Already accepted, just got a DWI Forum

[redsox]

DWI =/(necessarily)= driving drunk. In my state you can get a DWI if you the cop thinks you were "impaired" and you blow anything above a 0 (so you could get a DWI if you had a beer at 5 pm, then drove to Taco Bell at midnight). Although, we have "misdemeanor dui" and "felony dui" (above situation being the former).

Yeah, but in the situation you describe, you'd be impaired by the weed which instigated the trip to Taco Bell.

[seespotrun]

Readin Mtal's posts reminds of:

"Whateva! Whateva! I do what I WANT!"

I do, but I also agree to pay the consequences.

You fucker. My cousin (who wasn't in a car) was hit by drunk driver in a pickup truck. By some miracle, he's alive today, but even still, fuck you and your "consequences."

(Also, the driver admitted that he had driven plenty of times before at that BAC. Only takes one to screw up lives forever.)

You're using emotional reasoning to generalize from 1 case. I feel for your cousin (I know that sounds empty coming from me, but I do), but all that shows is that in that one instance, the driver did not know his limits, or, if he did know, chose to ignore them. My argument is that people shouldn't be punished SOLELY for being over a limit, if they are otherwise capable drivers.

That's not "all it shows." But all your post shows is what elicits this response: I can't believe you got pwned in lawl skool?!?!!!

[MTal]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

[manbearwig]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Gee, with this logic, I can't believe this guy got pwned by lawl skool?!!??!!!

Edit: You guys should stop with the death wishes. It's creepy. MTal already has enough bad karma to last for all of us.

[seespotrun]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Gee, with this logic, I can't believe this guy got pwned by lawl skool?!!??!!!

Lol. Poor guy must be a sad soul.

[A'nold]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Yeah, well I have a lot of reasons for despising chronic drunk drivers. Regardless, I have a family and my life would be over if something happened to them, yet you are going to come on here and talk about paying reparations for a wrong done, like it is some kind of formula that can actually compensate the death of a spouse, child, mother, or father. It honestly makes me sick.

OP: I am not judging YOU, and I addressing this guy only. Learn from your mistake and don't do it again. You take others' lives in your hands when you do this. If you have a heart at all (which is what I am suggesting Mtal apparently does not have) you could not live with yourself if you ever took an innocent person's life. Good luck to you.

[TheOcho]

MTL, agreed.

There are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you break the speed limit, cross the median, or are at fault in an accident the law will punish you. In the event you are driving over the limit and obeying all traffic laws, you're not going to get pulled over (minus the probability of a checkpoint). When someone impaired breaks a traffic law they should be charged with traffic law they violated. DUI laws often times punish people for a crime they have unknowingly committed, or could have never known they committed. DUI laws alone punish individuals for the content of their blood, not their driving ability.

I don't condone drunk driving. But those who call someone a jackass or tell them to commit suicide is hardly in a position to act as a moral superior. If you don't like his argument, discredit it.

[A'nold]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Gee, with this logic, I can't believe this guy got pwned by lawl skool?!!??!!!

Edit: You guys should stop with the death wishes. It's creepy. MTal already has enough bad karma to last for all of us.

Hey man, you gotta kill baby Hitler.

[MTal]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Yeah, well I have a lot of reasons for despising chronic drunk drivers. Regardless, I have a family and my life would be over if something happened to them, yet you are going to come on here and talk about paying reparations for a wrong done, like it is some kind of formula that can actually compensate the death of a spouse, child, mother, or father. It honestly makes me sick.

Have you like....ummm....ever taken a Torts class before?

[seespotrun]

MTL, agreed.

There are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you break the speed limit, cross the median, or are at fault in an accident the law will punish you. In the event you are driving over the limit and obeying all traffic laws, you're not going to get pulled over (minus the probability of a checkpoint). When someone impaired breaks a traffic law they should be charged with traffic law they violated. DUI laws often times punish people for a crime they have unknowingly committed, or could have never known they committed. DUI laws alone punish individuals for the content of their blood, not their driving ability.

I don't condone drunk driving. But those who call someone a jackass or tell them to commit suicide is hardly in a position to act as a moral superior. If you don't like his argument, discredited it.

So you note that there are laws in place to punish drunk drivers, but you are opposed to their enforcement? You and MTal must be related.

[A'nold]

MTL, agreed.

