Look back and look at all the emotion you poured out over these last few pages. I don't have a problem with having a debate if you're going to keep it civil and objective, but you have not. From the very outset you made personal attacks on others and that is my grievance with you. You would not have said those things if you weren't so personally invested in the topic.
I'm not sure when I did. The only time I said anything is when I called tali's opinion immature. His opinion.
To be completely honest, I don't really understand what level of emotion I've been putting out there you're getting and I think you might be seeing something that isn't there. Yes, I've had family members very adversely affected by a DUI, and my boyfriend, who I love, has a DUI himself. But....
I don't really know someone who doesn't know someone whose gotten a DUI or know someone affected by one. They are quite common, which is why I was so puzzled by your argument re: stigma and criminal. I never once talked about ostracizing a person for a DUI, ever. I would think that saying my boyfriend has a DUI would sort of demonstrate that I obviously don't believe that. You've completely misrepresented and distorted MY opinion.
But drunk drivers kill a lot of people. Thats a fact. I don't see why people shouldn't frown on drunk driving "so much." Apart from when I was talking to tali, all I have been saying in my posts to you in our discussion is that a person with a DUI should have to face the consequences of those decisions. All of that has been objective and civil. You're the one who keeps saying I have a personal bias, and you might not care that much until you've known someone affected by a DUI. I think thats pretty messed up, by the way.
I guess what you're saying is that a DUI itself is not enough to determine someone's maturity level. Obviously I agree with that, and as I've said...thats why I believe the entire record should be looked at. Who put in the community service, how they speak about the incident. I think I said no less than three times that someone can move on and learn a lot from a DUI (and most stupid mistakes, for that matter).
Eh, I think we're in agreement then. You're right in that I inferred something from your points that wasn't really there. In fact, looking back, you did a lot less of what I accused you of than some of the other posters.
Anyway, drunk driving = bad. That was never the point in question, so don't confuse me for an advocate for it. To me, this was more about the concept of criminalization than drunk driving itself. I'm still pretty young and carefree myself. I'm sure when I become a parent, I'll feel a lot different.
I didn't really mean expungement or nondisclosure as an option. I was just startled at how vicious the accusations were toward people with DUI offenses, and really did not think it should say THAT much about a person's character.
I really tried to leave this debate a number of times, but you always challenged me for more and in a really forceful way, so I couldn't help but defend my position. In reality, I was not trying to polarize this issue.
*shrug* I'm not really trying to paint them as parallel examples. Obviously, driving drunk increases your risk for having an accident. I agree that it's against my personal morals. I'm just annoyed that people are making such emotional appeals to make personal attacks on talibkweli when it isn't necessary. Alcohol inhibits your GABA receptors and slows overall activity in the brain, therefore, you should not drive when you are drunk. However, it is also true that many people who drive drunk do so while they believe they are otherwise capable of driving. This is an alcohol induced decision, not a calculated one. Then what you should be stigmatizing is the act of drinking altogether, not the act of driving. It is hypocritical to call drunk driving bad while our culture glorifies the use of alcohol for just about every occasion when everyone knows that people are overconfident and stupid when they are drunk and more likely to make bad decisions.
On the other hand, the rising incidence of drunk driving related vehicle deaths in China, for example, proves that strict enforcement and social stigma against drunk driving is necessary to reduce transportation hazards (China has no stigma or laws against it and their traffic and drinking habits are much worse). It should be a stain on someone's integrity because if we don't take it seriously enough, then it will continue to be a problem.
I have a habit of defending views that are not my own, so don't confuse my arguments with my personal feelings. My personal feelings are that the existing laws and enforcement against drunk driving are sufficient. If anything, people just need to take a more active role in being responsible with their friends.
This post from earlier on is probably more reflective of how I felt before this got really personal.