Posted on 10/11/2010 7:04:01 AM PDT by KeyLargo
Well I guess there is no reasoning with a nanny-stater who wants the rest of us to forfeit our rights in exchange for a little safety. I guess it’s not enough that we already have a zillion laws on the books. Nanny-staters are always wanting to pass yet more laws, as opposed to enforcing laws already on the books.
The point here is intent. Were the driver sober, yet intended to hit somebody, yeah, vehicular assault. You would criminalize behavior where they may well be no criminal intent whatsoever.
Second, this "dangerous crime" may not cause any property damage or injury to anyone, just the increased possibility of injury or property damage.
It's reasonable to take the "results" into account.
I have no DUIs either.
I’m a non drinker that spends a significant part of my friday and saturday evenings driving around drinking friends so that they get home safely.
I also had to drive a former landlord to and from work after he was busted with a DUI.
How hard is it to ask me to give you a lift? Not hard. But he still drove anyways.
I really don’t like this self righteous argument that enforcing drunk driving laws means that bars would shut down, etc. Horse hockey. Call a cab. Get a friend to drive you home. Seriously. If you’d been drinking and I didn’t know you and I was at a bar with you, I’d insist on driving you home.
No, you initiated an argument that people incarcerated for driving drunk are to be pitied and treated otherwise. I am pointing out the absurdity of that contention. I have already argued against lowering the level, but you introduced a new element that demanded I refute it. Show me a first time offender who had less than a .10 level and I will feel sorry for them. All others got what (or less than what) they deserved.
Coming from the people’s republic of Austin, I’m not surprised.
Of course, if you’re here illegally, driving without insurance or a license, and get in a wreck damaging another car and injuring someone, why that’s all well and good - even if you are drunk, comrade.
Citizens must be controlled. For illegals it’s “sanctuary”.
How bout we all start clamoring for a total abolition of alcoholic beverages in Austin businesses.
Wanna here some people scream bloody murder?
Just push a law banning alcohol sold in any bar or eatery.
Then the local government will see the possibility of their tax revenue from the sale of alcoholic beverages and lic fees dry up.
Then you'll here’m start waffling.
Well said from someone who sees how such draconian laws punish without regard for the background of the offender.
“You might not believe that way if you went to work with me a couple of times. I am a counselor in a prison for substance abusers. These are decent men with a problem, not criminals, and taking their livelihoods generates immense anger and frustration. We don’t punish our murderers, but give draconian penalties for drunk driving.
Our punishments don’t fit the crime. We are filling up prisons with men who have a problem, and are otherwise decent men. Do you really want that?”
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.