TX Man Sentenced to Life in Prison for 9th DWI

It's Romans 13:4. Government exists and exercises force for a reason. We should not be advocating anarchy. The government has a role in punishing people who are a danger to society. Being that we have a democratic republic of sorts, its up to us to decide what the government should rightfully be regulating. But, letting drunks go hog wild is not a matter of human freedom, necessarily.

Ah, Romans 13.

The biblical "fall back" position for tyrants and demagogues alike.



13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.

13 Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.

14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.
 
It's okay not to like me, I'm not mad at you or anyone here. But, I want you to think of something. If you are that angry about anything, maybe you should be angry at the guy with 9 DWIs who put people's lives in danger. Think of that.

Okay, I did think of it. My conclusion is that he wasn't "corrected" by his previous punishments, and somehow managed to get behind the wheel of another automobile while intoxicated enough to wreck his car. My conclusion is that sending him to jail for the rest of his life is probably not going to solve a thing for anyone involved, and definitely isn't going to teach anyone a lesson since it didn't happen until his 9th DWI which, to someone actually doing this regularly and watching the news, is simply going to tell them "Hey, if I stop at 8, I totally won't go to jail for life."

My conclusion is that I was so correct in my earlier assessment, that you haven't even bothered to address it lol
 
Rethinking Romans 13

Published: 04/14/2001 at 1:00 AM

http://www.wnd.com/2001/04/8841/

In recent years, Christians have interpreted Romans 13 as a command for unlimited submission to government by God. Many proponents of this belief have sat passively by, in the soft pews of their place of worship, while evil has triumphed in most areas of family and church life. In our pacifistic smugness, many have allowed government to become god without even knowing.

Yet, when confronted with the true meaning of Romans 13, absurd accusations are shouted in religious rhetoric toward those who would dare to break an unjust law or even to question the almighty government. The opponents of unlimited submission to government are deemed as rebellious, anarchist and disobedient. However, there is no practical, historical or biblical consistency in the shallow agreements of these simpletons.

First, unlimited submission to government is not practical. For a philosophy to be a valid philosophy, it must be consistent. As a result, it does not make practical sense to blindly obey a tyrant like Adolph Hitler or deem a law such as abortion-on-demand a legitimate law just because one’s government says it is public policy. However, if Romans 13 teaches unlimited submission to government, then we must obey and acknowledge all laws, good and bad, as the will of God. If all governments are of God, then all laws are of God. This in not practical from any point of view.

Second, it is not historical. Our founding fathers recognized and understood tyranny and despotism. They perceived the ultimate end of the king’s actions. Thus, they besought George III to relent in his persecutions and implored him to uphold his covenant agreement.

In July of 1774, our forefathers met in Fairfax County, Va., and considered ways of forcing Great Britain to redress American grievances. George Washington and George Mason were the instrumental agents in drafting what has come to be known as the “Fairfax Resolves.”

Ponder for a moment Resolves five and six:

“Resolved that the claim lately assumed and exercised by the British Parliament, of making all such Laws as they think fit, to govern the people of these colonies, contrary to the first Principles of the Constitution, and the original Compacts by which we are dependent upon the British Crown and Government; but is totally incompatible with the privileges of a free people, and the natural Rights of Mankind; will render our own Legislatures merely nominal and nugatory, and is calculated to reduce us from a state of freedom and happiness to slavery and misery.”

“Resolved that Taxation and Representation are in their nature inseparable; that the right of withholding, or of giving and granting their own money is the only effectual security to a free people, against the encroachments of Despotism and Tyranny; and that whenever they yield to one they fall prey to the other.”

All of the Resolves are loaded with bullets that explode against a tyrannical and despotic government. The “shot that was heard around the world on Lexington green was loaded in the “Fairfax Resolves.” How can one make that statement? After pleading with George III to uphold his covenant agreement and after seeking for a redress of grievances, the “coup de grace” is plainly stated in the 23rd Resolve:

“Resolved that it be recommended to the Deputies of the general Congress to draw up and transmit an humble and dutiful petition and remonstrance to his Majesty, asserting with decent firmness our just and constitutional Rights and Privileges, lamenting the fatal necessity of being compelled to enter into measures disgusting to his Majesty and his Parliament, or injurious to our fellow subjects in Great Britain; declaring the strongest terms of duty and affection to his Majesty’s person, family and government, and our desire to continue our dependence upon Great Britain; and must humbly beseeching his Majesty, not to reduce his faithful subjects of America to a state of desperation, and to reflect, that from our Sovereign there can be but one appeal.”

