That’s why we need zero tolerance for drunk drivers!
And Freepers who defend them should get the ZOT!
Does that include me since I’m a defense attorney?
I think blatantly drunk drivers should be charged with attempted murder.
Not to play devil’s advocate, but what should the punishment be for drunk driving (assuming legal licensing, etc.)?
Not for causing a crash, or for causing injury or death, but for driving drunk without harm to anyone?
(I’ll hold my answer for now)
“That’s why we need zero tolerance for drunk drivers!
And Freepers who defend them should get the ZOT!”
Some Libertarians argue that you should be able to drive drunk or high, and only get penalized once you do property damage and/or hurt or kill somebody.
Which is one reason why I am not a Libertarian.
Never let a tragedy go to waste? You seem a bit reactive about this....why don’t you start another alcohol prohibition movement or maybe we should just hang anyone driving while imbibed?
I never cease to be amazed at our tolerance for drunk drivers. I'm convinced it's partly because so many lawmakers do it all the time. Not to mention others in positions of leadership.
Where is the MFM/Leftie Cabal on this? They get all worked up over the deaths from guns but quietly accept the deaths of a thousands every year at the hands of drunk drivers. Usually drivers who have had previous DUI convictions and frequently are driving on suspended licenses, if they have a license at all.
Having personally suffered (along with my wife and 3 kids) from a head-on collision with a DUI and living with the consequences for the rest of my life, the only justice for a DUI offender is to have the same damage done to them as what they caused upon the innocent parties they inflicted pain upon. In my case, the DUI should have had four ribs broken, his faced scarred, his right kneecap shattered. and his right femur shoved through the pelvis shattering it into pieces. and if the DUI kills someone, then they should forfeit their life likewise. No mercy.
I'd be interested to see a link to just one post here where a Freeper condones drunk driving. maybe I frequent different threads from you, but I haven't seen any.
That’s why we need zero tolerance for drunk drivers!
And Freepers who defend them should get the ZOT!
Starting the criminal level at 0.15 matches medical reality. 0.10 and under is as impairing as talking on a cell phone, being elderly and confused, or teen-aged and inexperienced. Deserving of a citation if it causes an accident, but not prison.
Cops waste too much time on easy roadside stings and checkpoints, instead of cruising to observe apparently-impaired drivers (I see them).
Freepers who defend the nanny state should get the ZOT.
The MADD moms have done more to erase freedoms in this country than any other thing or group in the name of safety.
Thanks to them and the cooperation of various individuals (and FReepers), we now have soviet-style roadblocks for everything.
This was reckless driving and vehicular homicide.
We do not need a bunch of Driving While Whatever laws.
I was recently t-boned by a driver who was too short and fat to adequately look for me, operate the steering wheel, brake and accelerator.
Do we need a Driving While Fat law or a Driving While Short law?
After we go through the alphabet of driving while something, we can add characters and make the woman that hit me guilty of DWFSF (that would be driving while female, short and fat).
Where does it end?
>>That’s why we need zero tolerance for drunk drivers!
And Freepers who defend them should get the ZOT!<<
I agree with the sentiment but I think your brush is too broad.
“For children are innocent and love justice, while most of us are wicked and naturally prefer mercy.”
— G.K. Chesterton