It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Hey everyone, I just wanted to post a warning/reminder to everyone. On Friday, one of my best friend's ex-boyfriend died in a tragic drunk driving accident that sent two others in critical condition. This is the third kid I've known since August to die of a drunk driving related incident. No one is immune to drunken driving; I know that I've been put in regretful situations when it came down to getting a ride home. Fortunately, I think this death resonated among a lot of teenagers in my area, who regularly drunk drive on the weekends. Regardless, I want everyone to remember just how dangerous it is to drink and drive. Call ANYBODY if you are ever put in a difficult situation, you will get a ride.
pow pow can fuck off, you obviously suffer from normalcy bias (ive not seen another person while im driving under the influence yet, so i never will) love/hate to hear your tune change after the inevitable
TBK_ski.coDo you have a real argument? I would be fascinated to hear it.
Admitting that "you have made bad decisions" when it comes to driving drunk and "crashing multiple times" doesn't make you any less stupid for doing it. That is absolutely ridiculous. And then you are trying to pass the blame on the cops for making people feel unsafe and paranoid? Yes, police are here to protect and serve the public, but that doesn't take any of the responsibility off of us as citizens.
Just because you've never been pulled over for a DUI, you think we should get rid of RIDE checks whose sole purpose is to pull drunk drivers off the road? Are you out of your mind?
How you can see speeding as being deliberately reckless but driving home so drunk you are crashing your car "multiple times" is not I may never understand. One of the dumber arguments I've ever read.
Speed traps and red light cameras are absolutely basic in controlling people's speed. If we didn't have them, we'd have people (like you apparently) blowing through yellow lights and getting in more head-on collisions with left-turning drivers. I would gladly trade a rear-end collision for a head-on or a T-bone. Two of those are very lethal, one is an insurance claim.
You are clearly very naive when it comes to the police force and its officers. The vast majority of them don't do the job just to pull over speeders and give out tickets (I don't know any cops who like pulling people over for speeding, its a waste of their time), but it's the law. That's what they have to do. Don't like it? Don't speed, don't drive drunk, problem solved.
If you really can't see how the laws governing driving under the influence are there to protect the general public, then I'm sure natural selection will have its way with you anyway. I couldn't believe what I was reading in your response
There you go, kinda surprised I had to spell out why I called you stupid for crashing your car a few times while drunk, but hey, there you go. Rant over
TBK_ski.coAnd yet they have enough cops to station down the road from practically any major bar? Ill admit, I have made really bad decisions while under the influence. I have driven, and been a passenger in cars where either the driver, or I was severely inebriated, several times to the point where we were crashing multiple times. And yet the only time I ever came close to getting a DUI was when I drove through a checkpoint. If a cop was kind, and gave me a free breathalyzer test coming out of a bar, I would gladly take a cab and worry about getting my car in the morning later. I hope "constant fear of getting caught and strict penalties" is not your viewpoint on everything in life. Laws were not meant to be here as a way to throw people in jail, and fine them. Their purpose is to protect the general public, and yet it seems they go way beyond that to the point that they are fucking the general public. I don't thing speeding is comparable, as that is deliberately reckless. All these radar ticket cameras and red light cams that have been popping up, are doing absolutely nothing to better public safety, and have even been proven to cause more rear end collisions. Its all a business, they just want to make money wherever they can. For most cops, at this point I don't even feel like they care about helping people do the right thing, everything is a trap with a fine.
As I said, they have enough to station down to road occasionally, which makes the risk of them being there constant, verus being able to walk out to the parking lot seeing no cops and therefore knowing there is no risk of getting caught
Bullshit, you made that decision to drive drunk when ordered another beer in the bar.
Knowing when you are drunk isn't some fucking mystery, do you really need a breathalyzer to tell you are drunk when you are crashing into things on the way home?
And if that is really the case go buy your own breathalyzer for 40 bucks, it is a hell of a lot cheaper than a DUI
Yes that purpose of laws is to protect the public, the it way to enforce them is by having repercussions for breaking them. Who would bother following laws at all if they weren't any penalties if you are caught breaking them?
Like I said before, unless you are litterally retarded you will know when you are over or close to limit, so having a cop handing out breathalyzers really won't inform the public of much
I drove drunk a little too often back in the day... I have an old Domino's topper from when I used to work there that I would throw on the top of my truck whenever I had too many. It would look like I was just delivering pizzas so the cops wouldn't suspect anything. It proved to be a pretty good way to get home after bar close until I did a little growing up and just began footing the bill for cabs.
