Terbolizard was arrested for DUI this weekend??

[tommy7154]

Ok if this is true I don't see how he can be defended...

"It happens."?????? YES it happens and do you want to know what else happens? A child could have been run down by this DRUNK SOB. What if it was yours? Jesus Christ some of you people are unreal.

 

[familydog]

No shit? It has also been shown that thieves that get their hands cut off have a hard time picking their noses.

You, sir, need to move to communist China.

Your arguement is black and white and that is not how a smart person approaches conflict.

Having a beer or two and then driving doesn't necessarily make you a danger. As a matter of fact (since you are the expert) why don't you tell us what the average BAC is for drivers that are arrested for DUI when it involves injury, death, or property destruction? I'll give you a clue...it is NOWHERE near .08. Look it up and show the class what you have learned. If you don't, I will...I'm giving you a chance to not look stupid.

Get past that and I will take you off IGNORE.

Some people sure hate freedom in these forums.

You say its not black and white, yet you're making the same case except on the other side. Freedom completely, or no freedom at all.

All I'm pointing out is that just because one believes in laws for DUI, doesn't make them stupid like some here have suggested.

If he did this 20 years ago, and has a proven record of good judgement since, I reckon I'd vote for the man. If I can't trust someone with the life of me, my family, friends, and the general public while you're on the raod, I'm not trusting you with my country. If that makes my Hitler or whatever like apparently it does to some, I guess I'm Hitler.

 

[MrZach]

No shit? It has also been shown that thieves that get their hands cut off have a hard time picking their noses.

You, sir, need to move to communist China.

Your arguement is black and white and that is not how a smart person approaches conflict.

Having a beer or two and then driving doesn't necessarily make you a danger. As a matter of fact (since you are the expert) why don't you tell us what the average BAC is for drivers that are arrested for DUI when it involves injury, death, or property destruction? I'll give you a clue...it is NOWHERE near .08. Look it up and show the class what you have learned. If you don't, I will...I'm giving you a chance to not look stupid.

Get past that and I will take you off IGNORE.

Some people sure hate freedom in these forums.

I didn't realize we were arguing specific DUI regulations.

I'm pretty sure this argument is about whether or not the same public who finances the roads have the right to regulate them. I'm of the opinion that they are. It isn't about your right to operate your private property - it is about your usage of public roadways paid for by tax payers - who elected the people who set the laws for the conditions to use those roadways.

You can fight a DUI in court and win if you were driving your vehicle on your own private property drunk. It is when you're on the public road that you're under the jurisdiction of the same public that paid for the road. Don't like it? Go vote for someone who will repeal the laws and see if you win.

 

[Forefall]

Maybe he used too much mouthwash?

 

[LandonCook]

I love this! You guys are great... Our guy has a few sips of a beer and gets pulled over and it erupts a huge disscusion about the law itself! Its like watching the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists go at it! Although I think it is silly, I do side with the state on this one. A contract is a contract...

The question is: is Travel by car a right?
Well, freedom of travel is a right, but I think the real question is, Does the loss of a licence pervent the right to travel?

For me, yes... If I was in the city... No.

 

[[email protected]]

ah man.

may i point out that while this sucks, i'd still vote for him. he's still a lot better than the alternative.

+1

 

[FireofLiberty]

Here is a video interview with Ted on local news.......apparently this is true.

Click on video in the upper right corner.

http://cbs13.com/local/candidate.terbolizard.dui.2.651050.html

Wow, I'm actually impressed by how well he's handling it.

 

[pinkmandy]

Yes, its called voluntarily entering into a contractual agreement. Grow up.

As for the accusations of my "loyalty" to the campaign, lol you can put that to rest right now. I quit my job in mid November so I could volunteer for the campaign full-time. I spent my Christmas break canvasing in Iowa and then South Carolina after the Iowa Caucuses. I canvassed 4 precincts in IL by myself with door-to-door making sure to talk to EVERYONE (which means numerous go-arounds), and then made a second round to drop custom designed literature and personally paid for slim jims on all the issues that each person said was important to. I am the owner/operator of KnowBeforeYouVote.com.

Yeah, I'm *totally* a McCain spy. Just because I don't agree with every last nuance of your ideology I *must* be the enemy. Brilliant logic, dumbass...

Um, then why are you such an asshole? You are honestly the only RP supporter I've had the displeasure of discussing a subject with who resorts to calling people idiots, retards, dumbasses? The only people I've talked with who are this ugly, this vile have been with the McCain campaign. If you're not, my bad but you sure as hell talk and act like it here. Kudos to you if you walked the walk elsewhere but HERE you're acting like a freaking jerk. Do you have some personal reason for going after Terb? You certainly have dug yourself in like a bulldog on something that most don't see as a big deal, ready to attack your fellow supporters...respond as you wish but I think it's time I use that ignore feature. Congrats! You're my first ignore!!!

 

[nosebruise]

For me, yes... If I was in the city... No.

that really depends on the city you're talking about.

 

[Eponym_mi]

cellphones?

Applying make up? Receiving fellatio? Eating? Smoking? Reading the newspaper? Watching a DVD? Masturbating? I'm sure someone could come up with a more comprehensive list. The point being that any one of these activities done while driving can be just as deadly to others as drinking. The distraction/impairment isn't a crime...causing damage or injury is the crime.

 

[Liberty_is_NORML]

Per http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics.html "There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 – 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year."
That's a lot of individuals personal liberty being violated.

