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.
If NY is so concerned about public safety... perhaps it should take a good hard look at all their DWI issues...
Perhaps follow Florida's example. Get caught? Felony DWI.
There's no DWAI straight DWI Felony.
Where I'm from, the leading causes of death were
DWI
Car accident fatalities (usually speeding and a collision with a deer or losing control and smashing into a huge oak or pine tree or down an embankment)
Overdose
Slips/Falls
Drownings
Upstate had a big issue with substance abuse. Be it alcohol or narcotics.
Then again. You have to be drunk/high to live there.
Not to get off topic, but in New York DWAI is above 0.04 but below 0.08 BAC and DUI is above 0.08 BAC. In Florida, BUI is 0.08 BAC and above, with no per se criminality below that level.
So, in other words, New York actually has more restrictions on drunk driving than Florida.
Not to get off topic, but in New York DWAI is above 0.04 but below 0.08 BAC and DUI is above 0.08 BAC. In Florida, BUI is 0.08 BAC and above, with no per se criminality below that level.
So, in other words, New York actually has more restrictions on drunk driving than Florida.
No. Because you get a lawyer in NY and it gets reduced to a slap on the wrist dwai.
Unless you've killed someone seriously harmed them or did alot of property damage behind the wheel.
My little sister was popped for a DWI. It was reduced to DWAI with 1 phone call to a lawyer and 5k later. She should have received the DWI. She blew a .10 or something. I know it was over the limit. Long story there.
So you are against laws because criminals will just break them? Ok Einstein.
We're against proposals that do nothing to deter, or stop criminals, that only effects the law abiding, or outright discourages the law abiding from exercising their rights.
Then again in your feeble mind, anyone who actively exercises the right to keep and bear arms is a criminal... or is potentially a criminal.
No. Because you get a lawyer in NY and it gets reduced to a slap on the wrist dwai.
Unless you've killed someone seriously harmed them or did alot of property damage behind the wheel.
My little sister was popped for a DWI. It was reduced to DWAI with 1 phone call to a lawyer and 5k later. She should have received the DWI. She blew a .10 or something. I know it was over the limit. Long story there.
That is a county-by-county plea bargain policy based on the particular circumstances of each case. It has nothing to do with State law.
I'm just curious, but what other Constitutional Right requires carrying an insurance policy to exercise it?
Insurance specifically? None that I can think of. But the exercise of other Constitutional rights is not the proximate cause of immediate injury and death of a fellow citizen.
Also, the Supreme Court has regularly upheld the imposition of certain requirements in order to exercise said Constitutional rights. Think timely registration for voters, for starters.
Insurance specifically? None that I can think of. But the exercise of other Constitutional rights is not the proximate cause of immediate injury and death of a fellow citizen.
Also, the Supreme Court has regularly upheld the imposition of certain requirements in order to exercise said Constitutional rights. Think timely registration for voters, for starters.
That's quite a stretch, when those who've been pushing this in Albany for a decade have said that it specifically targets crimes
(hmmm...intentional? Hear that, insurance companies?) committed by those who steal, or otherwise illegally access, other people's guns.
Comparing voter registration requirements to making innocent, licensed gun owners responsible for the crimes of others is, among other things...nuts.
That's quite a stretch, when those who've been pushing this in Albany for a decade have said that it specifically targets crimes
[hmmm...intentional? Hear that, insurance companies?) committed by those who steal, or otherwise illegally access, other people's guns.
Comparing voter registration requirements with making innocent, licensed gun owners responsible for the crimes of others is, among other things...nuts.
This bill isn't aimed at reducing criminality. Its purpose is to provide actual recourse to those injured by firearms that are handled or wielded negligently.
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.
) committed by those who steal, or otherwise illegally access, other people's guns.
