Already accepted, just got a DWI Forum

[kalvano]

I like to do 90MPH and text while I drive, but at least I don't drive drunk.

You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

[fenway]

i guess it depends on where you are driving. and do you use 1 or 2 hands to text?

[Tautology]

I am blown away. People actually took time in this thread to defend drunk driving as a practice?

Sigh.

No one is defending it. I just think it is absurd to view these people as horrific criminals. It is wrong, but driving intoxicated is not an indication of moral depravity like all of you suggest.

Maybe not moral depravity, but certainly it's an indication that they place so little value on the lives and well-being of others that they don't care if they put others at risk if it's just a little bit more convenient for them to do so. Seriously, fuck them and anyone who thinks that drunk drivers aren't bad people until they kill someone.

[romothesavior]

I am blown away. People actually took time in this thread to defend drunk driving as a practice?

Sigh.

No one is defending it. I just think it is absurd to view these people as horrific criminals. It is wrong, but driving intoxicated is not an indication of moral depravity like all of you suggest.

Maybe not moral depravity, but certainly it's an indication that they place so little value on the lives and well-being of others that they don't care if they put others at risk if it's just a little bit more convenient for them to do so. Seriously, fuck them and anyone who thinks that drunk drivers aren't bad people until they kill someone.

What if you kill someone while texting? While flipping thru your CD case? While checking out a hot blond on the side of the road?

[LoyolaLaw2012]

What if you get a DWI on a bicycle? Same moral problems? What about a segway?

[Tautology]

I am blown away. People actually took time in this thread to defend drunk driving as a practice?

Sigh.

No one is defending it. I just think it is absurd to view these people as horrific criminals. It is wrong, but driving intoxicated is not an indication of moral depravity like all of you suggest.

Maybe not moral depravity, but certainly it's an indication that they place so little value on the lives and well-being of others that they don't care if they put others at risk if it's just a little bit more convenient for them to do so. Seriously, fuck them and anyone who thinks that drunk drivers aren't bad people until they kill someone.

What if you kill someone while texting? While flipping thru your CD case? While checking out a hot blond on the side of the road?

I am not convinced that those pose an equivalent danger, but I would only ever do the last one anyway.

[kaydish21]

I like to do 90MPH and text while I drive, but at least I don't drive drunk.

You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

Haha, I guess that explains the 25 tickets you said you had in the other thread then? More power to ya.

[paratactical]

Seriously, fuck them and anyone who thinks that drunk drivers aren't bad people until they kill someone.

Your behavior in a single instance makes you a bad person forever!

[romothesavior]

What if you kill someone while texting? While flipping thru your CD case? While checking out a hot blond on the side of the road?

I am not convinced that those pose an equivalent danger, but I would only ever do the last one anyway.

Saw something on TV where they did a study on texting while driving and the response time for texters was about the same as drunks.

[D Brooks]

Drunk driving is bad, those who do it should be punished, but they're not terrible people because of it, necessarily.

However, ITT, losers are painting themselves as infallible beings.

[D Brooks]

What if you kill someone while texting? While flipping thru your CD case? While checking out a hot blond on the side of the road?

I am not convinced that those pose an equivalent danger, but I would only ever do the last one anyway.

Oh, okay, I get it! Things that you wouldn't do that pose a danger on the road are bad. Everything else isn't that big of a deal. Makes perfect sense.

[SaintClarence27]

Have you ever had one beer and gotten behind the wheel a few hours later? If so, you could get a DWI in many states. Do you really think it is fair for that scarlet letter to follow you around for the rest of your career and life?

I would really like to know if/how this is really possible.

So I'm assuming that this is totally incorrect...

[SaintClarence27]

What if you kill someone while texting? While flipping thru your CD case? While checking out a hot blond on the side of the road?

I am not convinced that those pose an equivalent danger, but I would only ever do the last one anyway.

Saw something on TV where they did a study on texting while driving and the response time for texters was about the same as drunks.

In theory, sure that's true. And this isn't advocating texting, but being drunk is a constant - you can't just not be drunk in high traffic areas. Texting isn't. You can text when there aren't other cars on the road, at stoplights, etc. and then not text when there's more danger. Still doesn't make it right, but I don't buy that the two are equivalent.

[094320]

..

[romothesavior]

Have you ever had one beer and gotten behind the wheel a few hours later? If so, you could get a DWI in many states. Do you really think it is fair for that scarlet letter to follow you around for the rest of your career and life?

I would really like to know if/how this is really possible.

So I'm assuming that this is totally incorrect...

From wikipedia:

All states in the U.S. designate a per se blood or breath alcohol level as the threshold point for an independent criminal offense. A second criminal offense of driving "under the influence" or "while impaired" is also usually charged in most states, with a permissive presumption of guilt where the person's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is .08% or greater (units of milligrams per deciliter, representing 8 g of alcohol in 10 liters of blood).[4] Some states (e.g., Colorado) include a lesser charge, sometimes referred to as driving while ability impaired (this may apply to individuals with a .05% or above, but less than the .08 per se limit for the more serious charge.[4] Wisconsin, however, is the only state that continues to regard first offense drunk driving arrests as a forfeiture.[5]

You are from Illinois, correct? I'm about 90% sure our state has one of these "driving while impaired" laws, but not positive.

[SaintClarence27]

Have you ever had one beer and gotten behind the wheel a few hours later? If so, you could get a DWI in many states. Do you really think it is fair for that scarlet letter to follow you around for the rest of your career and life?

I would really like to know if/how this is really possible.

So I'm assuming that this is totally incorrect...

