|
Neurion posted:How about we affix parachutes to the car's frame Just have it automatically lower the road into the sewer pipes if it detects you driving drunk.
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
I think summary execution for any and all violations of vehicular law is the only solution.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:try not to bite so hard on obvious fakeposts and also alcoholism is a disease, incarcerating people for being alcoholics who make bad decisions is pretty lovely and regressive Mental illnesses are, well, illnesses, and we lock up mentally ill people if they pose a danger to others. We also lock up plenty of non‐dangerous people but that’s beside the point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
Just in case you don’t know this. You need to blow super hard into the breathalyzer then when it beeps after 6 seconds (try blowing hard for 6 seconds and see how much of a struggle it is) and then you have to suck for about 3 seconds. They should give you at least 5 minutes to be able to pull over but instead you literally have 60 seconds before it marks it as an infraction plus the increased beeping can panic anyone. Ps the breathalyzer wasn’t for me but for a family member. Any cars he could conceivably drive had to have a breathalyzer and that included mine. Sucked rear end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
I can see that in many parts of the us car ownership is essential but constitutional rights are forfeit in many cases such as felons not being allowed to own guns so I don't see the issue with taking away drivers licenses from people who have shown not to be fit to drive safely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:I can see that in many parts of the us car ownership is essential but constitutional rights are forfeit in many cases such as felons not being allowed to own guns so I don't see the issue with taking away drivers licenses from people who have shown not to be fit to drive safely. I need to drive drunk to defend myself against drunk drivers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:I can see that in many parts of the us car ownership is essential but constitutional rights are forfeit in many cases such as felons not being allowed to own guns so I don't see the issue with taking away drivers licenses from people who have shown not to be fit to drive safely. they do take away your license, but if your license is permanently revoked eventually people will start driving again without one, because not being able to drive is a massive disadvantage in living a normal life so the next best thing is to let them drive with a pain in the rear end interlock. you're giving people hoops to jump through to not break the law, versus telling someone to gently caress off and incentivizing them to break the law in my state your third dui gets you habitual offender status, your license is revoked for two years, you can get it back after you meet a ton of penalties (fines, minimum two week jail sentence, community service, you have to pay the newspaper to publish your mugshot and a nastygram about what a rotten drunk you are) and you are forever saddled with the interlock
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
Nah throw them in prison. Free up space by ending the war on drugs and start the war on cars.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Piggy Smalls posted:Ps the breathalyzer wasn’t for me but for a family member. Any cars he could conceivably drive had to have a breathalyzer and that included mine. Sucked rear end. I’ve heard of courts wanting to do this for room mates. They lawyered up to prevent it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
MF_James posted:I don't know the solution to the problem, but you're just creating another problem if you revoke licenses left and right. If you revoke someone's license in anywhere but a major city (and hell even in some major cities) they are going to have a lovely time getting a job if they can at all, which creates a new problem, now this person is going to have a poo poo life because they can't get a job, what are they going to do? They aren't going to stop drinking that's for loving sure. Do you let them drive around without consequence? No, but, again, I don't know a good solution, I can tell you that revoking someone's license immediately is not the right one though. Not that anyone was necessarily advocating 1 DUI = No driving for life, but I'm not sure where to draw the line, 3, 4 maybe 5?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:How many states take your license when you don't repay your student loans? 30 I think
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
On today's epsiode of "not my fuckin job" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOZcOxN2PIo
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
So that's how canals get filled with bicycles. I'd always wondered.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:How many states take your license when you don't repay your student loans? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/business/student-loans-licenses.html 20. "This person can't pay his bills, let's make it harder for him to keep a job, surely that will make him pay us back faster." "Brilliant!" It's almost as if it's not the money they want, it's a permanent underclass enslaved by debt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Powershift posted:But if you outlaw drunk driving, only the outlaws will drive drunk. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a beer is a good guy with a beer. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
I don't know how I missed this but the King of Random did a napalm episode https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6keN8mA1jr4
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
taking away peoples' licenses so they don't kill others with their terrible decisions wouldn't be a problem if we had halfway decent public transportation
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
Lain Iwakura posted:I don't know how I missed this but the King of Random did a napalm episode "Remember that this is being done in a controlled environment" <is in his living room>
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 01:54
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Crocoswine posted:taking away peoples' licenses so they don't kill others with their terrible decisions wouldn't be a problem if we had halfway decent public transportation Why are you trying to make it easier for Those People to get to my neighborhood and carry my TV away on their murderbuses
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
I think Ontario's structure of DUI penalties is pretty reasonable First time, car is impounded, you go to traffic school, license suspended for a year, have to drive a car with a breathalyzer for a year after that, $1,000 fine, plus jail time if the judge sees fit. Second time, 3 years of license suspension followed by three years with a breathalyzer, unlimited fine at the judge's discretion, minimum 30 days in jail. Third time, minimum 4 months in jail, unlimited fine, license permanently revoked (can be reduced to a 10-year suspension with a lifelong breathalyzer condition in some cases). Seems reasonable to me. Also, I think Ohio's system where anyone with a DUI gets bright red and yellow "pull me over, officer" license plates for some number of years is a solid idea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think Ontario's structure of DUI penalties is pretty reasonable Maybe people who do a DUI / DWI should be dyed bright red and yellow, all over.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
