Post: #26

I beat another one the other day. I have many strong feelings about Duis.

First, increasing_the amount of DUI cases in the system does not guarantee a revenue increase for the state at all. Duis, especially at the low (intoxication levels are incredibly easy to beat. Even the administrative side gets torn apart by the right lawyers. The more hearings and motions and whatnot don't drive up the fines, those stay the same. The one I just beat had four actual court appearances, and I walked out with a $2000 bail refund. They got nothing. The admin side required six hearings, six temp license issues, six subpoenas the state had to pay for, and then got nothing out of me.

When someone decides that a change needs to be made to DUI laws, they consult three (at least in Hawaii) groups 1) the DUI lawyers association 2) The police union 3) made.

The lawyers make out because now they got more cases to defend. The cops support it because duis are easy arrests to pad their resumes with. Madd loves it because they can justify their existence and they are evil haggard cunts who deserve to fry in hell.

Google madd and its hypocrisy. They are no longer just against drunk drivers. They are against all alcohol consumption, and are a policitical action arm that wields influence for pay.

With regards to driverless cars: I have pledged in another thread that I want to be the first man in Hawaii to get a DUI at a checkpoint in a driverless car. I stand by this pledge. You watch I'll subpoena elon musk and dale earnhardt Jr and all kinds of people. I'll be like Megan, but it will be Kona's Law.

I have many more feelings about the DUI system, and a vast knowledge of how it works.

Aloha!

Post: #27

(03-24-2017 12:56 PM)Rawmeo Wrote:  I'm glad to never have to worry about that in Thailand - just make sure to have 3,000 baht in cash, and drive home. If you get caught, just pay, and be on your merry way.

Yeah, this way of doing things is clearly the best way, reflected in the excellent traffic (and pedestrian) death statistics in Thailand...

Post: #28

The vast majority of drunk driver caused fatalities are caused by alcoholics who drive black out drunk on a regular basis and either fall asleep at the wheel or drive like a reckless madman. Lowing the BAC to .05 will do absolutely nothing besides make criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens. This shit will have zero effect on the hardcore drinkers who actually kill people and put lives at risk since they drive at .2 and above all the time anyway.

A social drinker driving home at .07 like normal, obeying traffic laws like usual does not pose any greater threat. Texting and driving is far more dangerous but they can't really do anything to get huge revenue from that like they can from "drunk driving".

Fuck the politicians who push these laws and fuck MADD. People shouldn't have to worry about losing their jobs and going to jail because they drove safely home after having three beers while watching a baseball game after work.

Also, any fatal crash where alcohol is involved in any conceivable way, such as a sober driver running into a drunk driver, a drunk pedestrian stepping into traffic, two sober drivers and a beer can found in one of the cars, ect, is recorded as "alcohol related".

And why the fuck is getting pulled over for nothing more than a license plate light being out at midnight on a Friday during DUI hunting time punished far worse than a sober driver driving recklessly and causing a bad accident?

Post: #29

I hate DUI laws because even if you blow a 0.00 you can still get arrested and forced to take a drug test with blood or urine (happened to me, it was negative). Further more here is a dirty secret lawyers do not want you to know, a simple DUI will have the same outcome whether you hire a lawyer or not-your first DUI will get reduced to reckless driving by the public defender and you will pay a simple fine.

Post: #30

(03-24-2017 04:38 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 12:56 PM)Rawmeo Wrote:  I'm glad to never have to worry about that in Thailand - just make sure to have 3,000 baht in cash, and drive home. If you get caught, just pay, and be on your merry way.

Yeah, this way of doing things is certainly the best way, reflected in the excellent traffic (and pedestrian) death statistics in Thailand...

That's my first go-to statistic when I'm going to visit a place.

"Well, I was excited to go see Thailand but then I saw their traffic statistics. So instead I guess I'll go party in Iowa."

Post: #31

(03-24-2017 04:38 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 12:56 PM)Rawmeo Wrote:  I'm glad to never have to worry about that in Thailand - just make sure to have 3,000 baht in cash, and drive home. If you get caught, just pay, and be on your merry way.

Yeah, this way of doing things is certainly the best way, reflected in the excellent traffic (and pedestrian) death statistics in Thailand.