From the same site:

Nationwide in 2005, alcohol was present in 24 percent of the drivers involved in fatal crashes (BAC .01-.07, 4 percent; BAC .08 or greater, 20 percent).

That means that 76% of all traffic fatalities had NO ALCOLHOL INVOLVED.

Should we make DWD a law, also? (Driving While Dumb)

 

[FreeTraveler]

Did you sign your driver's license? Then you signed an agreement to follow the state's laws on drinking and driving. Grow up.

I signed my license under duress. I am a free man and should have the right to travel as I see fit. Driver licensing is a violation of my right to liberty.

 

[MrZach]

By the way Mr ZACH you just said the roads are not our property they belong to the state where the taxpayers paid for them


Last time I checked I wasn't being charged for tax evasion so if my logic serves me correctly I own the roads in my state or at least a portion of the roads in my state

Exactly, therefore that gets you 1 vote on how those roads are to be regulated. Just because you don't like the final decision of the majority doesn't mean you aren't susceptible to the consequences. By your logic, I can vandalize the local park because I "own a percentage of it."

I'm actually very much in favor of *private* ownership of parks, roads, etc. No taxes on this crap, and you just pay to use them. You also agree to follow the rules of whatever entity that owns them sets.

That is basically what is happening here, except it is on a larger scale, and it is involuntary. You can't argue with the fact that the same entity that pays for property and lets you use it has the right to regulate how you use it. Period.

 

[MrZach]

I signed my license under duress. I am a free man and should have the right to travel as I see fit. Driver licensing is a violation of my right to liberty.

Your license isn't for the privileged to operate your MV - it is for the privlidge to operate it on public roadways. You were under duress to obtain your license, really? Yeah right, lol... Well, I guess if that is true, then your license should be invalidated - along with your privilege to use public roads.

Read my statements on using public roadways (where these regulations actually apply).

 

[MrZach]

Applying make up? Receiving fellatio? Eating? Smoking? Reading the newspaper? Watching a DVD? Masturbating? I'm sure someone could come up with a more comprehensive list. The point being that any one of these activities done while driving can be just as deadly to others as drinking. The distraction/impairment isn't a crime...causing damage or injury is the crime.

Actually you can be ticketed for doing all of these things if you demonstrated that you were driving recklessly.

The crime isn't endangering someone's life. The crime is using a publicly financed roadway and not abiding by the regulations enacted by the same organization that financed the roadway.

 

[MrZach]

Um, then why are you such an asshole? You are honestly the only RP supporter I've had the displeasure of discussing a subject with who resorts to calling people idiots, retards, dumbasses? The only people I've talked with who are this ugly, this vile have been with the McCain campaign. If you're not, my bad but you sure as hell talk and act like it here. Kudos to you if you walked the walk elsewhere but HERE you're acting like a freaking jerk. Do you have some personal reason for going after Terb? You certainly have dug yourself in like a bulldog on something that most don't see as a big deal, ready to attack your fellow supporters...respond as you wish but I think it's time I use that ignore feature. Congrats! You're my first ignore!!!

Because I've had dozens of friends killed and injured by drunk driver's in my lifetime. Call me unlucky, but I get pretty emotional about the subject.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

You folks who are worried about this need to loosen your chastity belts. So the guy made a mistake. Id vote for the biggest screw up in the world so long as he votes to reduce the size of government at every opportunity. Remember, we want these guys to do NOTHING for the most part...

 

[MrZach]

Um, then why are you such an asshole? You are honestly the only RP supporter I've had the displeasure of discussing a subject with who resorts to calling people idiots, retards, dumbasses? The only people I've talked with who are this ugly, this vile have been with the McCain campaign. If you're not, my bad but you sure as hell talk and act like it here. Kudos to you if you walked the walk elsewhere but HERE you're acting like a freaking jerk. Do you have some personal reason for going after Terb? You certainly have dug yourself in like a bulldog on something that most don't see as a big deal, ready to attack your fellow supporters...respond as you wish but I think it's time I use that ignore feature. Congrats! You're my first ignore!!!

Plus, I'm *TOTALLY* not going after Terbolizard. In fact, if you read my earliest posts, I was defending him saying that the wet & reckless laws in CA are totally retarded and that was possibly what he was arrested for - and that he hasn't even been convicted so people should back off.

I'm going after people who think that DUI laws are "unconstitutional" - because they don't seem to understand that if any organization finances something they have every right to regulate its usage - roadways not excluded.

 

[JMann]

The roads regulated by the people? I guess you mean the insurance companies and the trial attorneys that make hundreds of millions of dollars based entirely on the "MADD women laws".

I for one would never defend anyone driving drunk. The problem is the current DWI laws and drunk driving check points are not designed for only ticketing/punishing drunk people but rather to regulate people. In my state I remember the arguments in the early/mid 80's when the laws where being updated the question was do you go after everyone with .08 or pass a graduated more severe system and leave the BAC at .10. Even though the evidence showed it is more safe to spend time and effort going after people that where actually drunk rather than setting a very low bar.

These law are very punitive to the young and poor and make it difficult for them to get out of the system once they have been printed and hauled to jail. They have community service, fines and loss of driving rights or privileges. Many times jobs are loss and even careers destroyed over a first 'minor' offense.

Once again, if someone is drunk and a danger on the road make the punishment severe but these MADD women laws that classify everyone as drunk at .08 are insane and very punitive especially to the non-wealthy class.

 

[nosebruise]

you can also be charged with a DUI without demonstration that you were driving recklessly.