There are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you break the speed limit, cross the median, or are at fault in an accident the law will punish you. In the event you are driving over the limit and obeying all traffic laws, you're not going to get pulled over (minus the probability of a checkpoint). When someone impaired breaks a traffic law they should be charged with traffic law they violated. DUI laws often times punish people for a crime they have unknowingly committed, or could have never known they committed. DUI laws alone punish individuals for the content of their blood, not their driving ability.

I don't condone drunk driving. But those who call someone a jackass or tell them to commit suicide is hardly in a position to act as a moral superior. If you don't like his argument, discredited it.

As somebody that wasn't "pwned by lawl skoolz," I shall point something out for you: Equating calling someone a jackass with putting other innocent peoples' lives in danger is like saying that people that support the death penalty equally disvalue life as a serial killer that kills innocent little kids or something.

Missing factor = blameworthiness and hurting those that are innocent. Death penalty guy already made his choice.

Btw- I am death penalty neutral.

[seespotrun]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Yeah, well I have a lot of reasons for despising chronic drunk drivers. Regardless, I have a family and my life would be over if something happened to them, yet you are going to come on here and talk about paying reparations for a wrong done, like it is some kind of formula that can actually compensate the death of a spouse, child, mother, or father. It honestly makes me sick.

Have you like....ummm....ever taken a Torts class before?

DUI/DWI = Criminal Law

Culpability =/= Negligence

Punishment =/= Punitive or nominal damages

In fact, this is exactly the point you are missing. There's a reason that conduct is criminalized. Most of the time it's because Tort law isn't sufficient.

Edited for: I cant believe you got pwned by lawl skool?!?!??!!!

[A'nold]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Yeah, well I have a lot of reasons for despising chronic drunk drivers. Regardless, I have a family and my life would be over if something happened to them, yet you are going to come on here and talk about paying reparations for a wrong done, like it is some kind of formula that can actually compensate the death of a spouse, child, mother, or father. It honestly makes me sick.

Have you like....ummm....ever taken a Torts class before?

Did you pass any torts classes? See, there is more to life than $$$$. I know it's hard to believe, but most people wouldn't trade their spouse or their children for a trillion dollars. Deep I know.

Edit: I know I have to explain these things very slowly for you, so here is something to ponder: Haven't you ever wondered why people that get like 25 million dollar verdicts still don't look very happy when it is, say, a wrongful death suit over a child or how torts professors say that tort law ATTEMPTS to make people whole, to the extent possible? You can never make someone that has lost someone at your unclean hands.

[TheOcho]

MTL, agreed.

There are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you break the speed limit, cross the median, or are at fault in an accident the law will punish you. In the event you are driving over the limit and obeying all traffic laws, you're not going to get pulled over (minus the probability of a checkpoint). When someone impaired breaks a traffic law they should be charged with traffic law they violated. DUI laws often times punish people for a crime they have unknowingly committed, or could have never known they committed. DUI laws alone punish individuals for the content of their blood, not their driving ability.

I don't condone drunk driving. But those who call someone a jackass or tell them to commit suicide is hardly in a position to act as a moral superior. If you don't like his argument, discredited it.

So you note that there are laws in place to punish drunk drivers, but you are opposed to their enforcement? You and MTal must be related.

No. If you're driving impaired and can obey all the traffic laws, you won't be pulled over or charged with a crime (unless yo hit a checkpoint). Thus, no punishment. If you are driving impaired and violating traffic laws, you will be punished and charged with the traffic law you violated. Thus, there are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you aren't violating the law and are charged with DUI, you are being charged for the content of your blood (for a crime that you may or may not hypothetically commit). You are not being charged for a crime, your being charged for the content of your blood.

I'm not saying a drunk driver should be absolved from all punishment. If you violate a traffic law or commit any other crime while driving, you should be punished for it. Punishing someone who has not violated a traffic law or any other law, and charging them with a DUI, or the content of their blood, is questionable at best.

[TheOcho]

MTL, agreed.

There are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you break the speed limit, cross the median, or are at fault in an accident the law will punish you. In the event you are driving over the limit and obeying all traffic laws, you're not going to get pulled over (minus the probability of a checkpoint). When someone impaired breaks a traffic law they should be charged with traffic law they violated. DUI laws often times punish people for a crime they have unknowingly committed, or could have never known they committed. DUI laws alone punish individuals for the content of their blood, not their driving ability.

