, all together about 7-8 officers. (washington county, OK is not big, only about maybe 90 thousand people, but has the 3rd largest police force in OK, with Tulsa and Oklahoma city counties having more)

After Cory passed all of the field sobriety tests with flying colors, they give him a breathalyzer, which he barely fails with a .09, when .08 is the legal limit. They cuff him and arrest him for drunk driving. When they ask whos car it was, Tim (who was still very very drunk) told them and they ask him if he knows where the papers are. He starts reaching up to the front of the car from the back and then they pull him out of the car (i guess they were threatened by him
) and arrest him for public intoxication. They cuff him and slam his head down on the trunk while they do it, triggering a few angry word from tim (as I am sure alot of you might as well if you were in the position lol)

Its at this point they pull me, my brother, and his girlfriend out of the car and and proceed to search it, but they don't test any of us to see if we're drunk, which didn't make sense if they arrested Tim for Public Intox. One cop asks if we want to sit in his car with the heater (it was below freezing outside) so we go and just sit in the back of his car while they search Tim's. The cop who asked us sat in the drivers seat when we were in there and said, "Wow, this is ridiculous" My brother, not sure what he meant, said "yeah, its pretty cold out there" The cop then replied "No, this entire thing is ridiculous. I just moved here from California a year ago and i've...this is too much"

After a few minutes, they pull 2 muscle relaxers out of my brother's girlfriend's purse. She said that she had got them from her friend for her chronic back pain, since she didn't even remember she had them. Since i knew her well and knew she didn't ever pop pills since she's refused some other friend's offers before, i knew she was telling the truth, but the cops still arrested her for "Possession of a controlled substance". So out of 5 people in the car, me and my brother were the only ones who didn't get arrested for something that night.

My point in the story is that Cory, who was not impaired at all, got arrested needlessly, even after he passed all the physical sobriety tests.

After reading that part of the article, it makes sense that police are just fishing for People to arrest instead of actually stopping impaired drivers. Those cops that night were just looking for any excuse to arrest people or find something to mark as an achievement, as indicated by how many showed up at that time of night to one traffic stop. Especially when a cop has told me before that bartlesville only has a few active duty cops around that time of night, So most of the cops that were out that night were wasting time at one traffic stop.

All in all, the point that the article makes isn't just some asshole wanting to drive legally drunk, it makes very good points about the subject.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
the legal limit should be analyzed a 0.8 bal, is insane. If you have a couple beers after work you can potentially get arrested for a DUI. It is a no brainer to see the bottom line with dui's its all about money and retribution for madd, and other victim groups. To be honest it is just safer in so many ways to sit in front of a tv in your house.
welcome to the twenty first century.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reaper2137


I don't think he is selfish.. I think you are people who want to be "safe" at the cost of liberty deserve neither I think you have a narrow mind and if you die it wouldn't faze me... your are selfish for thinking that your life matters more than any other animal on the planet your not the only being on the planet.. thanks


I'm sorry, but what does drinking and driving have to do with the other animals? In fact, I would imagine that drunk humans pose more of a hazard on the road to other animals than non-drunk humans. What am I missing?

As for the safety, am I to assume that you are a complete anarchist as well? If you think that we should have no laws, by all means go move to Somalia where you will find a country and ruins but as close to anarchy as you will find on this earth. Do not get me wrong, I do not support an over-saturation of liberty-destroying motions such as the current debacle with the TSA and airport security, but not being allowed to drive drunk is by no means a violation of your personal liberty.

Whether you get home safe or kill an entire family in a head on collision when you're driving drunk is not your choice, but rather a matter of chance and timing. Some people can drive betters than others drunk, but it is still unsafe. Should bus drivers be able to drink on the job? How about pilots? There is absolutely no justification for drunk driving, and the only excuse for one to condone it would be simply ignorance and a lack of ability to understand statistics and scientific discovery.

Anarchists can cry all the want about how we should all do what we want to do because we are our own person, but I assure you you'd be much less satisfied and dead much quicker if you existed in your purposed ideal state.

This thread is an eye opener. I didn't think people like this existed.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
This makes the assumption that DUI laws actually prevent a large number of people from driving drunk.

They do not.


