Posted on 01/30/2006 1:47:10 PM PST by jjm2111
Lets let some real facts show up before we start ascribing innocence or guilt.
There was a time you would find me there around 1 a.m., sober but hungry!
For myself, I've only been arrested once for fighting in a White Castle parking lot. ;-)
Irregardless...I used to use this word a lot until someone shared with me a secret: There is no such word.
If you count up the toll from alcohol, which is a major contributing factor in a huge percentage of fatal vehicle crashes and fatal domestic violence incidents and fatal hunting accidents, etc. etc. etc., it just doesn't pass the cost-benefit analysis.
And how do you feel about cars and guns? Let's ban those. I've studied the statistics, and an extremely high percentage of fatal vehicle crashes involve automobiles. Ditto for fatal hunting accidents and guns. In fact, cars and guns are MUCH more related to car and gun accidents than "alcohol" is.
Again, it's not "alcohol" that causes car accidents where somebody was drunk. It's the abuse of alcohol. Do I have any sympathy for that? Not a drop. But let's not blame an inanimate substance that is actually health-enhancing when treated responsibly.
White Castles=Mordor. Only in the Bronx.
Neither does cotton-candy.
It does if you brush with fluoride toothpaste after each serving!
The trouble is, about 10% of the population is unable to control alcohol drinking once they start, and end up getting drunk on a regular basis even though that may not have been their original intention. And there's really no way of knowing who's one of the 10% until it's too late. That's just too big a rate of ruined lives (often not just their own) to justify, when the best possible payoff is some fun.
I don't agree with your presumption in this post, but I'll agree to let the facts show. However, there was a video and I would bet $$$ that the guy was very drunk and also probably very tired. If he worked the 4-12 and then went clubbing for four more hours, he would have been exhausted.
I hope for his sake that there were some mitigating circumstances.
What about in bed? I've slept with a gun before. It sucks.
hahaha...thanks, I'll remember that.
Got proof? I don't buy it, any more than I buy the liberal argument that the availability of guns turns people into crazed murderers.
I'm NOT saying there isn't a genetic component or predisposition to alcohol addiction, as there does seem to be. However, there are entire societies (such as Jews and Italians) with a very high per-capita rate of consumption of alcoholic beverages and a very low incidence of addiction problems. Much depends on how you view alcohol and on tolerance of abuse. A huge portion of our society (both consuming and non-consuming) views drunkenness as the reason for consuming alcoholic beverages. That's warped. We have an all-or-nothing view of alcohol. Either you're a teetotaller, or you drink to get drunk. Nonsense. That's like insisting that people can only be vegans or gluttons.
That's just too big a rate of ruined lives (often not just their own) to justify, when the best possible payoff is some fun.
By extension, you could say that we should make motorcycles, driving for vacation, and unmarried sex illegal... That's IF you accept your premise regarding "the best possible payoff." I don't.
You need to read up on the medical literature of the past decade or two concerning MODERATE consumption of alcoholic beverages. Those who consume alcoholic beverages IN MODERATION seem to live longer than EITHER abusers OR teetotallers. And the list of reported health benefits of MODERATE alcohol consumption is as long as your arm.
"Irregardless of" is a possible construction but the prefixes negate each other and render the word pretty much nonsense.It could be construed as meaning simply "as to."
"He clearly showed poor judgment, but to blame him for this is simply absurd."
Well, let's see..... if he had been packin' and NOT been intoxicated..... perhaps the outcome would have been different. He might have had more situational awareness and MIGHT have drawn his gun / identified himself as a cop BEFORE he got whupped.
Or.....
The flipside is... had he just been drunk and without his firearm... he most likely would NOT have been shot twice by fellow officers.
It sure seems as if he brought this on himself.
By "very low," I should note that I mean LOWER than cultures that are "prohibitionist" in their outlook.
Yup.
Drunk = beat up.
Sober with gun = not beat up.
Drunk with gun = beat up and shot.
My wife used to (long time ago) think that opening a beer ipso facto made you drunk.
hehehe...good one. Right to the point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.