Terbolizard was arrested for DUI this weekend??

[nosebruise]

Maybe when sleepy driving causes enough accidents in some state, people will get fed up and do something about it. What can one reasonably do? You can't really prove one way or another if someone has had enough sleep. It is very easy to measure someone's BAC.

Here's something to think about: When I was in the Air Force, when you take leave and go on a long trip and are under the age of 26, you must submit a travel plan that details how you're getting from point A to point B. If you are driving, there are strict regulations on how many miles/hours you can drive in one day. You are required to show that you are making stops every few hours for at least 15 minutes to rest, and you must allot for at least 8 hours of good sleep. You cannot even switch off drivers and use the "they slept in the car" excuse because there is good evidence that sleeping in the care doesn't give you the "good night's sleep" necessary to really be fully awake and alert.

Anyway, if you are in an accident and injured or killed - your health benefits and or your life insurance benefits will be null and void if there is reasonable evidence that you did not follow your pre-approved plan. Weren't wearing a seatbelt? No benefits. Didn't get a full night's rest and it can actually be proven? No benefits. Anything else can be proven that you did that could have been preventable and caused an accident? No benefits.

Additionally, if you're off your plan, you are subject to further punishment from your commander who signed the approval of your plan. Keep in mind, this is only for people under the age of 26 (don't ask me why - everything they do in the AF is purely statistics driven).

Do I think this is way crazy unreasonable? Yeah... perhaps. Then again, I don't HAVE to drive everywhere, and it isn't too hard for me to follow a plan if I do submit one or to follow... Plus, I don't have to stay in the Air Force (which I didn't) so I do have a choice in the matter... Once you accept the fact that you DO have options and choices - you kinda have to take responsibility for the choices you make... no matter how unreasonable the consequences.

I'm not arguing for making everything as strict as it was in the Air Force... I'm just trying to illustrate the fact that as long as you have choices and recourse - you really don't have a lot of room to complain...

-testing for sleep is ridiculous no matter how you swing it. the problem is NOT how much someone has slept, the problem is reckless driving. people handle sleep differently.

-AF rules example has absolutely no bearing whatsoever. when you are in active duty you are not free, and you have signed away your liberties to serve your country for a certain amount of time. this has absolutely no bearing on citizens, and if it did we would be a police state straight and simple.

-don't see your point about the insurance stuff. you're telling me if people are proven negligent then they dont get benefits. so what? i'm saying people should be charged with crimes if the commit one while being negligent. my problem isnt with charging people for driving irresponsibly or commiting crimes irresponsibly. it's with stringent laws which take away liberty and can be abused for the promise of "safety."

-yes it is completely and utterly unreasonable. chicago also has a great public transportation system, too. try living in Dallas and relying on getting around via public transportation.

ain't gonna happen.

-i'm saying you have choices as well, i'm saying if you make the wrong one and are negligent and driving eratically or hurt someone you should be completely charged with your infractions. my problem is the current laws that blanket things and are easily abused, and put people who may not pose as much a danger as you have been lead to believe, like the drug war.

 

[angelatc]

Um... in case you didn't notice, I live in Chicago too, buddy... Or are you having trouble reading the top right corner of every post I make?

Seriously, why am I arguing with someone who even the most obvious of observable facts escape his attention?

Your argument that since you pay some for the roads that you have the right to do whatever you want with them makes no sense whatsoever. I pay for the roads too - in fact the exact same ones you are paying for, so I guess my vote cancels out yours! You paying a tiny portion for the roads gives you a say, that's all. Not the final word. Deal with it.

Well. Mr King Of Observation...my name is ANGELA.

I am saying that because I have to pay for the roads I should have a right to use them. That's freedom. You're not advocating freedom by insisting that driving is a privelege. You're advocating statism.

Are you a Northwestern student per chance? They're the most ill-informed lot of social liberals in the midwest.

ANd now we learn that you don't drive because apparently trouble just follows you around. ALl those dead kids in high school, and vans out to get you...no wonder freedom frightens you.

Here I am, driving for 30 years or so...no accidents, no tickets, and no pile of big dead friends either. Just because you feel the need to insist on protection doesn't mean that I need it.

 

[angelatc]

The same public that finances the construction of roads has the right to regulate their usage.

As for your accusation that I didn't have 16 friends die while I was in high school, well that is just plain pointless to argue with. What am I going to do? Bring up all the obits? Basically you're calling me a liar based on... statistics - which you haven't even provided... so basically you're really just interested in calling me a liar because you don't want to believe me. Well, call me tragically unlucky, but it is true.

What I can't believe is that you have the disrespect to argue over whether or not someone died. That is pretty sick...

Oh, and actually none of my friends who died went to my high school - only the one girl who was put in a coma. Wow, I actually had friends who didn't go to my hight school! Wow... imagine that! Guess you didn't think of that, didja? lol

Of course I did. I had friends that went to the county school, Catholic school, and one of several other high schools. It's very statistically improbable that a single teenager knows 16 people who died in car crashes.

I'm pretty much not convinced that it's true. The odds of teenagers dying is pretty high. The odds of you knowing 16 of them is even higher. I suppose there could have been a party bus crash, but I gathered you were talking about an incredible amount of different accidents, and you're right. I don't believe you.

 

[MrZach]

-testing for sleep is ridiculous no matter how you swing it. the problem is NOT how much someone has slept, the problem is reckless driving. people handle sleep differently.

-AF rules example has absolutely no bearing whatsoever. when you are in active duty you are not free, and you have signed away your liberties to serve your country for a certain amount of time. this has absolutely no bearing on citizens, and if it did we would be a police state straight and simple.