...in the last few decades, in the usofa, society has changed dramatically in regards to driving while intoxicated... mothers against drunk drivers did a lot to help sway public opinion, as did big-aced tickets and jail time for offenders... a lot of people wont take the chance now because of the stricter laws and the negative social impact of being labeled a drunk driver...



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by nwdogg1982
 


We should not put them in jail for having a crappy life.
We should put them in jail/rehab for endangering others and themselves.

I have a crappy life, should I be in jail? No.

I get drunk and get behind 1000lbs of steel with the ability to kill in the matter of seconds, should I be in jail? Yes.
Crappy life or not. I could’ve just left the party of my life.

I do not have sympathy for people who drive drunk. I don’t care what their excuse is.

A little bit of personal responsibility is all that is needed.
edit on 17-12-2010 by worlds_away because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Reaper2137
 


I will gladly open my mouth when I wish to, Mr. Liberty because like you, I have every right to, amirite?
As for the statistics, I assure you that no large amount of "googleing" is required to come up with the facts. If you take a look around page 18 of this .pdf, you will see that the amount of traffic incidents has declined drastically over the years between 1975 and 1985, and hovered around the 42,000 level in the last 20 years. I would not call the slight drops or increases "ineffectiveness", especially when you include the growing vehicle population. Of course, these are Canadian statistics, but I would recommend that you be a little bit more nice and research your own opinion a little bit more before you assert your beliefs as facts. DUI's are effective, and they do indeed deter a large amount (not all of course) of drunk people from driving.

If you, however, can find statistics proving that DUI's do not improve the safety and well being of a community, I will revise my opinion. But until then, I think it is safe to say that you are misguided and your perception bias makes you believe in what you want to believe. If you believe that driving drunk will be of great benefit to you, then go ahead and try and deal with the consequences. If you get home safe, I tip my hat to you sir and will say "Wow, I sure wish I was you." If you end up killing or injuring someone, perhaps then you will be able to fulfil this websites cliche yet underused motto.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Knee jerk reactions galore in this thread huh?

Almost everyone is connected in some way to someone who was hurt/killed by a drunk driver and of course this is horrible stuff. Having said that, I know that most sensible people could agree that we still need to reevaluate the drunk driving laws. We really need to find a way to differentiate the people who willingly and shamelessly drive completely smashed with little to no regard for themselves or others, and those who drank in moderation because they knew they'd be driving later and are on the borderline .06 to 1.0 ish blood alcohol level.

To be perfectly honest, I admit that there were many times that I drove and would've failed a breathalyzer (not by an obscene amount or anything) if pulled over. However, and I'm sure many would say I'm a liar, I am fully confident that during those times I put no other human being, or myself, in danger because of it. If I'm driving while under the influence, I have my eyes glued to the road, the windows are down to give me a cold breeze to help stay alert, cell phone is nowhere in sight, radio off, no one else in the car.....you get the point.

God forbid we start trying to be proactive a little bit and figure out better ways to help shuttle people where they need to be after the bars get out. Look at many cities...Barely any DUI's because after people get done drinking at the bar, they take the bus, the train, the subway, taxi, etc. home and all is well.

Also, I know that certain cars already are equipped with a breathalyzer and won't start until someone that's clean blows. This of course could be circumvented by getting a sober friend (some 'friend' that would be) to blow for you but it's a good example of how we could easily use technology to attack this problem better. I know it's a slippery slope as far as the technology started to imprison us but I do think there's gotta be a better way to attack this problem.
What if, when a person was found to have driven drunk, instead of punishing them monetarily, (which is of course what this is really all about, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$), we do what we already do as far as publishing the name and incident in the paper but 10 X worse. I'm talking huge photos on whatever media for the local community to see. Humiliation goes a long way.

I've also heard something before about a gyroscope in cars that could detect when a car is weaving to much...I just think that if people really put their heads together we could come up with better solutions.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by worlds_away
 


I agree, but I think we both know that personal responsibility goes out the window when one gets drunk. So putting them in jail/rehab after they are behind the wheel is just good sense, but I think we should do more to keep them from getting behind the wheel in the first place.

Personally, I don't like alcohol and would not miss it being banned, but prohibition of any substance just causes more problems than it's worth. So that's not an option. Banning people from driving is not a good idea either, so I'm stupid for even bringing it up just now. More, stronger laws might help, but from reading this thread, I don't think the laws now do much to help, it would only make things worse in other ways.