I had 2 DUIs, 11 years apart in Washington state. After the first one didn't drink and drive for years. Second one, I had just started drinking again. (Never hurt anyone, thank god.) Did a week, fines up rear end, interlock ( I hardly drove I hated it so bad) and I literally haven't drank and drove since not a drop. I don't even remember exactly how long ago that was ? 14 years? I had anxiety dreams where I'd be driving with a buzz suddenly and brakes wouldn't work those were awful. Point is, people can and do change with the way the laws are now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:It's almost as if it's not the money they want, it's a permanent underclass enslaved by debt.  Escher ladders
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
Can somebody tell me why the physics in the Golden Boy bike race scene are loving impossible? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-SDwYnIDJ0
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Can somebody tell me why the physics in the Golden Boy bike race scene are loving impossible? Your first clue should be that it's a cartoon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Can somebody tell me why the physics in the Golden Boy bike race scene are loving impossible?  They say to this day he is still on that bicycle riding towards that pussy he had already won.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
Because it's anime you loving moron.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
Are you guys seriously saying that for almost twenty years, the cat NEVER caught the mouse? Impossible!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:"Remember that this is being done in a controlled environment" Well at least he didn't mix his soap and gas right on the hot plate. And he had a bigass fire extinguisher right there. Still, other OSHA violations include: -boiling gasoline in his living room -no safety glasses while putting his face directly over boiling gasoline -he does wear glasses while he's outside but I'm pretty sure they're just normal sunglasses -uses a normal length match (instead of a barbecue lighter or a long match) to light his concoction, risking burning his hand or igniting any gasoline residue still on his gloves -uses a normal paver stone to light his napalm toast (potential to crack or pop, spraying burning jelly) -takes a bite of bread that he just handled with gasoline soaked nitrile gloves -at the end he dumps a handful of his leftover napalm directly onto the fire with his hand, immediately after commenting about how sticky and difficult it is to get off once it adheres
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 05:23
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Your first clue should be that it's a cartoon. She clearly says it's not a cartoon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
Mozi posted:Couldn't the car just breathalize when it's put into park? That way you know it's safe to blow, and you would only have to blow once per trip. What if the offender happens to drive a stickshift? There IS no "park" gear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 08:54
|
|
|
Farmdizzle posted:Interlocks usually require a sample to start the engine, and then another about 10 or so minutes later, and then roughly every hour after that while the engine is running. This is so the driver can't have a sober person start the car for them so they drunkenly drive away, or pound down a few "road sodas" on a long trip. The interlock system for one of our (adult, 40+) Technicians is his mother. He is a complete alcoholic and she holds his work ute keys and breatho's him every morning. We get a call once every few months or so 'I'm sick and can't come in' - followed by a call from his mother saying that no, he is still drunk. Next week we can fire him finally as he is off compo and it won't look like we did it because he wasn't fit for work due to his knee injury.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:The interlock system for one of our (adult, 40+) Technicians is his mother. He is a complete alcoholic and she holds his work ute keys and breatho's him every morning. please tell us he's your primary forklift operator.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 10:12
|
|
|
In the UK getting caught drunk driving is an automatic minimum 18 months driving ban. No ifs, buts or appeals. How the gently caress are there developed nations where that isn't the case? gently caress drink drivers and gently caress their rights to drive. Selfish little wankers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 11:23
|
|
|
Blacknose posted:In the UK getting caught drunk driving is an automatic minimum 18 months driving ban. No ifs, buts or appeals. How the gently caress are there developed nations where that isn't the case? gently caress drink drivers and gently caress their rights to drive. Selfish little wankers. Step 1 of fixing this is to redesign american cities.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 12:03
|
|
|
No, step 1 is to not giving limp wrist slaps to serious crimes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
Serephina posted:No, step 1 is to not giving limp wrist slaps to serious crimes. And if your more serious penalties just cause more recidivism, what then? You're just being vindictive rather than looking out for public safety, with no transportation alternatives your options with many DUI offenders are to lock them up or mitigate the odds they drive drunk with something like an interlock. Pulling their license is only going to put unlicensed drunks on the road.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:And if your more serious penalties just cause more recidivism, what then? You're just being vindictive rather than looking out for public safety, with no transportation alternatives your options with many DUI offenders are to lock them up or mitigate the odds they drive drunk with something like an interlock. Pulling their license is only going to put unlicensed drunks on the road. It's not vindictive to say 'I don't want drunk people driving their pick-ups on the same road as my minivan full of kids and nuns'
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 13:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
The point is that harsh penalties can have unintended consequences such that past a certain limit you aren't further reducing infractions but actually increasing them, particularly when a driving license is almost causal to employment. I have no data on whether most US jurisdicitons' penalties are well short or close to that limit, but it takes more consideration than "drunk driving is bad so punish it maximally" and defies comparison with jurisdictions where cars are not as central to life.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 13:40
|
|
