DUI Thread

[Woodstock.Hippie]

Who's following the money?

Who took care of Howard Hughes?

What if everyone had a plant, and it made them healthy?

What if everyone had to blow to start their vehicle?

What if everyone could peacefully discuss the facts?

 

[CrackerJax]

Who cares more about children than women? There is no health care crisis......

The Independent Women's Forum (IWF) commissioned a survey to better understand women's health care concerns. They asked extensive questions of 800 registered voters, deliberately taking a broad sample to be representative geographically, demographically, politically and philisophically.

Group demographics....
40% - Democrats
22% - Independents
32% - Repukes
6% - unidentified

81% voted in the last election.

58% voted for Obama.

So what do they think about their health care right now?

74% - Rate their own health care as good or excellent.

77% - Think the health care they receive is equal to or better than others (satisfaction)

66% - Thought their insurance was good or excellent.

73% Thought that they had appropriate or even high quality insurance.

64% - Would rather have private insurance than a Govt. run plan.

 

[medicineman]

Who cares more about children than women? There is no health care crisis......

The Independent Women's Forum (IWF) commissioned a survey to better understand women's health care concerns. They asked extensive questions of 800 registered voters, deliberately taking a broad sample to be representative geographically, demographically, politically and philisophically.

Group demographics....
40% - Democrats
22% - Independents
32% - Repukes
6% - unidentified

81% voted in the last election.

58% voted for Obama.

So what do they think about their health care right now?

74% - Rate their own health care as good or excellent.

77% - Think the health care they receive is equal to or better than others (satisfaction)

66% - Thought their insurance was good or excellent.

73% Thought that they had appropriate or even high quality insurance.

64% - Would rather have private insurance than a Govt. run plan.

Did anyone poll the 47+ million un-insured?? You know, 47,000,000 un-insured.

 

[RickWhite]

Must every thread degrade into hostility and insults? When I left this thread last it was still a civil discussion. It is too bad people can't even make an effort to keep it that way.

Now, in response to those who see this issue as 100% black and white - it simply is not. Every day thousands of people all across the Country responsibly drive home above the legal limit. Many of these people have done so hundreds of times and have never had a problem, nor are they likely to.

Of course there are also people who get smashed and kill people - clearly I am not talking about them as we all agree they should be stopped.

What I am referring to is the unreasonable methods employed by law enforcement which includes violating your 4th amendment rights and Draconian punishments that treat all people over .08% the same regardless of whether or not you are .08% or .20%. Shouldn't a guy over twice the legal limit who is driving recklessly get in more trouble than a guy who is borderline and driving safely? You see, current laws make no such distinction and that is wrong.

Also, understand that if you smoke a joint and get pulled over 3 days later you are still DUI according to the law. So if you take a hard line against anyone who qualifies for a DUI you must also take the same hard line against the guy who smoked a joint 3 days prior to getting stopped. Either you agree with the law the way it is or you don't, you can not make exceptions for your chosen group of preference.

But, if you look at the link I provided you will see arguments for reasonable DUI laws, not for laws that make criminals out of people doing nothing wrong. If you haven't read the link you should do so because you shouldn't be posting otherwise.

 

[medicineman]

Also, understand that if you smoke a joint and get pulled over 3 days later you are still DUI according to the law. So if you take a hard line against anyone who qualifies for a DUI you must also take the same hard line against the guy who smoked a joint 3 days prior to getting stopped. Either you agree with the law the way it is or you don't, you can not make exceptions for your chosen group of preference.
I agree. Take the hard line against anyone that is driving impaired, joint, booze, heroine, coke, pills, etc. I don't want oncoming traffick to be impaired from any substance. That also goes for phone calling and especially texters. Driving is a serious business, has much responsibility, and needs to be taken seriously.

 

[brainwarp]

That is FUCKING BULLSHIT to get an OWI, just for having the keys in the ignition. The point of the law is to keep people from DRIVING while drunk, not entrapping people on a damn technicality. What if I'm drunk and fixing my turn signal light. in my driveway, and I have the keys in the ignition to test the lights? Then a cop drives by and see's me stumbling around. Should he be able to give me a ticket? I've been lucky to never get an OWI, but I've only done it a few times over 25 years.

I think it's total bullshit to lump everyone in the same category. There is a big difference between .08 and .2. There should be separate charges and penalties for "impaired" or "drunk." The guy that has 3 or 4 beers and get's stopped at .08 is completely different from the guy drinking heavily and is completely plowed and can't control the vehicle.