In simple terms, the Resolves offered George III two obvious choices. One was to fulfill his covenant obligations and be the king and ruler to the American Colonies that he had agreed to be or, second, to prepare for war. George III was asked to reflect upon the fact, that if he did not keep his end of the covenant, there could “be but one appeal.”

Last –and most important — it is not biblical. Daniel disobeyed Darius and went to the lions den. The three Hebrew children broke the law for not bowing. The parents hid baby Moses from Pharaoh. Rahab lied to protect the Hebrew spies. The Apostles went to prison for preaching Christ in the authority of Heaven. Paul and his followers in Acts 17 did contrary to all the decrees of Caesar in order to make Jesus the King. Even Jesus lived in direct opposition of the political religious leaders of his day and went to the cross for us.

Romans 13 is a treatise by Paul and the Apostles on the institution of model government. As we rightly divide the word of truth and take this passage in its total context, we will discover seven truths:

Good government is ordained by God.

Government officials are to be good ministers who represent God.

We the people must obey good and godly laws.

As we relate Romans 13 to America, our Constitution is the higher power — not the IRS tax code.

Good government is not to be feared.

In America, we are to pay honor and custom and constitutional taxes to whom it is due.

Government is to protect the righteous and punish the wicked.

As a result, we have a practical, historical and biblical mandate to fervently disobey any unconstitutional laws and all government officials who cease to be good ministers of Jesus Christ. God almighty is the only power that deserves unlimited obedience.
 
Your ideas help imprison innocent people who have not hurt anyone but themselves - think of that.
Seriously, the man negligently put people's lives at risk.


Let me just understand your opinion. Being that it is legal to own guns (for now) and legal to shoot them, just not at people, humor me this:

Should it be legal to walk around with my gun in an open space and start firing near people, but never aim at them. I don't destroy anyone's private property when I do it, let's say.

How's that any different than drunk driving?
 
Punishments are meant to be deterrents, period. That's the means in which we need to be evaluating our criminal justice system.

No, they're not. Punishments are meant to satisfy our sense of justice. That's it. They don't serve any other purpose.
 
I don't need a valium, I just think we need a harsher criminal justice system. I'd like to see flogging come back, old school death sentences (gallows), and an efficient prison system that actually deters crime.

You sound like a good little neocon.:rolleyes:

Law and order and life prison sentences is exactly what the doctor for the Prison Industrial Complex ordered. Especially in Texas where prisons are privately owned, profit-driven, to slave out better things than the Chinese slave labor does.
 
Okay, I did think of it. My conclusion is that he wasn't "corrected" by his previous punishments, and somehow managed to get behind the wheel of another automobile while intoxicated enough to wreck his car. My conclusion is that sending him to jail for the rest of his life is probably not going to solve a thing for anyone involved, and definitely isn't going to teach anyone a lesson since it didn't happen until his 9th DWI which, to someone actually doing this regularly and watching the news, is simply going to tell them "Hey, if I stop at 8, I totally won't go to jail for life."

My conclusion is that I was so correct in my earlier assessment, that you haven't even bothered to address it lol
I thought I did answer you question, but being that you don't believe this man really should be punished, just what should we do with him? Put him in a out=patient rehab. Oh oh, he did it a tenth time! Lock him up in a rehab? Oh no, he got out again and did it. Should we really just wait until someone dies?


Hence my earlier comment. Its easy to have these pie in the sky discussions, but if your brother let's say was killed by a drunk driver, you'd feel totally different.
 
Rulers are given to us to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. The ruler is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

And so carclinic exposes his true self. He worships the state. He thinks government was sent by God to do good, regardless of how abysmally bad they are at it. Wake up, man. Cops were not sent by God. They are tyrants and they do no good that you or I couldn't do.
 
You sound like a good little neocon.:rolleyes:

Law and order and life prison sentences is exactly what the doctor for the Prison Industrial Complex ordered. Especially in Texas where prisons are privately owned, profit-driven, to slave out better things than the Chinese slave labor does.
For what it is worth, I've voted Badnarik, Baldwin, and Goode the last three elections. I've vote for Paul since 2008. I just believe the government should have a criminal justice system that acts as a deterrent.
 
Seriously, the man negligently put people's lives at risk.


Let me just understand your opinion. Being that it is legal to own guns (for now) and legal to shoot them, just not at people, humor me this:

Should it be legal to walk around with my gun in an open space and start firing near people, but never aim at them. I don't destroy anyone's private property when I do it, let's say.

How's that any different than drunk driving?

