Senator Reid’s Ramblings  |   Home  |   Wisconsin Loses 12,000 Jobs in Last Year

Drunken Driving Critics

I got a kick out of this story.

Drunken driving critics are taking a page out of presidential campaign playbook - using the town hall format to draw attention to the issue.

Are there any “drunken driving supporters?”

Posted by Owen at 1202 hrs
Culture + Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

1. I like to party a bit.  Well, I don’t really drink I just smoke weed but am often disgusted and pissed off over how many people joke about driving drunk and do it often.  They DO say the law is redicules and claim some freedom bullshit.  Freedom is not a liscence to do something that kills so many innocents. 

     2nd DUI should involve manditory and permanent loss of driving privs.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 14, 2008 at 1356 hrs
   
   
   

2. I’d change the law a lot.  I’d raise the legal limit to somewhere aroun .12, but DRASTICALLY increase the penalties.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 14, 2008 at 1358 hrs
   
   
   

3. While there may not be any “drunken driving supporters” out there… there are certainly a large number of “MADD Critics” who dislike the tactics that they push, and the changes to our legal system and law enforcement measures that they have pushed which have curtailed our judicial and civil rights.

   Posted by Nick on August 14, 2008 at 1434 hrs
   
   
   

4. Ok, I’ll be the first to say it…

   Drunk driving (or being against it) presents everyone with the opportunity to be very self-righteous.

   There is a great deal of hipocrisy and grandstanding about it, but the reality is that most people at some point in their life have probably driven legally drunk.

   I think sometimes people take the opportunity to ‘talk tough’ on drunk driving like some macho aggressive outward demonstration so they don’t look guilty.  For many people “thou dost protest too much” if you ask me, and sometimes I’d REALLY like to have a crystal ball (or a polygraph) to put on some of the loudest mouths when the subject of drunk driving comes up.

   I tend to keep my mouth shut on the issue because I’m honest with myself to know “I’ve done it” 

   I will say this.  The way we’ve approached drunk driving is typical of non-sense government symbolism over substance.  Non-effective and pathetic.

   We lower the drunk driving limit to .08 and call it “tough on drunk driving” woo hoo.  MADD feels great, claims victory, and some state senator who sponsored the bill can stick his chest out and call himself ‘tough on drunk driving’ but all that REALLY happened is you just made the average law-abiding citizen that is going to have a bottle of wine with their wife at dinner begin to wonder and worry about getting pulled over for speeding on the way home and get a DUI for .09.

   The drunk drivers crossing the centerline and smashing into mommies with babies in the car-seat never blow .09.

   You’ve seen them on the news.  .19 .23 .25

   The method of fighting drunk driving by lowering the BAC limit is absolutely pathetic non-sense.

   Sure after 1 drink you are ‘affected’.

   I’ll tell you what.  When I drive to an appointment at 10 am I’m a better driver than I am at 11:30 stone sober when I’m driving home.

   Are we going to start to have reflex tests when we drive?  If your past a certain point of “tiredness” you get a ticket?

   We should begin to penalize the real problem. 

   And yeah, I agree with JIJAWM.  A higher legal BAC, and different levels of punishment for severity.

   You cause an accident and your ‘wasted’ you get the book thrown at you hard core.

   But you get pulled over for speeding and blow a .09, that should be much less severe.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 14, 2008 at 1614 hrs
   
   
   

5. There is a great deal of hipocrisy and grandstanding about it, but the reality is that most people at some point in their life have probably driven legally drunk.

   I think sometimes people take the opportunity to ‘talk tough’ on drunk driving like some macho aggressive outward demonstration so they don’t look guilty.  For many people “thou dost protest too much” if you ask me, and sometimes I’d REALLY like to have a crystal ball (or a polygraph) to put on some of the loudest mouths when the subject of drunk driving comes up.

   I absolutely agree with this.

   Posted by Fuzz on August 14, 2008 at 1618 hrs
   
   
   

6. For the record, I agree too, BUT that wasn’t the point of my post.  I was just commenting on their choice of verbiage.  Even the people of which you speak probably aren’t “drunk driving supporters.” 

   Posted by Owen on August 14, 2008 at 1623 hrs
   
   
   

7. For the record, I agree that the point of your post was that the verbiage sounds stupid, as would:

   1. Anti-murder zealot
   2. Rapists’ rights rival
   3. Election fraud supporter

   

   Posted by Fuzz on August 14, 2008 at 1627 hrs
   
   
   

8. I meant “election fraud opponent.” Doh! :D

   Posted by Fuzz on August 14, 2008 at 1628 hrs
   
   
   

9. You mean y’all don’t have a chapter of Drunks Against Mad Mothers up there?

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 15, 2008 at 0834 hrs
   
   
   

10. The sad part of the story is that our society and laws actually encourage drunk driving.  In many communities the growth pattern dictates that taverns can only be accessed via car.  In many communities their are zoning requirements for minimum number of parking spots at taverns.  Think about the location of Miller Park, it’s pretty hard to access without a car. (yes some bus service but look at those parking lots.  A very startling site is seeing massive bars with large parking lots located just off the freeway.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 17, 2008 at 1549 hrs
    
    
    

11. The sad part of the story is that our society and laws actually encourage drunk driving

    I think thats a stretch.

    Its legal to drink and drive.  Its not legal to be drunk and drive.

    So having parking spots at a bar doesn’t mean people get drunk.  By and large I would believe that most people that go in a bar do not leave drunk.

    A very startling site is seeing massive bars with large parking lots located just off the freeway.

    “massive” bars typically have a large food service operation also.  I don’t see any reason to believe that encourages drunk driving.  I think it encourages people to stop in and have a beer and a burger.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 17, 2008 at 1956 hrs
    
    
    

12. It wasn’t just off the freeway but I remember the Alumni Club out in Schaumburg, IL.  Basically impossible to walk to so what did hundreds of people do a night.  Drive.  But quite clearly if you build in a style that requires driving to access an establishment people will chance it.  Sad but true.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 18, 2008 at 0930 hrs
    
    
    

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.