I think the government kinda traps you here. Alcohol impairs your judgment, no question. But then the government allows a bar to serve you alcohol... so anything you do after that pretty much you aren't responsible for... because, as the government states, it has impaired your judgment.. so blame drunk drivers all you wanna.. but really what you should be doing is pointing your finger at the good ol' US of A... and the hypocrisy of the system...

6/19/2006 12:55:42 AM

here we go

6/19/2006 12:57:55 AM

If you want to drink and then operate heavy machinery well hey who am I to complain if I get run over?


...wait is this a trick question

6/19/2006 12:59:45 AM

the government likes to pick and choose what to ban. sure, a crack addict can go out and kill someone b/c they are out of their mind, so of course crack is illegal. but someone can drink alcohol than go out and kill someone by driving drunk, which happens so often, that it only makes sense to outlaw alcohol.

however, since alcohol is a federally regulated substance, people assume it is safe. it is not safe. it is very very dangerous.

more info:

http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/50773;jsessionid=aaa-HH0p1fAx_T

6/19/2006 1:07:48 AM

the other side of the coin is that it makes sense to legalize crack and to educate the public about the fact that it's dangerous and why, just as we do with alcohol.

6/19/2006 1:11:18 AM

hcnguyen said:

Quote :

"But then the government allows a bar to serve you alcohol... so anything you do after that pretty much you aren't responsible for..."

You're responsible for your choice to drink.

6/19/2006 1:21:14 AM

^indeed that is how we roll

with those, what do you call em


civil liberties

6/19/2006 1:24:45 AM

This thread is poorly thought out and moronic.

And I'm gonna leave it at that.

6/19/2006 1:26:55 AM

If you smoke crack and kill someone... you get charged with under the influence AND murder... you don't just get out of it.

If you want to drink and get so piss drunk you can't stand... im all for it as long as it doesn't impede my rights! That's why there are things called CABS, and Designated Drivers... there went that attack.

6/19/2006 1:32:53 AM

another classic by hcnguyen

I blame it on not knowing english

6/19/2006 1:53:09 AM

if you are too drunk to drive... common sense tells you that you're also too drunk to think... so you're not aware you're too drunk to drive... and the government allows this to happen...

If the legal limit is .08, which it is, but one beer impairs you... how can you make a smart decision on when enough is enough if you're impaired already.. it makes no sense at all... once i have a drink in my system my judgement is already in jepordy and the domino effect has started.

6/19/2006 1:57:30 AM

it's well known that asians have the tolerance of 5 year old girls. The rest of us can handle it like adults.

6/19/2006 2:59:10 AM

When you go out to drink, you are sober. You know you are going out to drink. Therefore it is your responsibility to make appropriate arrangements for your transportation before you get beyond the point of reason, which you know you are going to do.

[/thread]

6/19/2006 3:08:02 AM

Quote :

"if you are too drunk to drive... common sense tells you that you're also too drunk to think..."

hcnguyen teaches us an important lesson. Don't drink and post.

6/19/2006 7:21:57 AM

^^ Grumpy nailed it. A good example would be catching a lift to the bar since you know you will be drunk later and likely to concede to the temptation to drive home, something you cannot do if you have no car.

You might consider giving up your keys in exchange for drinking.

[Edited on June 19, 2006 at 8:50 AM. Reason : .,.]

6/19/2006 8:50:05 AM

i really hope this is a troll.

the idea of drunk driving being bad has been so hammered into our society that you'd need an insane amount of impairment to forget it.

6/19/2006 8:55:33 AM

if you get a DWI...and go to your court date and try to use this shit as your defense...they'll be like "sir, please don't show up to court drunk"

6/19/2006 10:21:45 AM

Quote :

"if you are too drunk to drive... common sense tells you that you're also too drunk to think... so you're not aware you're too drunk to drive... and the government allows this to happen... If the legal limit is .08, which it is, but one beer impairs you... how can you make a smart decision on when enough is enough if you're impaired already.. it makes no sense at all... once i have a drink in my system my judgement is already in jepordy and the domino effect has started."