You are able to hunt wherever it's legal including "firing near people" but it's only when you actually hit someone with your bullet that you're subject to law.
Following your expressed logic about drunk driving, a hunter who takes a shot while another person is in the woods jeopardized his safety and should be subject to punishment..
 
shouldn't you have to infringe on another persons life, liberty, or property before having yours removed permanently?

WHICH THIS PILE OF SHIT CLEARLY DID!!!!!!

Truth be known he should have been separated from Society FOREVER at the first offense.

That said I would not if it were my pick use prison for such dregs. A reservation for malefactors where they are able to harm ONLY eachother and get killed on sight if they attempt to leave is I believe the most Liberty consistent solution for a Society such as ours.
 
For what it is worth, I've voted Badnarik, Baldwin, and Goode the last three elections. I've vote for Paul since 2008. I just believe the government should have a criminal justice system that acts as a deterrent.

Then I think we need to start with the REAL criminals in DC!
 
I thought I did answer you question, but being that you don't believe this man really should be punished, just what should we do with him? Put him in a out=patient rehab. Oh oh, he did it a tenth time! Lock him up in a rehab? Oh no, he got out again and did it. Should we really just wait until someone dies?


Hence my earlier comment. Its easy to have these pie in the sky discussions, but if your brother let's say was killed by a drunk driver, you'd feel totally different.

You not only did not answer, but you misrepresented my position. I can't help but think it's malicious. I don't think he should be punished? Where did you get that from? I think he should be punished based on the fact that he drove wrecklessly and damaged property, REGARDLESS of what caused him to do it. Do you think someone who negligently drives a vehicle and strikes someone else's property should go to jail for life? No? Then why's the fact he did it drunk enough to punish him more severely than just about for any other crime?
 
WHICH THIS PILE OF SHIT CLEARLY DID!!!!!!

Truth be known he should have been separated from Society FOREVER at the first offense.

That said I would not if it were my pick use prison for such dregs. A reservation for malefactors where they are able to harm ONLY eachother and get killed on sight if they attempt to leave is I believe the most Liberty consistent solution for a Society such as ours.

You realize you're talking about some guy who got caught drunk driving right?
 
By that logic, society would be best served be executing them then.

I refuse to believe then our options are mass executions or just letting everyone go to create havoc. We SHOULD be making a system that deters crime, somehow.

No, by that logic, we should stop putting people in cages for petty crimes and pre-crimes. Nobody has to be executed. Death is a part of life. Accidents happen. Most people don't drive drunk because they know it's a bad idea and they know they can die or cause others to die. Stupid people will happen. If they do kill someone, by all means, serve some justice. But don't put people in prison for something they didn't do. Our options are to make the punishment fit the crime. There is no just punishment for someone who has hurt nobody. What makes you think that, just because we let some people go who haven't killed anybody, that that's going to "wreak havoc"? It will be no worse than executing thousands of people for petty crimes. The better option is to let them be. You can't save people by trying to guess who's going to kill someone before it happens. That only causes more deaths than it would if we just let nature run its course. We have laws for justice, we don't have laws to protect people.
 
Drunk driving is not petty, though.

That's debatable. It is non-aggressive, though. Aggressive means hurting someone. Driving in a state that increases the likelihood of hurting someone is not hurting anyone. If and when they do hurt someone, they can be charged, but not until then. Any other policy is asking for more death and destruction, and a higher tax burden and overcrowded prison systems.
 
You are able to hunt wherever it's legal including "firing near people" but it's only when you actually hit someone with your bullet that you're subject to law.
Following your expressed logic about drunk driving, a hunter who takes a shot while another person is in the woods jeopardized his safety and should be subject to punishment..
You just caught yourself.

You can go drive drunk in a parking lot, or in your driveway. Anywhere in private property. No one questions that. You cannot and should not in public.

That's the difference between firing weapons where it is designated to do so (private property, with a permit in the woods) and not walking around on main street.
 
You are able to hunt wherever it's legal including "firing near people" but it's only when you actually hit someone with your bullet that you're subject to law.
..............................

Simply not true. You can't hunt in town. You can't hunt from a public highway. You can't hunt on the Private Property of others without their permission. Guaranteed getting caught firing in a manner which crosses the boundaries of a town, Private Property or a public road will lead to a court date. Sooooo sure ya wanna be a fool & drive drunk on YOUR OWN back 40, got for it..........BUT keep your drunk ass from behind the wheel of a vehicle on a highway. Otherwise ya just may get to be someone's prison bitch and guess what- not may of us will care about your lost 'liberty'.
 
Back
Top