The most politically incorrect thread of all time.

[PLC1]

So you believe in convicting people before they have commited an offense? And you people defend guns??

Driving under the influence is an offense in itself, as well it should be.

Is going into a convenience store and pointing a gun at the clerk a crime, if you don't then demand cash and/or pull the trigger? Endangering others is an offense, even if nothing comes of it.

 

[samsara15]

At least you are consistent. PLC. DUI would not be an offense if the law were not written to make it such. Would you then, based on the same sort of logic, make it a similar offense to use a cell phone, or text messaging, or to perform other distracting tasks (as such might legally defined, now or in the future), while driving? If so, I can go along with that without any heartburn.

 

[PLC1]

At least you are consistent. PLC. DUI would not be an offense if the law were not written to make it such. Would you then, based on the same sort of logic, make it a similar offense to use a cell phone, or text messaging, or to perform other distracting tasks (as such might legally defined, now or in the future), while driving? If so, I can go along with that without any heartburn.

I'm not sure just how you legislate common sense, but such things as driving after drinking substantial amounts of alcohol, texting while driving, reading the newspaper, driving after smoking pot, driving after having taken a sleeping pill, or any other thing that makes you a menace to public safety is simply not common sense.

It would be pretty hard to make a definitive list of what you can't do while driving a car and not leave anything out.

There are a lot of things that are illegal simply because they jeopardize public safety. Can you burn leaves when the surrounding woods are dry as dust? Is it legal to shoot off bottle rockets in the middle of town?

Driving under the influence, just like anything else that makes a person a danger to others, is and should be illegal, so you don't need to take your Tums just now.

As for laws that are designed to save us from ourselves, I'm not sure how those could be justified, so long as we aren't putting others at risk.

 

[samsara15]

My heartburn hasn't gone away, but I don't make laws, they are made by others, I just live within them as best I can, whether they are justifiable IMO or not. None of us are free to act as we please, we are limited in our actions by the opinions of others. Which, in a sense, makes a case for a socialism, does it not, the 'social contract'??

 

[PLC1]

My heartburn hasn't gone away, but I don't make laws, they are made by others, I just live within them as best I can, whether they are justifiable IMO or not. None of us are free to act as we please, we are limited in our actions by the opinions of others. Which, in a sense, makes a case for a socialism, does it not, the 'social contract'??

If by "socialism" you mean social order, as opposed to anarchy, yes.

 

[top gun]

So you believe in convicting people before they have commited an offense? And you people defend guns??

Drunk driving is committing an offense. It is an offense of intentionally endangering other people. There are many similar offenses.

It's illegal to yell FIRE in a crowded theater even though there's not really a fire... people might get out just fine or they might get trampled to death in the panic.

It is illegal to leave your child alone in a car... not all children will be harmed but some will be injured or die from heat stroke at some point.

It's illegal to discharge a firearm into the air inside the city limits... you may almost never hit someone with the returning bullets but at some point some will.

It's illegal to drive a semi truck without a CDL (commercial drivers license)... some may be able to figure out the gears brakes without running over someone... but others will crash & burn.

I could go on & on but you see the point. When something is proven to be dangerous it can be restricted or outlawed.

As far as "us people" defending guns??? America has it written into it founding documents that people can own firearms... so I guess that could be called defending guns.

But there is an obvious distinction between owning a gun (which can be dangerous) and drunk driving. Guns can also keep people safe from harm, theft & attack. And guns handled 100% legally & properly put them pretty high up on the safety scale.

I don't think you can show any redeeming social value or benefit of drunk driving. And I also don't think you'll be able to show how drunk driving is more safe than sober driving.

For if that was truly the case the police would be handing out beers & shots to help get people home safely.

 

[samsara15]

Drunk driving is committing an offense. It is an offense of intentionally endangering other people. There are many similar offenses.

It's illegal to yell FIRE in a crowded theater even though there's not really a fire... people might get out just fine or they might get trampled to death in the panic.

It is illegal to leave your child alone in a car... not all children will be harmed but some will be injured or die from heat stroke at some point.

It's illegal to discharge a firearm into the air inside the city limits... you may almost never hit someone with the returning bullets but at some point some will.

It's illegal to drive a semi truck without a CDL (commercial drivers license)... some may be able to figure out the gears brakes without running over someone... but others will crash & burn.

I could go on & on but you see the point. When something is proven to be dangerous it can be restricted or outlawed.

As far as "us people" defending guns??? America has it written into it founding documents that people can own firearms... so I guess that could be called defending guns.

But there is an obvious distinction between owning a gun (which can be dangerous) and drunk driving. Guns can also keep people safe from harm, theft & attack. And guns handled 100% legally & properly put them pretty high up on the safety scale.

I don't think you can show any redeeming social value or benefit of drunk driving. And I also don't think you'll be able to show how drunk driving is more safe than sober driving.

For if that was truly the case the police would be handing out beers & shots to help get people home safely.

Guns can be used to harm people who have not threatened anyone. Isn't that proving them to be dangerous? Yes, its the Second Amendment, but haven't we weakened the First, as well (You can't yell fire in a crowded theater)?

Are you willing to defend using a cell phone while driving??? You would convict without having yet had an offense.

 

[samsara15]

If by "socialism" you mean social order, as opposed to anarchy, yes.

I mean by socialism that we limit, by design, each other's range of actions and freedom. If that need be economic, then so be it. That is the social contract, as I interpret it, that has been used by most societies in human history.

 

[samsara15]

Social responsibility wins over individual rights. It always does, and so it should.

But we, as a society, must be aware that in many cases, we perpetuate other injustices when we let social responsiblity win out over individual rights. We let drivers who have done no wrong, except to endanger others, be penalized and shamed so severely that some of them commit suicide.

 

[top gun]

Guns can be used to harm people who have not threatened anyone. Isn't that proving them to be dangerous? Yes, its the Second Amendment, but haven't we weakened the First, as well (You can't yell fire in a crowded theater)?

Are you willing to defend using a cell phone while driving??? You would convict without having yet had an offense.

It isn't "can" something be harmful. It's is it extremely likely to be harmful.

Drunk driving clears that bar like Superman. Even with all the drunk driving laws we have that should be a deterrent there are still hundreds of thousands injured and thousands killed directly because of drinking & driving every year.

A kitchen knife "can" be harmful... but it's not very likely. Similarly with guns. They can be dangerous... but handled 100% legally and properly they are actually pretty darn safe. Safe drunk driving is an oxymoron... like saying, huge midgets. Drunk driving by it's actual nature is not safe driving at all.

As far as cell phone driving I can see how some could say that's a multitasking distraction. Do I think it is ANYTHING like someone drunk driving? No I don't. Once again it's the likelihood of injuring somebody that is the issue here with drunk driving.

The only way you'd have any serious argument that drunk driving should be allowed is if you can post any study... ANY STUDY ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD SINCE THE DAWN OF TIME that shows drinking and driving doesn't affect driving ability negatively.

Since that ain't never gonna happen I think you should just concede this one.

 

[samsara15]

I beleive that civilized society exists as a result of an informal 'social contract', which means that we have binding social responsiblity, and obligations, to each other. And that our opinions, and rights, can, and should, be over-ridden by the opinions of others, no matter if we think we are right, even if the evidence supports our POV. I concede the point, although I still think I am right, because I think you have shown that the binding 'social contract' we all should live by over-rides my POV.