That's why you prepare... BEFORE you go drinking if you're going to get piss drunk. That's why there are DD's and Cabs. But of course if you want to blame the government for your drunk ass instead of taking responsibility go ahead. You can serve the time in jail.

Welcome to our society where your actions have reprocussions. If you don't like it, move somewhere they have rules that you do like.

6/19/2006 10:25:55 AM

paging PartyChris

6/19/2006 10:28:17 AM

i'm a drunk driving hypocrite

at some point in the last month i drove with alcohol in my system, possibly with a bac of greater than .08

however i enjoyed talking shit about redick's dwi

6/19/2006 10:31:54 AM

here's the truth: the reason people drive drunk is because they don't see a problem with it, even when they are sober

and this thread is stupid

6/19/2006 11:18:12 AM

IT'S THE GOVERNMENT'S FAULT IM IRRESPONSIBLE!1

6/19/2006 12:37:15 PM

That's why prohibition is the way to go.. let's abolish alcohol and cut off the penises of any man caught consuming or distributing... blow up all government buildings (off hours, of course) until they see things this way...

It really is a money racket.. the government couldn't care less about drinking and driving.. they get all the tax money while you're getting drunk then reward you by all the alcohol related fines you get through the court system... I think they're going to the well one too many times... MAN UP, boys, quit drinking.. show the government who is boss...

6/19/2006 3:33:04 PM

seriously...go away.

Quote :

"if you are too drunk to drive... common sense tells you that you're also too drunk to think... so you're not aware you're too drunk to drive... and the government allows this to happen... If the legal limit is .08, which it is, but one beer impairs you... how can you make a smart decision on when enough is enough if you're impaired already.. it makes no sense at all... once i have a drink in my system my judgement is already in jepordy and the domino effect has started."

this might be the dumbest thing i've see on TWW. also, stop drinking like a 4 year old girl. does communion wine make you slur your words?

6/19/2006 3:38:25 PM

the government also allows you to go buy a knife/gun and kill yourself/other people

DAMN THE GOVERNMENT - THOSE BASTARDS

6/19/2006 3:39:37 PM

-10/10

STUPIDEST FUCKING THING I HAVE EVER HEARD

6/19/2006 3:44:34 PM

^^^i agree this is a terrible thread...but he's actually right about that....

6/19/2006 4:51:21 PM

Is this guy serious or just trolling?

6/19/2006 5:07:54 PM

Quote :

"When you go out to drink, you are sober. You know you are going out to drink. Therefore it is your responsibility to make appropriate arrangements for your transportation before you get beyond the point of reason, which you know you are going to do. [/thread]"

WRONG

the fact that you assume 100% of the population is responsible 100% of the time is ignorant. you should know just how stupid everyone is and that many people are going to drive drunk no matter what.

[Edited on June 24, 2006 at 11:42 PM. Reason : ]

6/24/2006 11:42:34 PM

ahahaha

this guy posts in the soap box?

this thread rules

6/25/2006 12:44:43 AM

Quote :

"the fact that you assume 100% of the population is responsible 100% of the time is ignorant"

And to imply that we should not hold people responsible for their irresponsible behavior is idiotic. People should be wise enough to stop themselves from driving while drunk before they get drunk, otherwise we must punish them in hopes that next time they will act more responsibly.

6/25/2006 12:45:02 AM

thx liberalism for producing mindsets like these


fuck.

6/25/2006 12:45:12 AM

hcnguyen, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this internet forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

6/25/2006 1:46:26 AM

oh lol i thought u were talking to salisburyboy but then i remembered that you agree with him

6/25/2006 2:50:29 AM

6/25/2006 3:01:49 AM

lock it up

6/25/2006 3:13:12 AM

Quote :

"hcnguyen: But then the government allows a bar to serve you alcohol... so anything you do after that pretty much you aren't responsible for..."

hcnguyen, this is the basis of your argument and it's laughable.

I'm extremely irresponsible and even I don't wake up next to a stranger and think, "Man, I ought to sue those Stoli mother fuckers. And Otis Redding too. That man makes me horny."