-don't see your point about the insurance stuff. you're telling me if people are proven negligent then they dont get benefits. so what? i'm saying people should be charged with crimes if the commit one while being negligent. my problem isnt with charging people for driving irresponsibly or commiting crimes irresponsibly. it's with stringent laws which take away liberty and can be abused for the promise of "safety."

-yes it is completely and utterly unreasonable. chicago also has a great public transportation system, too. try living in Dallas and relying on getting around via public transportation.

ain't gonna happen.

-i'm saying you have choices as well, i'm saying if you make the wrong one and are negligent and driving eratically or hurt someone you should be completely charged with your infractions. my problem is the current laws that blanket things and are easily abused, and put people who may not pose as much a danger as you have been lead to believe, like the drug war.

LOVELY... my class was canceled at the last minute due to weather, so I guess its a good thing I missed that train!



- You make my point. You cannot easily test sleep, that is why it is not an issue and why it cannot be compared to people's BAC. That was my point.

- When you are on active duty you ARE free. You have not signed away your liberties. There are certain *limits* to your freedom, but the constitution still applies to you. I don't know where you came up with that silly statement...

- The point wasn't about the strong relationship between AF regs and state laws about operating a MV. The point was about the fact that at the end of the day you have a choice.

- I used to "live" in Carrolton (Dallas suburb - my mother's family lives there and I'd visit all the time, sometimes for a couple of months), and went to Dallas all the time. I understand that it is difficult to get around without a car... for example, getting across state... but you can get around. I used to walk all over the place when I was there, and it wasn't a problem. Walking isn't that hard, and you'd be surprised how far you can get. I also used to walk all over the place when I lived in Joplin, Missouri. There is NO public transportation there, but sure enough - you don't really need it - you can cover many miles in a short amount of time.

- The point still is that you have choices - maybe not the best ones, but it is still a choice you can freely make or not make.

 

[MrZach]

Well. Mr King Of Observation...my name is ANGELA.

Oh EXCUSE me for not pulling your gender out of the forum name "angelatc" lol... Seriously? You expect me to assume your a female from that? For all I know, the name that i would pronounce "Angel-atic" has something to do with angels in the atic or something... lol

Keep grasping at straws to hit me with though. It is quite becoming.

I am saying that because I have to pay for the roads I should have a right to use them. That's freedom. You're not advocating freedom by insisting that driving is a privelege. You're advocating statism.

Yes, I'll give you that - on THIS issue. Remember, we're talking about ONE issue here, not the broad strokes of all political science and public policy. It is ridiculous to say that just because I actually make rational discernments and don't go all or nothing in to every last detail that I'm all of the sudden advocating statism across the board. Give me a break! lol

Are you a Northwestern student per chance? They're the most ill-informed lot of social liberals in the midwest.

No, I'm not. Keep trying.

ANd now we learn that you don't drive because apparently trouble just follows you around. ALl those dead kids in high school, and vans out to get you...no wonder freedom frightens you.

Here I am, driving for 30 years or so...no accidents, no tickets, and no pile of big dead friends either. Just because you feel the need to insist on protection doesn't mean that I need it.

Wow, imagine that - we actually had dramatically different experiences in life. And it actually effected our perspectives on things. Wow, that is SO weird. I've never heard of that happening.

I honestly don't get why everyone has their panties in a bunch over this. Someone earlier said that I'm advocating sacraficing liberty for safety, so somehow that quote about sacrificing liberty for safety and deserving neither applies to me. Are you serious? Who actually sees one's right to drink and rive as an ESSENTIAL liberty on which our entire system hinges? And the fact that little ole' me is willing to make exception on that issue because I think it actually will make us safer - and for practically NO sacrifice of liberty at all - doesn't make me some kind of commie or fascist or statist. People who throw around terms like that as if it is going to trump everything anyone says and win every argument are just as bad as the people who slap terms like "isolationist" on Dr. Paul and say, "You're an isolationist, we're not! We win! Nah-nah-nee-nah-nah!"

Of course I did. I had friends that went to the county school, Catholic school, and one of several other high schools. It's very statistically improbable that a single teenager knows 16 people who died in car crashes.

I'm pretty much not convinced that it's true. The odds of teenagers dying is pretty high. The odds of you knowing 16 of them is even higher. I suppose there could have been a party bus crash, but I gathered you were talking about an incredible amount of different accidents, and you're right. I don't believe you.

Well, on that account, Angela, you can pretty much go fuck yourself. You disrespect my friends who have died tragically and you call me a liar, so go fuck yourself. I may not agree with all your ideologies, but it is your complete lack of human compassion that makes you worthless. Go to hell.

 

[MrZach]

By the way, Angela, it is statistically improbable that any single person would know four people who were burned alive in their car right in front of their eyes because they were driving under the influence and had a wreck on the highway that caused their car to light up... BUT, it happened, and myself and many of my friends were there to witness it. You can take your statistics (and complete ignorance about them) and shove them up your ass.

 

[MsDoodahs]

First, STOP THE DAMNED FLAMEFEST AND I DONT CARE WHO STARTED IT.

I'm ending it.

Second, is it confirmed that the person arrested for DUI was in fact an RP GOPer running for office? PM me with the info, I'm locking this thread.

IF it has been confirmed, ALL THOSE CONSIDERING RUNNING FOR OFFICE TAKE NOTE: Don't do this stupid shit if you are SERIOUS about holding office at ANY POINT in your lifetime.

This kind of crap will come back to haunt you.