I don't condone drunk driving. But those who call someone a jackass or tell them to commit suicide is hardly in a position to act as a moral superior. If you don't like his argument, discredited it.

As somebody that wasn't "pwned by lawl skoolz," I shall point something out for you: Equating calling someone a jackass with putting other innocent peoples' lives in danger is like saying that people that support the death penalty equally disvalue life as a serial killer that kills innocent little kids or something.

Missing factor = blameworthiness and hurting those that are innocent. Death penalty guy already made his choice.

Btw- I am death penalty neutral.

You conveniently left out the part of my post where I also add "tell them to commit suicide." Furthermore, I didn't equate the two actions. I just said anyone who would make such statements isn't in a position to act as a moral superior. What kind of person goes around telling people they don't know to commit suicide? Really?

[kalvano]

You do know you could have killed someone? What's your problem. I don't get dirtbags like you. Kill yourself but don't put innocent people in danger.

Making a mistake doesn't necessarily make OP a dirtbag.

You say "mistake" like it's it's picking the wrong brand of peanut butter at the store, or a choosing a blonde hooker for the bachelor party when your friend prefers redheads.

It's not like someone in this country can escape knowing how dangerous drinking and driving can be. It's not a "mistake" to get in a car after drinking. It's a choice.

[MTal]

Have you like....ummm....ever taken a Torts class before?

DUI/DWI = Criminal Law

Culpability =/= Negligence

Punishment =/= Punitive or nominal damages

In fact, this is exactly the point you are missing. There's a reason that conduct is criminalized. Most of the time it's because Tort law isn't sufficient.

Edited for: I cant believe you got pwned by lawl skool?!?!??!!![/quote]

For that reason, criminal and civil trials can take place for the same set of facts. Damages are calculated by mathematical formulas and actuarial tables for wrongful death. I no longer have my Torts E&E, but Glannon devotes an entire chapter on precisely this subject. You can cry and be all self-righteous about how lives can't be compensated by money, but they in fact are, and on a daily basis to boot.

[HBK]

Never submit to field sobriety tests if you've had more than a drink or two. No matter what the cops tell you, they're lying. They aren't going to let you go, they aren't your friends. They're collecting evidence. Don't give them any. Go to jail for a night and lose your license for a couple months. No evidence = no case, and a dismissal is better than a conviction.

This is something everyone (especially law students) should know.

As far as above .08 = drunk, that's not necessarily true for everyone. Alcoholics can have a .08 BAC without being affected.

Also, if you go to trial, always demand a jury trial. Juries are generally more lenient on sentencing because a judge will get run out of town by MADD if he gives a "drunk driver" a slap on the wrist, especially if that person is later involved in a fatality accident.

/tmyk

[kalvano]

MTL, agreed.

There are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you break the speed limit, cross the median, or are at fault in an accident the law will punish you. In the event you are driving over the limit and obeying all traffic laws, you're not going to get pulled over (minus the probability of a checkpoint). When someone impaired breaks a traffic law they should be charged with traffic law they violated. DUI laws often times punish people for a crime they have unknowingly committed, or could have never known they committed. DUI laws alone punish individuals for the content of their blood, not their driving ability.

I don't condone drunk driving. But those who call someone a jackass or tell them to commit suicide is hardly in a position to act as a moral superior. If you don't like his argument, discredited it.

So you note that there are laws in place to punish drunk drivers, but you are opposed to their enforcement? You and MTal must be related.

No. If you're driving impaired and can obey all the traffic laws, you won't be pulled over or charged with a crime (unless yo hit a checkpoint). Thus, no punishment. If you are driving impaired and violating traffic laws, you will be punished and charged with the traffic law you violated. Thus, there are already laws in place to punish drunk drivers. If you aren't violating the law and are charged with DUI, you are being charged for the content of your blood (for a crime that you may or may not hypothetically commit). You are not being charged for a crime, your being charged for the content of your blood.

I'm not saying a drunk driver should be absolved from all punishment. If you violate a traffic law or commit any other crime while driving, you should be punished for it. Punishing someone who has not violated a traffic law or any other law, and charging them with a DUI, or the content of their blood, is questionable at best.

Are you drunk? I honestly can't make the connection you seem to be trying to draw.

