The most politically incorrect thread of all time.

[PredFan]

Actually, that kind of makes sense in a twisted way.

Jesus will take care of you, regardless of your own foolish decisions.

Advocating drunk driving = advocating reckless disregard for the well being of others.
Advocating torture = advocating reckless disregard for the well being of others.

It kind of makes sense, so long as you ignore the philosophy that Christ actually preached, as recorded in the New Testament, which, of course, is totally opposed to advocating reckless disregard for the well being of others, and does not include god intervening to save a fool from his foolishness.

I never claimed to be a good Christian, I'm simply Christian by birth.

 

[PredFan]

I could be that it is not blind luck. Some people just don’t get effected by alcohol that much and can maintain motor skills while others like myself cant handle even just a beer.

I don’t guess there are too many people out there who can maintain motor function after drinking but there are some and this guy is one of them.

I think that’s all he is saying, that and cops shouldn’t set up traps for drivers to see if they are drunk. If the car is swaying exc. then that’s reason enough to pull them over but to make up stupid lies like your tail light is out when its not or just camping outside bars and following people then making up stupid reasons to pull them over is wrong.

The police should be in business to keep us safe not make money off tickets.

Someone gets it.

 

[top gun]

No, grow up.

How bout not worrying about me "growing up".

You're not out driving around drunk because you've convinced yourself you were blessed with super human abilities to fend off the effects of alcohol... around me.

It's all the kids out driving the roads with you down in Orlando I want to see get to "grow up".

And just for the record... NO... it doesn't mean anything that you haven't been arrested for drunk driving or killed someone yet.

It only takes once...

 

[top gun]

Wow! How can I ever respond to such eloquent and well thought out statements?

You can't.

Starting this thread was like starting one that said...

Russian Roulette should be legal.

I've played Russian Roulette hundreds of times and I've never blown my head off. Even others in my family have this mystical ability to just know when the bullet is not in the chamber... though we don't talk about it much because we all see the "politically incorrectness" of it.

Come on I'm not busting your balls because I'm against drinking. And I personally think the baseline limit they've set is a little low. But if you test over a .1 you are guaranteed not AS SHARP behind the wheel as if you hadn't had a drink. You may "think" you are... but you are not.

I'm just saying error on the side caution and understand there are other people at stake.

 

[top gun]

Top Gun was right on target for once.

Driving under the influence is monumentally stupid and dangerous, and, if you haven't hurt anyone yet, it is blind luck.

FOR ONCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PLC1 when you cut me do I not bleed???

 

[PLC1]

I could be that it is not blind luck. Some people just don’t get effected by alcohol that much and can maintain motor skills while others like myself cant handle even just a beer.

I don’t guess there are too many people out there who can maintain motor function after drinking but there are some and this guy is one of them.

I think that’s all he is saying, that and cops shouldn’t set up traps for drivers to see if they are drunk. If the car is swaying exc. then that’s reason enough to pull them over but to make up stupid lies like your tail light is out when its not or just camping outside bars and following people then making up stupid reasons to pull them over is wrong.

The police should be in business to keep us safe not make money off tickets.

There are alcoholics who are able to drink a lot of booze and still appear to be sober, yes. It is a matter of developing a tolerance for alcohol.

 

[PLC1]

I never claimed to be a good Christian, I'm simply Christian by birth.

No one a Christian by birth. Either you believe in Jesus as savior, or you don't. If you do, then it follows that you are willing to follow his teachings. Of course, there are some who doubt the Christ as messiah story, and still understand that following the philosophy that Christ preached is worthwhile. I'd call them Christian, too, but not everyone would.

It is not possible to believe in torture, and still accept the teachings of Jesus Christ. Those two are diametric opposites.

 

[PLC1]

You can't.

Starting this thread was like starting one that said...

Russian Roulette should be legal.

I've played Russian Roulette hundreds of times and I've never blown my head off. Even others in my family have this mystical ability to just know when the bullet is not in the chamber... though we don't talk about it much because we all see the "politically incorrectness" of it.

Come on I'm not busting your balls because I'm against drinking. And I personally think the baseline limit they've set is a little low. But if you test over a .1 you are guaranteed not AS SHARP behind the wheel as if you hadn't had a drink. You may "think" you are... but you are not.

I'm just saying error on the side caution and understand there are other people at stake.

You're right again!

I'm beginning to think I shouldn't have added the "for once."

Now, it's at least for twice.

 

[Pandora]

There are alcoholics who are able to drink a lot of booze and still appear to be sober, yes. It is a matter of developing a tolerance for alcohol.

I agree with you there are some who develop a tolerance, and there are some like me who dont. But there are some ( probably a real small group) who just naturally have a tolerance.

