Political Crossfire Forums

Police officers already have the tools to get drunk or dangerous drivers off the road. They don't need specific legislation against drunk driving. It seems more like a money grab to me, just another way to pad the pockets of insurance companies and municipal offices.

Shit can't happen anymore, since of course if the government is really all powerful, then the government is responsible for the shit that happens. So...they have to be seen to try to engineer society in such a way as to prevent shit from happening...even if by doing so they actually conjure up the shit and make it a happening.

The belief that we can design the shit out of the happening is delusional. Best we can do is try to work in a 5X margin of safety and make sure the chin straps on our helmets are snug.

Hitler was a pretty decent artist. Not as good as Dubya, but close.

FYI, the body processes about 12 oz of beer an hour, so a pint is not two beers. It is one and a third. So for every three you'd need an hour more to be at zero. At 200 lbs, a person would need to be a little under four drinks completely unprocessed to get to .08

So 5 pints in 5 hours leaves less than two drinks unprocessed, which will not hit the legal point of inebriation.

I personally do not drive after drinking just to be on the safe side. However, observing all of the perfectly sober drivers that nearly kill people every day here in Dallas, I really don't worry much about those who are driving tipsy. That's not hyperbole either, the drivers here have made it clear to me that humanity lacks any concern for the well being of others and that we as individuals would really be better off without a significant portion of the population.

When there is an accident on the highway, the cars will speed up, try to pass, and jam up all possible avenues to ensure that rescue vehicles cannot get to the scene in the hopes that whoever is involved will die a screaming, bloody death on the pavement. I personally believe if you installed a button in each car that, if pushed, would reduce commute time by five minutes and also kill five people, it would get pushed all the time.

All the red traffic lights should emit Xanax vapors,lol.

[quote="Darkhorse"][quote="eynon81"][quote="Darkhorse"]I know your a public defender or whatever, but can I see some statistics. I've never been in an accident where anyone received charges and twice the police decided they didn't even need to come. I don't think the average accident results in charges, maybe just the serious ones.[/quote] I think this is a recent thing (last decade) and it may just be a Colorado thing, but I've been told by numerous LEOs that it's their general practice to cite someone in traffic accidents, to the point where they don't even call them accidents anymore, but crashes. That's all subject to discretion though.

[quote]The majority of Americans have probably committed a variety of different crimes, that doesn't mean they oppose penalties for those crimes. If someone put this on a ballot it would get thoroughly destroyed.[/quote]

yeah I don't disagree. It's just that is one of those crimes that most of us has probably committed.[/quote]

I think that might be the case. Just think of how many states there are with no-fault laws which protect the at-fault party. It is simply assumed that accidents happen and no one ought to be punished.

I'd be willing to bet the majority of people have taken something which did not belong to them, but they still think theft should be illegal.[/quote]

Hi,
For more information about DUI law. You can further contact on the link given below.

http://www.duilawcenter.org/state/nevad ... lasses.php