Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: grundle

“Real” men will say we don’t need no steenkin drunk driving laws. sarc/


3 posted on 11/16/2012 10:25:40 AM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: chessplayer

You don’t really need a subsection of laws that deal specifically with drunk driving.

You just charge them under existing laws, starting with attempted murder if they are caught driving drunk. If they hit somebody, it’s attempted murder, plus whatever else you can rack up, related with careless driving.


4 posted on 11/16/2012 10:30:29 AM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: chessplayer

Here in IL the DUI system is an utter joke. It’s designed to do nothing more than put money into the hands of lawyers and the coffers of the State.


6 posted on 11/16/2012 10:42:37 AM PST by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: chessplayer

I agree. No laws. Just a bullet to the back of the head.


10 posted on 11/16/2012 10:55:36 AM PST by Morris70
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: chessplayer
“Real” men will say we don’t need no steenkin drunk driving laws.

But we already do have drunk driving laws. This case would seem to show that they don't seem to solve the problem.

18 posted on 11/16/2012 12:21:30 PM PST by krb (Obama is a miserable failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson