Posted on 09/18/2007 9:39:52 AM PDT by Philistone
I'm sorry that your child was killed by a drunk driver, but that doesn't give you the right to pull my car over at random and search me or it.
I'm sorry that your father died of lung cancer at the age of 60, but that doesn't give you the right to tell me I can't smoke in my own house or car.
I'm sorry that your best friend died of a heart-attack after eating nothing but Big Macs all his life, but that doesn't give you the right to tell me that I can't eat fats if I want to.
I'm sorry that you were raised to be squeamish at the sight of blood, but that does not give you the right to force me to eat only vegetables or wear only plant fibers.
I'm sorry that you can't afford health insurance, but that does not give you the right to force me to provide it for you.
I'm sorry that over 150 years ago people with the same color skin as me enslaved people with the same color skin as you, but that doesn't give you the right take the hard-earned efforts of my labor for yourself.
I'm sorry that your homeland is corrupt and your culture has no work ethic, but that doesn't give you the right to come here illegally and burden our schools and emergency rooms with your presence.
I'm sorry that your parents chose to come here illegally, but that doesn't give you the right to force me to fund your college education.
I'm sorry that you find it fashionable to ride your bike to work, but that doesn't give you the right to take away my car.
I'm sorry that your lack of intelligence and attention through high school and college left you fit only for a job as a public school teacher, but that doesn't give you the right to inflict your anger and ideology on my child.
I'm sorry that you are mentally and physically unfit to serve in our nation's Armed Forces, but that does not give you the right to disparage those who are fit and do serve.
I'm sorry that your parents and teachers continually told you that you are unique and special, but you are not.
I'm sorry that the jocks stuffed you in your locker in high school, but that doesn't give you the right to equate my President with Hitler.
I'm sorry that you failed Trigonometry, but that doesn't give you the right to equate Sociology with Engineering
I'm sorry that you are not as attractive as other women, but that does not give you the right to impose your feminist idiocracy on me, my company or my family.
I'm sorry that your nervous system is so exquisitely sensitive that you can be hurt by minute variations in air pressure caused by sound waves, but that doesn't give you the right to determine what I can and can not say.
I'm sorry that your enormous ego coupled with a complete lack of self-esteem, lack of any sense of self-worth and ignorance about how the real world works has led you to becoming a Liberal, but... Well, no buts. I'm not really sorry.
Remember: Anyone who tells you "it's for the children" believes that YOU are a child.
‘Do you believe that random searches of homes or persons are ok?’
Only if they are found moving down a highway at 60 mph.
(chuckle)
‘Uh, 1 guy’s accident shows us there was rampant drunken “partying” going on before the ‘60s?’
(chuckle)
Reread the post a bit slower, my friend. I was citing the drunk drivers age, between 20 and 30’ish.
Again, reread the post. I could have worded it better.
The drunk driver that killed 27 was between 20 and 30.
It wasn’t between ‘1920 and 1930’.
Sorry, should have been crystal clear....hey, maybe I’m posting drunk!
lol
Well, that’s good, at least. I’ve been attacked sometimes for, God forbid, taking the side of “reason” or just pointing out the facts. Meaning, I wasn’t supporting the Marxist view, but pointing out some libertarian argument was bogus. Sometimes both sides use straw men (sometimes deliberately to look smart; others just being plain stupid and illogical, which doesn’t help the cause).
But like Dems, I would be wary of what you support.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
It is dang clear that the Constitution does not grant or list rights and that there are rights not mentioned that are retained by the people.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
It is dang clear that the Constitution does not grant or list rights and that there are rights not mentioned that are retained by the people.
Oh, OK. Oops.
But can you explain how this shows that partying wasn’t increasing in the ‘60s on and might be a cause of more drunks driving? I’m getting confused!
I think it’s clear as day.
Besides, as I mentioned, if the Founders were foolish enough to enumerate every right, the document would be HUGE. Huge as the current IRS rules.
Never mind they weren’t dumb enough to enumerate things that might go out of date, and be replaced by things they had no clue about.
But like Dems, I would be wary of what you support.
That comes from making assumptions based on one issue only. Its pretty clear to me we agree on far more than we disagree.
Anyway, we’ll see.
Can you repeat the post one more time?
(just kidding)
I don’t think that citing this is going to help you at a dui checkpoint, do you?
Oh, OK. Oops.
But can you explain how this shows that partying wasn’t increasing in the ‘60s on and might be a cause of more drunks driving? I’m getting confused!
You aren’t drinking and posting, are you?
How many fingers am I holding up!
