Hemi's

GregV814

GregV814

Well-Known Member
Now GILLIGAN, ............(swats Gilligan with hat as Thurston Howell III watches)..... The Jack Booted training academy specifically teaches recruits that have a possibly drunk dude, (at gunpoint) to do cartwheels while balancing a basketball on the nose, then have them twirl around the nightstick 12 times and recite the Chinese alphabet, all 126 letters, in 10 seconds. That way, they can illegally search the dudes wallet for marijuana seeds and grab his cash to split with the District Court dudes and the MVA clerks.
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
GregV814 said:
Now GILLIGAN, ............(swats Gilligan with hat as Thurston Howell III watches)..... The Jack Booted training academy specifically teaches recruits that have a possibly drunk dude, (at gunpoint) to do cartwheels while balancing a basketball on the nose, then have them twirl around the nightstick 12 times and recite the Chinese alphabet, all 126 letters, in 10 seconds. That way, they can illegally search the dudes wallet for marijuana seeds and grab his cash to split with the District Court dudes and the MVA clerks.
Click to expand...
That's what I like about this forum......learn me something new every day.
 
Kyle

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
GregV814 said:
That way, they can illegally search the dudes wallet for marijuana seeds and grab his cash to split with the District Court dudes and the MVA clerks.
Click to expand...
Well, of course.

Those Lattes are expensive.
 
Kinnakeet

Kinnakeet

Well-Known Member
HemiHauler said:
It still can be refused. Doesn’t mean there isn’t penalty for doing so, but is in fact voluntary.

Police can no more use force to make anyone stand on one leg with one thumb in their rear end while reciting the Magna Carta in Latin but with a slight Russian accent than they can force you to furnish your ID, for example. In that latter case, if there is probably cause, you’ll be taken to the lockup until you can be positively identified.

In the former case, I think you loose your license for a bit and blood draws are often physically compelled (after some time when BAC may have settled a bit, so law enforcement likes to get this done in the field). Many of those have had successful legal challenges though.

In any case, all voluntary choices we citizens get to make. Just be aware of the consequences, could end up an expensive miscalculation. In other words, don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time. Anyone in that situation might see losing their license for x months might be life-ending, but I guarantee a DUI on the record will be far worse, for a far longer period of time.

The language you furnished from Implied Consent doesn’t obviate the natural right to remain silent.
Click to expand...
make anyone stand on one leg with one thumb in their rear end while reciting the Magna Carta in Latin.....LMAO
 
LightRoasted

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

SamSpade said:
You have a inalienable right to own things, like a car. But what is argued is - do you have an inalienable right to drive on a public road?
Click to expand...

Of course one does. Public roads are for public use. Paid for by a tax on each gallon of gas, and from other forms of taxation. The issue here is a common law issue. Whereas if you are irresponsible while driving and hurt someone or damage property, then you are responsible and should receive an appropriate punishment.

phreddyp said:
The problem with DUIs is that instead of enforcing the laws and penalties that were on the books back in the 60s and 70s it was decided to lower the amount of alcohol in your bloodstream to convict you of driving while impaired or DUI, therefor making a whole new class of criminals which required lawyers, judges, MVA personnel and alcohol classes. No way in HELL are most people impaired at .05 or intoxicated at .08 BAC!
Click to expand...

Exactly. DWI, DUI, laws are simply to remove money from the person being cited, and keep the court system and lawyers rolling in money. If driving drunk were really such a very bad thing, then people would be sent to prison for it, instead of being released, slapped on the hand, take a another safety course, and pay the system's fees and fines; all for many to do it over and over again. Even when a drunk driver kills someone, rarely do they get a prison sentence. So it's not about creating safe driving at all. It's all about extracting money.
 
gemma_rae

gemma_rae

Well-Known Member
HemiHauler said:
Yea, appeal to emotion logic is for soft girly men like you.
Click to expand...
1720026312872.png


And, can you punctuate it?
 
LightRoasted

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your consideration ...

GregV814 said:
and your response if a DD killed or maimed a loved one???

so lets insert shooting or stabbing someone with a weapon? Just to feed the machine? I mean HEY, we need to pay jail guards... lawyers.. (Mike Slocum wins!)...the DEI illiterate equality hires workin in da lawyah's office...
Click to expand...

And here it is. Taking it to the extreme, the non-sequitur.

There will always, always, always, be people that will do stupid things that wind up killing innocent people, no matter what is done nor how many laws are passed. Just like the failure that is "gun control". People who are not inclined to abuse the Right, are the ones that always bear the brunt of unconstitutional laws. The criminals? They don't care nor do they abide by the laws. Same with alcoholics. There will always be alcoholics that drive and other stupid people after a bars night out. It cannot be stopped. Never. I would bet that for every person cited for a DWI/DUI, there are 100 more that were not caught.

Instead of criminalizing such behavior, criminalize heavily the effects of the behavior. Because right now getting a DWI/DUI is basically a minor inconvenience for the people that get cited. Get into any kind of accident while drunk driving? Go to prison. Simple as that. That would be the only way, pretty much, to reduce drinking and driving. Because financial penalties, car starter breath analyzers, temporary licence suspensions, do not work.
 
Merlin99

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
HemiHauler said:
I love, love, love these replies.

Pssst: the comma is not required after “And”. My statement, on the other hand, is correctly punctuated as it stands.
Click to expand...
Reading the sentence it feels wrong unless you know that “appeal to emotion” logic is a title of a logical fallacy. As such it should be quoted to show that it’s been lifted verbatim from another source.
 
H

HemiHauler

Well-Known Member
Merlin99 said:
Reading the sentence it feels wrong unless you know that “appeal to emotion” logic is a title of a logical fallacy. As such it should be quoted to show that it’s been lifted verbatim from another source.
Click to expand...
At best, it could be written appeal-to-emotion, but is otherwise fine as it atands. But is correct and readable as it is
 
M

MADPEBS1

Man, I'm still here !!!
Public Execution in the square, Public Beating in the square, REQUIRED that young'un watch, maybe that will put them on straight and narrow...

Now to identify infractions required for each type.... One trial, No appeals, BYE BYE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top