I like driving the ATV drunk out in the woods, and do that a lot. That's half the fun of it. They can give me a ticket for that, but can't put you in jail for it. Either way, it's total bullshit. If I want to get lit up, and wrap the fucker around a tree, that's my business, not the government's.

And smoking weed? Please. I can understand if someone is completely blitzed out of his mind and can't operate properly. But, just being high is no problem. I do that all the time. Hell, I took drivers ed. stoned, just so I would learn to drive that way.

Typical...a bunch of fuckers years ago screwed it up for all of us. Now all the MADD mothers fuckers have it their way.

 

[fdd2blk]

i tripped over 3 dead babies on the way to my mailbox yesterday afternoon.fuckers are starting to become bothersome.


[youtube]tpJeNw_fwyM[/youtube]

 

[RickWhite]

That is FUCKING BULLSHIT to get an OWI, just for having the keys in the ignition. The point of the law is to keep people from DRIVING while drunk, not entrapping people on a damn technicality. What if I'm drunk and fixing my turn signal light. in my driveway, and I have the keys in the ignition to test the lights? Then a cop drives by and see's me stumbling around. Should he be able to give me a ticket? I've been lucky to never get an OWI, but I've only done it a few times over 25 years.

I think it's total bullshit to lump everyone in the same category. There is a big difference between .08 and .2. There should be separate charges and penalties for "impaired" or "drunk." The guy that has 3 or 4 beers and get's stopped at .08 is completely different from the guy drinking heavily and is completely plowed and can't control the vehicle.

I like driving the ATV drunk out in the woods, and do that a lot. That's half the fun of it. They can give me a ticket for that, but can't put you in jail for it. Either way, it's total bullshit. If I want to get lit up, and wrap the fucker around a tree, that's my business, not the government's.

And smoking weed? Please. I can understand if someone is completely blitzed out of his mind and can't operate properly. But, just being high is no problem. I do that all the time. Hell, I took drivers ed. stoned, just so I would learn to drive that way.

Typical...a bunch of fuckers years ago screwed it up for all of us. Now all the MADD mothers fuckers have it their way.

Be careful! If you drive your ATV off of your property you can be arrested and charged with DUI. The law defines it as operating anywhere that other vehicles might be. So public trails count, a dirt parking lot counts, even your own driveway counts as other cars could pull in. Also, if there is another ATV there that could count as well.

There are many things people ought not do while driving. Hell, old people shouldn't be allowed to drive. But the real issue is that you really don't want to give cops an excuse to abuse their power which they will do as much as is humanly possible.

 

[CrackerJax]

FDD.... ever make baby mashed potatoes?

 

[brainwarp]

Thanks, RickWhite.

You are correct about the DUI on ATV's. But I'm willing to take the chance. It's in the middle of nowhere, driving all over, blasted on Cuervo and "Blueberry." Never see a soul. Fuck the DNR, they can give me a ticket even if I'm sober.

 

[CrackerJax]

ATV.... All Trespass Vehicle.

 

[budsmoker87]

hahahaha i love the crazy random scenarios some people pull out of their ass

"what if my friend is driving down the road, sober, and i'm in the passenger's seat drunk, and he pulls over to take a piss, leaving me in the car alone, a cop comes along, and I get a DUI....WHERE'S the justice?!"lol

I do feel very sorry for the guy who told the story about receiving the DUI, and actually being sober...but from what you describe, didn't sound like you pushed to fight it much...?

i have to say i agree with medicineman and others on this.... if you can't find a way around avoiding impairment while driving, then get off and stay the fuck off the road. Why bother having to live with the guilt of potentially killing somebody behind the wheel, impaired or not? why bother placing yourself at ANY greater risk of killing somebody because of impairment, if you can find a way to avoid it? (whether texting/drunk/"buzzed"/tired/drowsy/whatever)

I DO feel that driving stoned is far different than driving drunk...i've done it as a kid, and used to love "cruising" the backroads...but just don't feel a need to anymore because I can make a conscious choice to avoid it

 

[CrackerJax]

You want to get drunk and operate dangerous equipment?

Go buy a wood chipper. Leave the carnage in ur own back yard.

 

[Cloud City]

Must every thread degrade into hostility and insults? When I left this thread last it was still a civil discussion. It is too bad people can't even make an effort to keep it that way.