Just an interesting thought, and I don't know if this is true in other states, but here in Hawaii you can bribe your way into anything these days. I could build a pipeline through an ancient burial ground and over the steps of the governors mansion, call it The Leaky Toxic Pipeline, and nobody would care as long as the bribes roll in.

The only thing nobody budges on is DUIs. I've given cops money for all kinds of traffic shit, and a ton of other stuff that involves the government. But when it comes to shady ass duis, its all by the books. Sad.

Aloha!

Post: #32

(03-24-2017 04:45 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 04:38 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 12:56 PM)Rawmeo Wrote:  I'm glad to never have to worry about that in Thailand - just make sure to have 3,000 baht in cash, and drive home. If you get caught, just pay, and be on your merry way.

Yeah, this way of doing things is certainly the best way, reflected in the excellent traffic (and pedestrian) death statistics in Thailand...

That's my first go-to statistic when I'm going to visit a place.

"Well, I was excited to go see Thailand but then I saw their traffic statistics. So instead I guess I'll go party in Iowa."

Brewdog bro, I lived in Thailand (and your fav location Colombia).

I didn't imply you should base a travel decision on these facts.

But it's absurd to imply that they way these countries deal with traffic laws is somehow superior or better for the people. The only guy it's better for is the guy paying the bribe.

I get that it's "fun" in these places where you can get away with more, but lets not pretend that they aren't fucked up in many ways.

Post: #33

Delete double post
[/quote]

Post: #34

(03-24-2017 04:51 PM)GlobalMan Wrote:  Brewdog bro, I lived in Thailand (and your fav location Colombia).

I didn't imply you should base a travel decision on these facts.

But it's absurd to imply that they way these countries deal with traffic laws is somehow superior or better for the people. The only guy it's better for is the guy paying the bribe.

I get that it's "fun" in these places where you can get away with more, but lets not pretend that they aren't fucked up in many ways.

It's just my feeling that Americans give way too much power to the government to make them feel safe. I don't need anyone to make me feel safe. I wanna die with my balls on fire while falling of a mountain cliff.

I think this Utah law has more to do with the Mormons just not wanting anyone else to drink. And I'm tired of busybodies ruining my fun in life using the pretense that "It's for the CHILDREN!"

Post: #35

(03-24-2017 05:15 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  I think this Utah law has more to do with the Mormons just not wanting anyone else to drink. And I'm tired of busybodies ruining my fun in life using the pretense that "It's for the CHILDREN!"

This law was passed in Utah because the people that want the limit lower knew that there wouldn't be any opposition there. Mormons don't drink.

Now that a foot is in the door a bunch of other states are gonna go along with it and .05 will become the norm.

Watch, four less people will die in Utah and the lawmakers and special interest groups will stand on their high horses and pat themselves on the back for changing this law and saving lives.

Its all bullshit. If the SWPL went after Roosh, they should have no problem calling MADD a hate group.

Aloha!

Post: #36

(03-24-2017 05:27 PM)Kona Wrote:  Its all bullshit. If the SWPL went after Roosh, they should have no problem calling MADD a hate group.

I think we should ban together and form DAMM. Drunks Against Mad Mothers.

Post: #37

(03-24-2017 05:33 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 05:27 PM)Kona Wrote:  Its all bullshit. If the SWPL went after Roosh, they should have no problem calling MADD a hate group.

I think we should ban together and form DAMM. Drunks Against Mad Mothers.

I meant the SPLC.

Aloha!

Post: #38

(03-24-2017 05:34 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 05:33 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 05:27 PM)Kona Wrote:  Its all bullshit. If the SWPL went after Roosh, they should have no problem calling MADD a hate group.

I think we should ban together and form DAMM. Drunks Against Mad Mothers.

I meant the SPLC.

Aloha!

The Southern Preposterous Lie Center? Yeah, I heard of 'em. Anyone that they don't agree politically with goes on their hitlist of "hate groups."

Post: #39

(03-24-2017 04:02 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  When I was growing up and the legal drinking age was 18 the DUI level was 0.12 then MADD got the drinking age raised to 21 and the level lowered to .08, the cunts-ruined the party and getting home from it. 18 to drink and .12 is reasonable, keep women out of politics.

I was at a friend's wedding a few months back. The bartender told me that shots weren't allowed. I asked why and he said the local MADD chapter had lobbied the state govt to ban shots from open bars...

Fucking fat baby boomer cunts sucking all the fun out while they partied and fucked their way through the 70s and 80s.

