I said, “You’ve summarized the Alynski message pretty well.”
You replied, “You can beat on me all you want. If you’re too immature to understand raw politics,”
You clearly misunderstand. My comment to you was in agreement to your position. I was simply stating that it is a specific approach that is prevelant in our society.
In all aspects of society, and at all levels of government, we are governing to the lowest extremes. Rather than prosecute these extremes that you mention, we are treating everyone as if they are those extremes. It is a wonderful tool to advance government control over private citizens.
In this particular issue, we are using those extreme cases to “crack down” on all driving with ANY alcohol use, especially without any person or property damage. People scream in support, using the cases you list as the reasons. Yet, I’d wager that the percentage of DUI arrests involving personal or property damage is rather small. I’ve seen stats ranging from 10-20%, however I’m not able to source that very quickly, so I’d defer to somewhat higher numbers. That said, it is certainly less than half of the arrests.
What have been the direct results? We have traffic roadblocks to randomly search all citizens. We have DUI arrests being made in cases not involving motor vehicles (rid a horse drunk, get arrested for DUI!) We have DUI arrests being made while persons are in vehicles but not driving, don’t chose to sleep it off in the bar parking lot with your engine running. We have DUI arrests being made while people are drinking and mowing their own lawns. We have DUI arrests being made while people are sitting in their cars, in their own driveways and listening to music. I could go on and on and on and on.
In addition, we have the unintended consequence of changing the general public’s attitude towards driving. The singular focus on DUI has made folks apathetic to driving. We now see a lot of dangerous driving that are resulting in deaths, but are not prosecuted accordingly. So, as long as you are not drinking, if you kill someone no biggie.
Let’s summarize, the use of those extreme cases has led to less liberty and more dangerous roadways. Alynski would be proud!
Apologies...I was so sure you were in the group that says “since he didn’t (yet) kill anyone, why punish him and deprive him of his liberties”. Obviously there’s a limit to that, such as the case where you shoot at a guy, and miss.