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 3:18 AM. Reason : sss]

6/25/2006 3:15:55 AM

^dont take that quote out of context please. before that i explained that the GOVERNMENT THEMSELVES has proclaimed that alcahol on any level impairs your decision making.

so they are allowing places to serve you something that THEY KNOW will impair your judgement. and they leave it 100% legal for you to get your judgement impaired on a small level by this alcahol

but you are responsible for the things you do after you have already legally impared your judgement. thats the hypocrisy

6/25/2006 3:30:49 AM

There is hypocrisy in the laws, when you compare drunk driving with drunk sex. A girl can claim the next day she was drunk, and so was raped, when in fact she consented. Isn't that so in the good ol' US of A???

If so, in that case, these arguments, while they are perfect thread-enders when talking about drunk driving, they are not so when you take into account drunk sex:

Quote :

"You're responsible for your choice to drink."

Quote :

"When you go out to drink, you are sober. You know you are going out to drink. Therefore it is your responsibility to make appropriate arrangements for your transportation before you get beyond the point of reason, which you know you are going to do."

So,

[/thread]

Also, while I am a big fan of taking responsibility for one's actions, I completely agree with this:

Quote :

"It really is a money racket.. the government couldn't care less about drinking and driving.. they get all the tax money while you're getting drunk "

If the government really cared about the welfare of its people, it would ban alcohol and tobacco, just like all other drugs are banned, because alcohol and tobacco are really as bad, if not worse, than a lot of the banned drugs. But, the bottom line is $texas.

So, hypocrisy DOES exist when talking about alcohol and tobacco, in more ways than one.

QED.

6/25/2006 6:10:50 AM

Well, if you fellas don't buy the arguments made in favor of liberty and freedom to choose, surely you cannot argue with results: while some individuals may fuck themselves up with alcohol at least we don't have alcohol driven organized-crime syndicates rampaging through Chicago terrorizing the locals and straining the social fabric with ever larger prison populations and ever more street violence.

6/25/2006 9:53:18 AM

laws allowing alcohol to be served vs. laws banning drunk driving IS NOT hypocrisy

laws that state a woman can not consent to sex while drunk vs. laws banning drunk driving IS hypocrisy

6/25/2006 11:01:11 AM

^

6/25/2006 11:15:30 AM

Quote :

"laws that state a woman can not consent to sex while drunk vs. laws banning drunk driving IS hypocrisy"

Yes, the cannot consent thing you may have a point, but laws banning drunk driving are necessary and prudent.

6/25/2006 11:50:44 AM

nobody's arguing otherwise

6/25/2006 12:01:16 PM

^^ and i understand that. i was just leading to the fact that alcahol should be banned. its hypocritical for it to be legal.

6/25/2006 12:13:48 PM

didn't we already try that and determine it to be a really, really bad idea?

6/25/2006 12:25:53 PM

the gov could make more money off fines than sells and not be hypocritical at the same time.

6/25/2006 12:29:15 PM

to reap the benefit of fines you have to have enforcement. enforcement costs money. add to the fact that you'd kill half the restaurants in the country who make a lot of money on drinks and there goes some more revenue.

6/25/2006 1:09:15 PM

bars would still serve non alcaholic beverages. many of the same drinks can be made with substitue concentrates instead of liquir. and youd be surprised how similar they taste too. it would open up a whole new technology sector. it would also increase the productivity of america by so much. there would be less bums, less crime, less fights, no drunk driving and all in all things would be better.

i wonder how much they spend on checkpoints and shit? police are gonna work regardless. the penalty for alcahol could be very decriminalized to the point of a ticket.

6/25/2006 1:19:52 PM

Quote :

"bars would still serve non alcaholic beverages. many of the same drinks can be made with substitue concentrates instead of liquir. and youd be surprised how similar they taste too."

hahahaha

Quote :

" there would be less bums, less crime, less fights, no drunk driving and all in all things would be better."

hahahahaha



i basically don't even drink, and i'm saying you've lost your mind, or are totally oblivious to what happened when this was tried once before.

6/25/2006 1:24:13 PM