Answer, damnit!
(chuckle)
Wrong, and we've been over this before.
Your wish....
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
*******************************************************
Check points and random stops aren’t the same.
I might not like it, but check points for license, insurance, and registration are valid stops. Even stopping every 4th vehicle isn’t random.
DUI stops, just because, are BS.
And the 9th and 10th don’t have anything to do with that, but they certainly show your error on stating that rights were spelled out in detail.
This is factually incorrect and cannot be proven by any means.
‘We’ haven’t. And if that was true (muckraker) tell the forum why there will be DUI checkpoints come Friday night in your town?
Hmmmmm?
Be sure to cite that during a dui stop, if you get into one. And ping me with the response the ST’s or county boys and girls give you....
There was some thought to enumerating rights but they realized that they couldn’t possibly do that.
Then there was concern about enumerating only some rights because they thought that government would close in and restrict everything else.
Boy, were they right! Today a right isn’t even a right and what’s worse is that there are those among the people who are ready and willing to give away what few rights they have left!
Worse that that is when these yo-yos want to give away my rights!!
Okay, prove its ‘factually incorrect’.
I’ll wait.
I must most humbly disagree. The assumption there is that American citizens are criminals unless proven otherwise.
Should cops have the right to enter every fourth house to make sure it has insurance? Smoke detectors (after all, they save lives!)? The plumbing is adequate? The children are in school?
There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 – 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), “A motor vehicle crash is considered to be alcohol-related if at least one driver or non-occupant (such as a pedestrian or pedalcyclist) involved in the crash is determined to have had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .01 gram per deciliter (g/dL) or higher. Thus, any fatality that occurs in an alcohol-related crash is considered an alcohol-related fatality. The term ‘alcohol-related’ does not indicate that a crash or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol.”
Note the last paragraph, and in particular, the last sentence. This would seem to make the statistics below a little misleading since we tend to think that alcohol-related crashes are caused by drunk drivers. But if a sober driver kills an alcohol-impaired pedestrian, it’s still considered an alcohol-related crash. Does this invalidate the drunk driving statistics below? No. The statistics reveal that most fatal alcohol-related crashes do indeed involve drunk drivers and far fewer of these fatalities involve intoxicated pedestrians or “bicyclists and other cyclists”.
Nationwide in 2005, alcohol was present in 24 percent of the drivers involved in fatal crashes (BAC .01-.07, 4 percent; BAC .08 or greater, 20 percent).
The 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 (39% of total traffic fatalities for the year) represent a 5-percent reduction from the 17,732 alcohol related fatalities reported in 1995 (42% of the total).
The 16,885 fatalities in alcohol-related crashes during 2005 represent an average
of one alcohol-related fatality every 31 minutes.
Of the 16,885 people who died in alcohol-related crashes in 2005, 14,539 (86%) were killed in crashes where at least one driver or nonoccupant had a BAC of .08 or higher.
The drunk driving statistics show that raffic fatalities in alcohol-related crashes fell by 0.2 percent, from 16,919 in 2004 to 16,885 in 2005. [Note that this figure for 2004 is higher than what we’ve shown for 2004 (16,694 deaths) because our data came from preliminary reports. The final government report counted more drunk driving deaths.]
NHTSA estimates that alcohol was involved in 39 percent of fatal crashes and in
7 percent of all crashes in 2005. The national rate of alcohol-related fatalities in
motor vehicle crashes in 2005 was 0.57 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled.
An estimated 254,000 persons were injured in crashes where police reported that alcohol was present — an average of one person injured approximately every 2 minutes.
In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program
estimated that over 1.4 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. This is an arrest rate of 1 for every 139 licensed
drivers in the United States. (2005 data not yet available.)
In 2005, 21 percent of the children age 14 and younger who were killed in motor
vehicle crashes were killed in alcohol-related crashes.
In 2005, a total of 414 (21%) of the fatalities among children age 14 and younger
occurred in crashes involving alcohol. Of those 414 fatalities, more than half (224)
of those killed were passengers in vehicles with drivers with BAC levels of .01 or higher.
Another 48 children age 14 and younger who were killed in traffic crashes in 2005
were pedestrians or pedalcyclists who were struck by drivers with BAC .01 or higher.
The rate of alcohol involvement in fatal crashes is more than 3 times higher
at night as during the day. For all crashes, the alcohol involvement rate is 5 times higher at night.
The highest percentage of drivers in fatal crashes who had BAC levels of .08 or
higher was for drivers ages 21 to 24 followed by the 25 to 34 age group.
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.