Posted on 08/07/2007 4:59:35 PM PDT by rellimpank
"Pre-emptive war" got us into a real mess in Iraq. So maybe we ought to think twice before adopting similar measures when it comes to traffic law. Specifically, when it comes to an idea floated by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) to require that all new cars be fitted with an ignition interlock that can detect alcohol in the driver's system -- and shut the car down if it does.
Several large automakers (including GM, Ford, Toyota and Honda) also support the idea -- and are working on ways to get these things into new cars, maybe within the next two or three years, if not sooner.
Sounds OK in principle -- sort of like the idea of liberating Iraq. The devil's in the details, though.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Lying mindreading about a fellow FREEPER’S perspectives and convinctions, beliefs . . .
is assaultive.
And thereby, imho, against forum rules.
In any case, it’s exceedingly offensive.
Perhaps that was your intention.
We only know what you have told us.
You have told us that you are a statist, bordering on a fascist.
I’ve
NOT told you ANY SUCH THING.
Nor have I hinted at such nor implied such.
You have ASSUMED, EXTRAPOLATED AND PONTIFICATED OUT OF YOUR OWN HARSH, HOSTILE biases.
You have, evidently, been so . . . pricked in your sensibilities about my positions that you have had to try and squeeze me into your preconceived notions.
You have also evidently not read all my posts on this thread.
Figures. Tends to go with the territory.
In the interest of Personal Responsibility, perhaps you should press the "Abuse" button if you're so inclined, imho.
In any case, it’s exceedingly offensive.
Entirely subjective. I feel the same about you, but I'm not appealing to authority to fix it.
Perhaps that was your intention.
Perhaps it was yours.
Here's the thing: I don't like you, and you don't like me.
This is how life works. Not perfect, but there you are.
You can't spend your whole life running to teacher when things don't work out your way.
Most people get defensive when their philosophy won’t stand up to objective scruting or criticism.
"scruting" = "scrutiny"
I think I’ve done that twice in . . . however many years FR has been going.
I prefer to tell folks directly what I think of their posts with respect to the rules of the forum.
I don’t like . . . your attitude.
I don’t know all that much about your person, personhood. I suspect you have many redeeming social qualities.
Most FREEPERS do . . . though some hide them better than others.
I don’t mind getting energized over alcohol problems.
They cause a LOT of suffering to a LOT of innocent children and no few spouses.
Rationalize till the cows come home. Those in the know with a shred of fair-mindedness understand.
As I’ve posted numerous times on FR, the late Dr Walter Martin (KINGDOM OF THE CULTS etc) has dealt with that issue rather well.
I don’t care to bother with it ATT.
Perhaps you can find someone else to . . . tilt at windmills with.
Later
First of all, define 'drunk'. You cant do it for me,cause you dont know me, so Im sure youll retreat to the 'legal' definition.
Now about endangering lives, severely impaired drivers are dangerous. There are also a bagillion other dangers while driving. that so called 40% fatalities are alcohol related , if even statistically true,is skewed by the mere presence of BAC or the cops 'smelling' alcohol.
Now to 'no criminal consequences'-I'll simply refer you back to youre definition of 'drunk'. sounds criminal now. which brings us back to 'safe to drive' in which we are all deadly EVERY time we get behind the wheel. Some more than others but inevitably we are all one blink of the eye from producing or becoming roadkill. ..
I sure hope theres a special place in Hell for ambulance chasers...
I sure hope theres a special place in Hell for ambulance chasers...
Been there, done that. BTW I pulled off the road to sleep for a while, because I WAS drunk. Woke me up to go to jail. IOW punished me for realizing my condition and choosing safety, I Didnt ever make that mistake again...
Two stories, first I have made it through a checkpoint, but fortunately I had just gotten off work and only had two beers [really !!!] thought it was an accident scene and almost pulled a U turn to go the other way. But yes I was treated like a hardened POS criminal before sent on my way 20 min later.
last checkpoint cop repeatedly [4-5 times] asked if I was drinking. I hadnt been, but knew the routine of proving it. He and I had that awkward stare going until he remembered that a few years earlier we had worked for the same company, "have a nice night" and away I drove.
BTW, nobody can define 'drunk' for anyone but themselves except in the 'legal' revenue generating sense...
I truly hope you piss poor attitude never reaches a treatment center. You may be booksmart, but in the reality of addiction, or of fundamental liberty you dont have a clue...
From your HATEFUL rantings about 'drunks', Id say you really dont have a clue to God's 'assessment'. Love the sinner, hate the sin works for individuals, but tyranny is immoral and unforgivable...
He aint no 12 stepper. he’s clueless about real alcoholism cause he aint one, just a do gooder that needs a cause...
Folks that can’t drink and drive are spoiling it for those of us who can.
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.