I don't know, this is such a deep, involving issue that the debate will go on forever. The crazy thing is, just about everyone who has posted on here is right, in one way or another. Just goes to show that even if a topic might seem ridiculous and downright rude at first, it may still be a topic worthy of discussion.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by harvib
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


You bring up an important issue. I think people have been convinced that drunk driving is a far more serious issue then it truly is.


I believe so as well.

It has been propagandized into oblivion because it benefits the State to keep it illegal.

If I said "We could save 400 lives a year but we will have to raise everyone's taxes by 100 dollars a year" - should we do it?

That is effectively what we are doing with these DUI laws that punish people who have not injured or damaged anyone's property.

Of course, this does not take into consideration all the lives that may be saved by allowing those people who did not hurt anyone to keep their money.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by For(Home)Country
reply to post by Reaper2137
 


I will gladly open my mouth when I wish to, Mr. Liberty because like you, I have every right to, amirite?
As for the statistics, I assure you that no large amount of "googleing" is required to come up with the facts. If you take a look around page 18 of this .pdf, you will see that the amount of traffic incidents has declined drastically over the years between 1975 and 1985, and hovered around the 42,000 level in the last 20 years. I would not call the slight drops or increases "ineffectiveness", especially when you include the growing vehicle population. Of course, these are Canadian statistics, but I would recommend that you be a little bit more nice and research your own opinion a little bit more before you assert your beliefs as facts. DUI's are effective, and they do indeed deter a large amount (not all of course) of drunk people from driving.

If you, however, can find statistics proving that DUI's do not improve the safety and well being of a community, I will revise my opinion. But until then, I think it is safe to say that you are misguided and your perception bias makes you believe in what you want to believe. If you believe that driving drunk will be of great benefit to you, then go ahead and try and deal with the consequences. If you get home safe, I tip my hat to you sir and will say "Wow, I sure wish I was you." If you end up killing or injuring someone, perhaps then you will be able to fulfil this websites cliche yet underused motto.


I would say that here in the united states.. it does very little and a quick "google" proves


2008 Drunk Driving Statistics





Total fatalities



Total Fatalities


Alcohol-Related
Fatalities
Number

Percent
Texas 3,382 1,463 43
California 3,434 1,198 35
Florida 2,978 1,041 35
Pennsylvania 1,468 578 39
North Carolina 1,433 500 35
Georgia 1,493 489 33
South Carolina 920 463 50
Illinois 1,043 434 42
Ohio 1,190 415 35
New York 1,231 409 33
Louisiana 912 404 44
Tennessee 1,035 386 37
Alabama 966 367 38
Virginia 824 365 44
Missouri 960 364 38
Michigan 980 331 34
Arizona 937 329 35
Mississippi 783 297 38
Oklahoma 749 274 37
Indiana 814 250 31
Wisconsin 605 250 41
Kentucky 826 226 27
Washington 521 225 43
Arkansas 600 205 34
Colorado 548 202 37
New Jersey 590 197 33
Maryland 591 186 31
Minnesota 456 161 35
Oregon 416 159 38
Kansas 385 157 41
Massachusetts 363 151 42
West Virginia 380 142 37
Nevada 324 121 37
New Mexico 366 118 32
Iowa 412 113 27
Connecticut 264 104 40
Montana 229 103 45
Idaho 232 93 40
Nebraska 208 75 36
Wyoming 159 75 47
Utah 275 55 20
New Hampshire 139 53 38
North Dakota 104 52 50
Hawaii 107 50 46
Delaware 121 49 40
Maine 155 47 30
South Dakota 119 41 34
Rhode Island 65 29 45
Alaska 62 24 38
Vermont 73 15 21
Dist of Columbia 34 13 39
National 37,261 13,846 37
Puerto Rico 399 162 41


that most states still have almost halve there deaths in cars due to DUI so in the fact that the law does very little to stop.. you must mistake me for a fool or some thing I don't it should be legal per sa just more defined a person who makes it home safe and sound did nothing wrong.. a person who kills and or harms property should be punished.. but lumping them all in and than making money off of it and than the searches that and unjust and you see that they really don't catch that many drunk drivers I think the law should work...
edit on 17-12-2010 by Reaper2137 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join