Post: #40

(03-24-2017 05:15 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  It's just my feeling that Americans give way too much power to the government to make them feel safe. I don't need anyone to make me feel safe. I wanna die with my balls on fire while falling of a mountain cliff.

I think this Utah law has more to do with the Mormons just not wanting anyone else to drink. And I'm tired of busybodies ruining my fun in life using the pretense that "It's for the CHILDREN!"

Every time I hear that line I can't help but think of this epic Bill Maher spiel that sums it up perfectly, back in the good old days before he went full SJW

(03-24-2017 05:27 PM)Kona Wrote:  [quote='BrewDog' pid='1535797' dateline='1490393714']
This law was passed in Utah because the people that want the limit lower knew that there wouldn't be any opposition there. Mormons don't drink.

Now that a foot is in the door a bunch of other states are gonna go along with it and .05 will become the norm.

Watch, four less people will die in Utah and the lawmakers and special interest groups will stand on their high horses and pat themselves on the back for changing this law and saving lives.

Its all bullshit. If the SWPL went after Roosh, they should have no problem calling MADD a hate group.

Aloha!

Worth noting that not only is .08 the norm, but if states try to make their limit higher than that level they lose federal highway funding, regardless of how much they've given the feds in taxes.

I've also been T boned by a drunk driver (.15) and also own a high end breathalyzer, which I can count the number of times I've blown .08+ into in the five years I've owned it on one hand (not that I blow into it every time I'm drinking...). These facts are irrelevant - my own life isn't worth preventing 7 billion other people from catching a buzz once in a while to anyone but myself. Life is risk - get comfortable with it, or move to Australia.

If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom. - Dwight D. Eisenhower

Post: #41

(03-24-2017 11:38 PM)Gorgiass Wrote:  If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom. - Dwight D. Eisenhower

I don't want "total freedom", I want to not get sent to the hospital by some asshole who's too wasted to stand.

Post: #42

(03-24-2017 11:56 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(03-24-2017 11:38 PM)Gorgiass Wrote:  If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom. - Dwight D. Eisenhower

I don't want "total freedom", I want to not get sent to the hospital by some asshole who's too wasted to stand.

I'm not sure you understand quotation marks.

And if have evidence of people regularly being unable to stand at .06, please bring it to my attention. Otherwise, save the hyperbole for the MADD meetings.

Post: #43

(03-24-2017 11:38 PM)Gorgiass Wrote:  Every time I hear that line I can't help but think of this epic Bill Maher spiel that sums it up perfectly, back in the good old days before he went full SJW

I've been impressed by Maher lately. He's been sticking it to the SJWs.

Post: #44

We don't need to lower the threshold for what is considered a DUI. We need to make it much, much harder for people to get a driver's license in the first place. Fucking cunts. This issue pisses me the fuck off.

Post: #45

^ Making it harder to get drivers licenses is an attack on immigrants, y'see... And it's War on Women. Report for re-education immediately, citizen!

PS: it's also wrong for Whites to drive, because they culturally appropriated the wheel.

Post: #46

(03-24-2017 11:56 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  I don't want "total freedom", I want to not get sent to the hospital by some asshole who's too wasted to stand.

"...too wasted to stand..."

So you would be cool raising the legal limit from .08 to .18 or higher then?

Post: #47

^ Whether the limit is 0.08, 0.05, or 3803242, chronic drunk drivers will continue to break the law - even if we put a "zero tolerance" law, multirecidivists will still do it. IMO, lowering the limit is only a way to make money. I drove several times around 0.08 and I didn't feel impaired at all - of course if I'm wasted I'll take a taxi, but after just 2-3 drinks, I don't see any problem - they want our cash.

Post: #48

High five for entirely appropriate and seemingly organic use of "multirecidivist".

Talent, gents: we have it right here on RVF.

Post: #49

(03-26-2017 02:54 AM)Hoser Wrote:  High five for entirely appropriate and seemingly organic use of "multirecidivist".

Talent, gents: we have it right here on RVF.

I don't fully understand your thoughts.

A recidivist would mean that you keep doing something repeatedly.

A multirecidivist would therefore mean that you keep on, keep on doing something repeatedly.

That's as clear as one can get.

Post: #50

Is there such a thing as a megarecidivist? A recidivist so severe that recidivism turns into his main job?