Now, in response to those who see this issue as 100% black and white - it simply is not. Every day thousands of people all across the Country responsibly drive home above the legal limit. Many of these people have done so hundreds of times and have never had a problem, nor are they likely to.

Of course there are also people who get smashed and kill people - clearly I am not talking about them as we all agree they should be stopped.

What I am referring to is the unreasonable methods employed by law enforcement which includes violating your 4th amendment rights and Draconian punishments that treat all people over .08% the same regardless of whether or not you are .08% or .20%. Shouldn't a guy over twice the legal limit who is driving recklessly get in more trouble than a guy who is borderline and driving safely? You see, current laws make no such distinction and that is wrong.

Also, understand that if you smoke a joint and get pulled over 3 days later you are still DUI according to the law. So if you take a hard line against anyone who qualifies for a DUI you must also take the same hard line against the guy who smoked a joint 3 days prior to getting stopped. Either you agree with the law the way it is or you don't, you can not make exceptions for your chosen group of preference.

But, if you look at the link I provided you will see arguments for reasonable DUI laws, not for laws that make criminals out of people doing nothing wrong. If you haven't read the link you should do so because you shouldn't be posting otherwise.

Sounds like you've gotten a DUI or two or three and now you think you should be allowed to drive drunk. And don't even try comparing alcohol to weed when it comes to impairment of motor skills. You're saying drinking an intoxicating poison is the equivalent to consuming a plant. Fuck that! I'll get in the car with a stoned driver any day no problem. Show me one legitimate study or test that proves consuming weed impairs motor skills.

 

[Cloud City]

so you can't afford a cab but you own a car and can afford booze?

Yeah no shit right. He can afford to buy 5 dollar beers at the bar all night but cant spring 10 bucks for a cab?!?!! If you can't afford a cab ride then you can't afford to be out drinking at the bar.

 

[CrackerJax]

Maybe ur smoking mexi dirt weed, but I know just from personal experience, weed slows ur reflexes. Ppl need to be razor sharp when driving.

 

[Cloud City]

There is no proof that weed slows your reflexes. Nobody ever smokes a joint then starts stumbling around and falling all over like a drunk does.

 

[Cloud City]

Maybe ur smoking mexi dirt weed, but I know just from personal experience, weed slows ur reflexes. Ppl need to be razor sharp when driving.

Well I'll guarantee I'm smoking danker herb than you are.

 

[RickWhite]

Sounds like you've gotten a DUI or two or three and now you think you should be allowed to drive drunk. And don't even try comparing alcohol to weed when it comes to impairment of motor skills. You're saying drinking an intoxicating poison is the equivalent to consuming a plant. Fuck that! I'll get in the car with a stoned driver any day no problem. Show me one legitimate study or test that proves consuming weed impairs motor skills.

The law doesn't discriminate between weed and alcohol, either way its a DUI. And I have been in the car with people that have ran red lights due to being stoned.

But either way you are saying that you disagree with the law - so how is our argument different? I am saying that myself and most people I know can drive fine at .08 or even higher, you are saying you can drive fine while high, what is the difference?

The whole point is that zero tolerance laws seldom do any good for anyone. DUI laws ought to be based on what a person actually does and not on some arbitrary measure that is different for everyone. If a guy is wasted and driving 30 over on the wrong side of the road he ought to go to jail, but if a guy is driving fine and has perfect control of his motor skills he shouldn't be put through hell based on an arbitrary number.

Funny, I assume most of the people here are pot smokers. If you go to another forum you might hear people saying that everyone involved with pot is committing a horrible crime and should be jailed. They would use the same logic many of you are using but of course you would all disagree. The funny thing is that you can't see that you are taking two different sides of what is essentially the same argument. One deamonizes weed, the other booze - same thing.

Me personally, I would rather take my chances with a few drunks than with the cops and the Draconian Courts.

 

[Cloud City]

The difference between driving drunk vs driving while high is that the alcohol impairs your motor skills while cannabis does not. Have you ever watched the police videos of when the give they give drunks roadside sobriety tests? The drunks cannot walk a straight line, recite the alphabet, etc.. while a person under the influence of weed could pass all of those tests. Its not about what some law says, its about needlessly endangering others lives. When I see a drunk on the road swerving all over I don't hesitate to follow him and report the asshole.