If you aren't violating the law and are charged with DUI, you are being charged for the content of your blood (for a crime that you may or may not hypothetically commit). You are not being charged for a crime, your being charged for the content of your blood.

It's illegal to drive with a BAC over a certain amount. That's what they are charging you with.

[Thirteen]

You do know you could have killed someone? What's your problem. I don't get dirtbags like you. Kill yourself but don't put innocent people in danger.

Making a mistake doesn't necessarily make OP a dirtbag.

You say "mistake" like it's it's picking the wrong brand of peanut butter at the store, or a choosing a blonde hooker for the bachelor party when your friend prefers redheads.

It's not like someone in this country can escape knowing how dangerous drinking and driving can be. It's not a "mistake" to get in a car after drinking. It's a choice.

I understand the magnitude of the mistake. Would it have been better if I said momentary lapse in judgment that could have serious, potentially life-altering consequences? I'm not trying to act like what he did wasn't a big deal; I'm just saying that calling him an asshole wasn't warranted, necessary, or helpful to his situation with his future school.

[D Brooks]

Always late to the party....

[kalvano]

You do know you could have killed someone? What's your problem. I don't get dirtbags like you. Kill yourself but don't put innocent people in danger.

Making a mistake doesn't necessarily make OP a dirtbag.

You say "mistake" like it's it's picking the wrong brand of peanut butter at the store, or a choosing a blonde hooker for the bachelor party when your friend prefers redheads.

It's not like someone in this country can escape knowing how dangerous drinking and driving can be. It's not a "mistake" to get in a car after drinking. It's a choice.

I understand the magnitude of the mistake. Would it have been better if I said momentary lapse in judgment that could have serious, potentially life-altering consequences? I'm not trying to act like what he did wasn't a big deal; I'm just saying that calling him an asshole wasn't warranted, necessary, or helpful to his situation with his future school.

I think it would have been better if you jumped on the bandwagon and hurled insults at him too.

Then we might have avoided MTal.

[MTal]

Never submit to field sobriety tests if you've had more than a drink or two. No matter what the cops tell you, they're lying. They aren't going to let you go, they aren't your friends. They're collecting evidence. Don't give them any. Go to jail for a night and lose your license for a couple months. No evidence = no case, and a dismissal is better than a conviction.

This is something everyone (especially law students) should know.

As far as above .08 = drunk, that's not necessarily true for everyone. Alcoholics can have a .08 BAC without being affected.

Also, if you go to trial, always demand a jury trial. Juries are generally more lenient on sentencing because a judge will get run out of town by MADD if he gives a "drunk driver" a slap on the wrist, especially if that person is later involved in a fatality accident.

/tmyk

Excellent advice, thank you for that.

[Mike12188]

Actually, I see no problem with wishing Mtal would die the next time he drinks and drives. I mean, if somebody is going to shoot into a room blindfolded, I hope somebody takes them out.

Are you seriously drawing a moral equivalency between that and having a few drinks and driving home?

Also, I feel honored by your expressed wish for me to end my life. I believe that if you're not hated by somebody, then you haven't done anything worthwhile, so thank you for validating this.

Wishing death upon MTal is uncalled for. MTal is someone living in his mother's basement after not making the cut at a TTT law school trying to patent his "unique" ideas. I would never wish him the opportunity of leaving the HELL he calls life.

[seespotrun]

DUI/DWI = Criminal Law

Culpability =/= Negligence

Punishment =/= Punitive or nominal damages

In fact, this is exactly the point you are missing. There's a reason that conduct is criminalized. Most of the time it's because Tort law isn't sufficient.

Edited for: I cant believe you got pwned by lawl skool?!?!??!!!

For that reason, criminal and civil trials can take place for the same set of facts. Damages are calculated by mathematical formulas and actuarial tables for wrongful death. I no longer have my Torts E&E, but Glannon devotes an entire chapter on precisely this subject. You can cry and be all self-righteous about how lives can't be compensated by money, but they in fact are, and on a daily basis to boot.

Please don't misquote me as if I'm spewing your bullshit, tyia. Once again, you are missing the point. Nowhere in my post did I suggest that one set of facts could not support criminal and civil causes of action. However, my point was that a civil wrongful death case against a drunk driver is not sufficient like you are suggesting it is. That's why it is punishable under Criminal law; because the consequences of drunk driving are such that society is not willing to accept someone's paycheck to "pay" for their dead family member.