From wikipedia:

All states in the U.S. designate a per se blood or breath alcohol level as the threshold point for an independent criminal offense. A second criminal offense of driving "under the influence" or "while impaired" is also usually charged in most states, with a permissive presumption of guilt where the person's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is .08% or greater (units of milligrams per deciliter, representing 8 g of alcohol in 10 liters of blood).[4] Some states (e.g., Colorado) include a lesser charge, sometimes referred to as driving while ability impaired (this may apply to individuals with a .05% or above, but less than the .08 per se limit for the more serious charge.[4] Wisconsin, however, is the only state that continues to regard first offense drunk driving arrests as a forfeiture.[5]

You are from Illinois, correct? I'm about 90% sure our state has one of these "driving while impaired" laws, but not positive.

You can't have one beer, get behind the wheel a few hours later and still be .05. Or anything above a .00

[Stanford4Me]

What if you kill someone while texting? While flipping thru your CD case? While checking out a hot blond on the side of the road?

Who the heck still has those?

[legalease9]

What if you get a DWI on a bicycle? Same moral problems? What about a segway?

There's a difference in that the chances of you killing an innocent because you are riding a bicycle/segway drunk is much lower.

[kalvano]

If you're paying attention to driving while you do it, you're doing something wrong.

[SaintClarence27]

What if you get a DWI on a bicycle? Same moral problems? What about a segway?

There's a difference in that the chances of you killing an innocent because you are riding a bicycle/segway drunk is much lower.

You can't get a DWI on a bicycle, either, IIRC. I dunno about a segway. I'm pretty sure it has to be a motorized vehicle. Riding lawnmowers do apply, however.

[romothesavior]

[quote="SaintClarence27
I would really like to know if/how this is really possible.

So I'm assuming that this is totally incorrect...

From wikipedia:

All states in the U.S. designate a per se blood or breath alcohol level as the threshold point for an independent criminal offense. A second criminal offense of driving "under the influence" or "while impaired" is also usually charged in most states, with a permissive presumption of guilt where the person's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is .08% or greater (units of milligrams per deciliter, representing 8 g of alcohol in 10 liters of blood).[4] Some states (e.g., Colorado) include a lesser charge, sometimes referred to as driving while ability impaired (this may apply to individuals with a .05% or above, but less than the .08 per se limit for the more serious charge.[4] Wisconsin, however, is the only state that continues to regard first offense drunk driving arrests as a forfeiture.[5]

You are from Illinois, correct? I'm about 90% sure our state has one of these "driving while impaired" laws, but not positive.

You can't have one beer, get behind the wheel a few hours later and still be .05. Or anything above a .00[/quote]

Okay, minor exaggeration on my part. But you sure could have a couple of beers and get behind the wheel a few hours later.

Being over .05 does not put anyone at risk. And honestly, I'm not sure .08 really does either. There is a huge difference between being tanked and driving and having a few.

[paratactical]

What if you get a DWI on a bicycle? Same moral problems? What about a segway?

There's a difference in that the chances of you killing an innocent because you are riding a bicycle/segway drunk is much lower.

You can't get a DWI on a bicycle, either, IIRC. I dunno about a segway. I'm pretty sure it has to be a motorized vehicle. Riding lawnmowers do apply, however.

You can get a DWI on a bicycle, at least in some states.

[romothesavior]

What if you get a DWI on a bicycle? Same moral problems? What about a segway?

There's a difference in that the chances of you killing an innocent because you are riding a bicycle/segway drunk is much lower.

You can't get a DWI on a bicycle, either, IIRC. I dunno about a segway. I'm pretty sure it has to be a motorized vehicle. Riding lawnmowers do apply, however.

You can get a DWI on a bicycle, at least in some states.

+1

[LoyolaLaw2012]

What if you get a DWI on a bicycle? Same moral problems? What about a segway?

There's a difference in that the chances of you killing an innocent because you are riding a bicycle/segway drunk is much lower.

You can't get a DWI on a bicycle, either, IIRC. I dunno about a segway. I'm pretty sure it has to be a motorized vehicle. Riding lawnmowers do apply, however.

You can get a DWI on a bicycle, at least in some states.

It depends on the statute.

[kalvano]

[quote="SaintClarence27
I would really like to know if/how this is really possible.

So I'm assuming that this is totally incorrect...

From wikipedia:

All states in the U.S. designate a per se blood or breath alcohol level as the threshold point for an independent criminal offense. A second criminal offense of driving "under the influence" or "while impaired" is also usually charged in most states, with a permissive presumption of guilt where the person's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is .08% or greater (units of milligrams per deciliter, representing 8 g of alcohol in 10 liters of blood).[4] Some states (e.g., Colorado) include a lesser charge, sometimes referred to as driving while ability impaired (this may apply to individuals with a .05% or above, but less than the .08 per se limit for the more serious charge.[4] Wisconsin, however, is the only state that continues to regard first offense drunk driving arrests as a forfeiture.[5]

You are from Illinois, correct? I'm about 90% sure our state has one of these "driving while impaired" laws, but not positive.

You can't have one beer, get behind the wheel a few hours later and still be .05. Or anything above a .00

Okay, minor exaggeration on my part. But you sure could have a couple of beers and get behind the wheel a few hours later.

Being over .05 does not put anyone at risk. And honestly, I'm not sure .08 really does either. There is a huge difference between being tanked and driving and having a few.[/quote]

Come on people, this is TLS, not xoxo or one of those other eyesore websites. Learn how to quote so I don't want to smash my head against the wall when reading.

Edit - fucking hell. My mockery of Romo's quote fail quote failed.