Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This story puts faces to what is being justified. Three people dead, one injured, because a 20 year old had a fake ID and got behind the wheel of a car. His family was able to post the money covering a $1 million bond.
Drive under the influence often enough and it increases the odds of you either killing or paralyzing someone. But that's okay because nothing has happened so far.
This story puts faces to what is being justified. Three people dead, one injured, because a 20 year old had a fake ID and got behind the wheel of a car. His family was able to post the money covering a $1 million bond.
Drive under the influence often enough and it increases the odds of you either killing or paralyzing someone. But that's okay because nothing has happened so far.
That's the clouded thinking of an alcoholic.
Let's face it. Drunk drivers, especially those who proudly gloat about it, are low on the totem pole of human beings. They don't care about anyone but themselves & their goal to get drunk & then get in a car. Totally selfish criminals. Toss them behind bars. I get that people have driven drunk. I used to do it. Then I grew up & realized how incredibly stupid it was. Some people just never grow up.
You provide no numbers or statistics, just emotions. It should be really embarrassing for you to realize you're lost in this debate.
Drunk driving is illegal. It has nothing to do with emotions. What's embarrassing is you still trying to justify drunk driving. Pathetic. May I remind you that 99.9% of the posters on here think your actions are pathetic. So really dear, it's you who has lost the debate. Actually, there is no debate. Drunk driving is illegal. End of story.
This story puts faces to what is being justified. Three people dead, one injured, because a 20 year old had a fake ID and got behind the wheel of a car. His family was able to post the money covering a $1 million bond.
Drive under the influence often enough and it increases the odds of you either killing or paralyzing someone. But that's okay because nothing has happened so far.
That's the clouded thinking of an alcoholic.
This story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_...s_Market_crash puts faces to a totally legal driver killing 10 people and injuring 63. Does it prove anything? Not really. You cannot beat statistics and statistically (from government sorces, as i posted here in the link), you're twice as likely to be fatally hit by a sober driver, than by a drunk driver.
This story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_...s_Market_crash puts faces to a totally legal driver killing 10 people and injuring 63. Does it prove anything? Not really. You cannot beat statistics and statistically (from government sorces, as i posted here in the link), you're twice as likely to be fatally hit by a sober driver, than by a drunk driver.
If one out of 10 people on the road are drunk, but cause 1 out of 3 fatalities, that statistically shows that drunk drivers are more dangerous.
If one out of 10 people on the road are drunk, but cause 1 out of 3 fatalities, that statistically shows that drunk drivers are more dangerous.
Finally, at least someone could provide a good argument. Unfortunately, I could not find any stats how many people on the road are drunk. They tend to go unnoticed, unless caught up and reported. Yet again, WI being famous for it's drinking and driving (and relaxed laws about DUI) isn't the worst state in terms of fatalities.
The only other thing, I could see (in addition to what I posted) was that rural Fatalities for 1M car/miles was consistently higher than city fatalities. But that could be just a result of slower response times from paramedics or something.
Driving buzzed is different than driving drunk. Driving with a .08 is different than driving with .216. The laws should reflect this and handle each accordingly.
Agreed.
If I remember correctly, the drunk driver that seriously injured a friend and killed her husband blew a .27.
A former co-worker got totally blitzed (don't know what her BAC was, but I do know she was a heavy partier) and went the wrong way on a freeway (you don't do that unless seriously impaired), and killed a man, injured others, and was seriously injured herself.
I'd be very interested in seeing drunk driving fatalities/serious injuries compiled by BAC, not just the presence of some alcohol.
I'm not saying there is not some impairment at .08 or .10, but it isn't as risky as the .20 and above crowd, IMHO. Penalties for driving under the influence should reflect the risks of varying levels of intoxication.
If we can give different penalties for drug possession based on the amount of drugs found, I think it makes sense to do the same for DUI.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