That is only part of the thread starters topic. The only part anyone seems to be focusing on.

What about setting traps for people and making up stories as to why you are pulling them over. Broken tail light exc. Just to see if you can smell alcohol on them?

What do you think of that part of the thread? I think that police should pull you over if you are doing something wrong, not because they saw you pull out of a bar or because your driving at an odd time of night.

 

[PLC1]

I agree with you there are some who develop a tolerance, and there are some like me who dont. But there are some ( probably a real small group) who just naturally have a tolerance.

That is only part of the thread starters topic. The only part anyone seems to be focusing on.

What about setting traps for people and making up stories as to why you are pulling them over. Broken tail light exc. Just to see if you can smell alcohol on them?

What do you think of that part of the thread? I think that police should pull you over if you are doing something wrong, not because they saw you pull out of a bar or because your driving at an odd time of night.

Now, you have a good point. Does stopping someone because they might have been drinking constitute an unreasonable search? How about setting up roadblocks and checking anyone who happens by?

While I agree with the goal of getting the drunks off of the road, that seems to me to be on pretty shaky grounds from a Constitutional standpoint.

 

[Pandora]

Now, you have a good point. Does stopping someone because they might have been drinking constitute an unreasonable search? How about setting up roadblocks and checking anyone who happens by?

While I agree with the goal of getting the drunks off of the road, that seems to me to be on pretty shaky grounds from a Constitutional standpoint.

Road blocks to stop everyone seems horrible to me unless there is a major outbreak of some virus or something big.

We have the right to go from point A to B without being checked, at least we should.

If you see someone driving wrong, not using signals exc, then pull them over but just stopping everyone is wrong and making up reasons to stop them is wrong.

I would have thought you would agree with me on that one.

love your new avatar by the way, Im so glad to see lou dobbs gone

 

[top gun]

I agree with you there are some who develop a tolerance, and there are some like me who dont. But there are some ( probably a real small group) who just naturally have a tolerance.

That is only part of the thread starters topic. The only part anyone seems to be focusing on.

What about setting traps for people and making up stories as to why you are pulling them over. Broken tail light exc. Just to see if you can smell alcohol on them?

What do you think of that part of the thread? I think that police should pull you over if you are doing something wrong, not because they saw you pull out of a bar or because your driving at an odd time of night.

I think everyone would be in agreement with you that staking out bars or pulling people over for bogus reasons is not proper. This does go on and if there's anyway to stop it it should be stopped.

As far as the drunk driving check points (which I too see as an infringement on people doing nothing wrong to possibly catch some who are) the way they get around that is they do it in a totally random way. They'll either do a certain number of cars and then let a certain number through without checking... or they'll check say every 3rd or 4th car or something like that.

It appears that allows these stops to "legally" pass muster.

 

[Pandora]

I think everyone would be in agreement with you that staking out bars or pulling people over for bogus reasons is not proper. This does go on and if there's anyway to stop it it should be stopped.

As far as the drunk driving check points (which I too see as an infringement on people doing nothing wrong to possibly catch some who are) the way they get around that is they do it in a totally random way. They'll either do a certain number of cars and then let a certain number through without checking... or they'll check say every 3rd or 4th car or something like that.

They should not do any of that, they should only pull people over who have broken the law.

and they should not sit around waiting either, they should drive around looking for people not camp out in front of a bar

 

[PredFan]

You can't.

Starting this thread was like starting one that said...

Russian Roulette should be legal.

I've played Russian Roulette hundreds of times and I've never blown my head off. Even others in my family have this mystical ability to just know when the bullet is not in the chamber... though we don't talk about it much because we all see the "politically incorrectness" of it.

Come on I'm not busting your balls because I'm against drinking. And I personally think the baseline limit they've set is a little low. But if you test over a .1 you are guaranteed not AS SHARP behind the wheel as if you hadn't had a drink. You may "think" you are... but you are not.

I'm just saying error on the side caution and understand there are other people at stake.

Now see! You can make your point without acting childish.

I disagree with you on the Sharpness factor simply because I'm more cautious at the wheel when I've been drinking. When I'm completely sober, my mind is probably wandering all over the place. Things that happened at work, things I need to be doing, what the rest of the week looks like. When I know that one stop for one even minor violation could mean that I get arrested for DUI, that keeps my mind on what I'm doing. I drive defensively and keep my eyes open.

Perhaps my reflexes are slowed a bit, but I compensate with defensive driving. I don't allow myself to get into situations that require quick reflexes.

 

[PredFan]

There are alcoholics who are able to drink a lot of booze and still appear to be sober, yes. It is a matter of developing a tolerance for alcohol.

That's only a small part of it, but that is true.