To Protect and to Serve...

Status
Not open for further replies.
#6,476
#6,476
Grand Vol said:
Here's the more relevant question.

How often are people actually cited for having an open container?
Click to expand...

I've heard countless stories. A friend of mine was recycling cans and got charged.

But if a low isn't being enforced, why do you believe we should keep it?
 
#6,477
#6,477
Cdywolfe said:
You brought your friend into the discussion. Not me. If they were off limits then that's where they should have stayed. That's why you're a wimp. You took the discussion to an emotional place that allowed you attack me, not my argument, when I pointed out how silly it was. Your friend died because someone who was intoxicated killed them. Not becuase somebody was simultaneously driving and responsibly drinking a beer. One should punished harshly and the other shouldn't be punished at all.

If you are able to feel better about yourself by fantasizing you've caught me in some double standard then have a blast.
Click to expand...

Your institution makes policies about alcohol use because it can impair you and result in patient harm.

You wouldn't let a surgeon work on a family member after they have consumed a harmless drink of alcohol because it could result in harm to a human.

Both of those are examples that make my point very clear.
 
#6,478
#6,478
jp1 said:
If open containers are legal what cause do you have to field test them in your scenerio?
Click to expand...

1. They need some cause to pull you over in the first place (failure to maintain lane for example).

2. They smell alcohol on your breath and see an open container.

That's plenty of justification for a field sobriety test. And if you fail, I have no problem with you being charged (well, I do actually have a problem with the ridiculously low limits). But if you pass, you have done no wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,479
#6,479
jp1 said:
Your institution makes policies about alcohol use because it can impair you and result in patient harm.

You wouldn't let a surgeon work on a family member after they have consumed a harmless drink of alcohol because it could result in harm to a human.

Both of those are examples that make my point very clear.
Click to expand...

But 1 beer doesn't impair a person to the level where they are incapable of driving safely.

So why does the law not reflect that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,480
#6,480
jp1 said:
Your institution makes policies about alcohol use because it can impair you and result in patient harm.

You wouldn't let a surgeon work on a family member after they have consumed a harmless drink of alcohol because it could result in harm to a human.

Both of those are examples that make my point very clear.
Click to expand...

Those are are unbelievably stupid examples. The police can't be sued for a drunk driver that crashes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,481
#6,481
hog88 said:
:thud:

IMO if over 60% of all fatal crashes have nothing to do with alcohol we need to start fixing that problem. DUI laws are nothing more than money pumps for the county, state, lawyers and insurance companies.
Click to expand...

That's why they set the limits to such outrageously low amounts.

I'd like to read up sometime on the legality and case law related to road blocks. It seems like it would fall under unnecessary seizure.
 
#6,482
#6,482
jp1 said:
Shining example of how adults post. I think I almost have it covered.
Click to expand...

Since when does pointing out how intellectually weak your ad hominem response was the same as repeatedly calling someone a douche and moron?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,483
#6,483
jp1 said:
Your institution makes policies about alcohol use because it can impair you and result in patient harm.

You wouldn't let a surgeon work on a family member after they have consumed a harmless drink of alcohol because it could result in harm to a human.

Both of those are examples that make my point very clear.
Click to expand...

Like I said... Have at it champ.
 
#6,489
#6,489
hog88 said:
:thud:

IMO if over 60% of all fatal crashes have nothing to do with alcohol we need to start fixing that problem. DUI laws are nothing more than money pumps for the county, state, lawyers and insurance companies.
Click to expand...

Isn't over 30% of all fatalities being drunk driving an extremely high percentage since the overwhelming majority are sober drivers.....they do have laws covering the rest.....speeding laws, running red light and stop signs.....there are laws against using their cellphone and driving....crossing the yellow line.....illegal passing....etc and so on.
 
#6,490
#6,490
volbeast33 said:
Isn't over 30% of all fatalities being drunk driving an extremely high percentage since the overwhelming majority are sober drivers.....they do have laws covering the rest.....speeding laws, running red light and stop signs.....there are laws against using their cellphone and driving....crossing the yellow line.....illegal passing....etc and so on.
Click to expand...

See here is the thing. If anyone involved in the accident is drunk, it's an alcohol related indecent. Could have been a drunk pedestrian stumbling out in traffic. So the stats are skewed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,493
#6,493
jp1 said:
Why do employers set the legal limit at zero?
Click to expand...

I support a businesses right to make their own rules (in most all cases). If you don't like the rules, work for someone else or start your own business.

But that in no way relates back to why this should or shouldn't be legal.
 
Last edited:
#6,494
#6,494
Vol8188 said:
I've heard countless stories. A friend of mine was recycling cans and got charged.

But if a low isn't being enforced, why do you believe we should keep it?
Click to expand...

I'm gonna call BS on that one.

And to answer your second question, there are countless idiotic laws on the books that are rarely, if ever, enforced. Just like it's illegal to wrestle a bear or promote such an event in Oklahoma. It's still on the books, but likely not charged that much.

I'll re-ask the question and expand it a bit. How often does one get cited for open container without having the accompanying DUI to go with it?
 
#6,495
#6,495
Grand Vol said:
I'm gonna call BS on that one.

And to answer your second question, there are countless idiotic laws on the books that are rarely, if ever, enforced. Just like it's illegal to wrestle a bear or promote such an event in Oklahoma. It's still on the books, but likely not charged that much.

I'll re-ask the question and expand it a bit. How often does one get cited for open container without having the accompanying DUI to go with it?
Click to expand...

If the DUI is accompanying, why is this charge even necessary?
 
#6,496
#6,496
Vol8188 said:
Since some of you can't figure this out on your own, I'll help you:

Open containers should not be illegal. Driving intoxicated should be illegal. If someone has an open container, field test them. If they fail, then blood test them.

But having an open container does not mean you are intoxicated. Just like having an open bottle of oxy doesn't mean you're not capable of safely operating a vehicle.
Click to expand...

Change the law. If not deal with it. Many people don't find it that hard to abide by.
 
#6,497
#6,497
hog88 said:
See here is the thing. If anyone involved in the accident is drunk, it's an alcohol related indecent. Could have been a drunk pedestrian stumbling out in traffic. So the stats are skewed.
Click to expand...

it might skew it a little but not that much.....Just bc other things are dangerous that takes our concentration away from the road....it doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to stop something that we know is extremely dangerous to do while driving.
 
#6,498
#6,498
Bigurnge said:
Change the law. If not deal with it. Many people don't find it that hard to abide by.
Click to expand...

I've never seen anyone so willing to accept oppression as you.

"Yeah, you should be able to do his. And yeah, the law should be changed. But if not, so be it. I like the government telling me how to live!"
 
#6,499
#6,499
Any business, especially a hospital, is liable for their employees actions. As a result they prohibit it's use That's a voluntary agreement I enter into. I can quit at any time with no threat of violence against me.

When I drive my car I'm liable for whatever happens. I make the rules in there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top