I still like to drive around with my topper though, it's a hell of a way to get out of tickets.
Sketchy3sYet again fails to bring up another argument but continue to spew shit through a keyboard. What I was bashing earlier was drunk driving you absolute fucking idiot. Do I bash on people who drive drunk and distractedly. Yes because I have multiple family deaths because of it. Have I eaten while driving. Yes. Did I ever say once that it wasn't bad because I did it. No. So I don't know what the hell your trying to say. For real all you just did was point out the blatantly obvious and then say it was retarded. You didn't say a single constructive thing. Quit trying to act like you know shit when in reality you are just saying things to say them because poor little you feels insecure about his own problems. And opinions? All you do is say your opinion you stupid hypocrite.
And oooh shit shut up your 17 man that hits deep
You bashed distracted drivers of all types yet admit to distracted driving. Jesus youre dumb
KayngBaynghis point was in the first three words of this post. You're fucking dumb, that's the point i'm making just for clarification.
So self righteous is that point? You're a different kinda stupid. Self righteous would be holding myself above that and stating I never drive distractledly...oh wait I did say I have And that I regret so shut up you ducking idiot with the self righteous when you don't understand the phrase or the whole situation.
Sketchy3sSo self righteous is that point? You're a different kinda stupid. Self righteous would be holding myself above that and stating I never drive distractledly...oh wait I did say I have And that I regret so shut up you ducking idiot with the self righteous when you don't understand the phrase or the whole situation.
Ive read all of your two posts in this thread, so theres the situation aspect.
I also fully understand what being self righteous is.
And here is proof that you have 0 understanding of the situation your in,
I called you a fucking idiot, because it seems that you restate yourself and put far too much effort with very little thought into your arguments. If you took the time to think about what I posted, you would have realized that I personally do not give a shit what you do while you drive, or how big of a self righteous tool you are. Simply put, Im calling you dumb. The fact that I feel the need to even offer this much explanation says a lot about what I think about you, and probably my social life.
plyswthsqrrlsAdmitting that "you have made bad decisions" when it comes to driving drunk and "crashing multiple times" doesn't make you any less stupid for doing it. That is absolutely ridiculous. And then you are trying to pass the blame on the cops for making people feel unsafe and paranoid? Yes, police are here to protect and serve the public, but that doesn't take any of the responsibility off of us as citizens.
Just because you've never been pulled over for a DUI, you think we should get rid of RIDE checks whose sole purpose is to pull drunk drivers off the road? Are you out of your mind?
How you can see speeding as being deliberately reckless but driving home so drunk you are crashing your car "multiple times" is not I may never understand. One of the dumber arguments I've ever read.
Speed traps and red light cameras are absolutely basic in controlling people's speed. If we didn't have them, we'd have people (like you apparently) blowing through yellow lights and getting in more head-on collisions with left-turning drivers. I would gladly trade a rear-end collision for a head-on or a T-bone. Two of those are very lethal, one is an insurance claim.
You are clearly very naive when it comes to the police force and its officers. The vast majority of them don't do the job just to pull over speeders and give out tickets (I don't know any cops who like pulling people over for speeding, its a waste of their time), but it's the law. That's what they have to do. Don't like it? Don't speed, don't drive drunk, problem solved.
If you really can't see how the laws governing driving under the influence are there to protect the general public, then I'm sure natural selection will have its way with you anyway. I couldn't believe what I was reading in your response
There you go, kinda surprised I had to spell out why I called you stupid for crashing your car a few times while drunk, but hey, there you go. Rant over
1. I never even implied that admitting to drunk driving made it less dumb, I believe I called it a Bad decision.
2. I most definitely was not crashing into things (curbs, my mail box) intentionally, I don't know why you would think that would be deliberate.
3. DUI ride checks don't specifically target reckless drivers, and get people who were driving responsibly in trouble. You should get a DUI for driving like you are drunk, not blowing a .09.
4. http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/objections Pretty much sums up why red light cams are worthless
5. "but its the law" is a horrible argument, my whole stance is questioning the laws.
6. You don't seem to have much or an argument besides calling me stupid, and twisting my words to prove irrelevant points.
cool_nameAs I said, they have enough to station down to road occasionally, which makes the risk of them being there constant, verus being able to walk out to the parking lot seeing no cops and therefore knowing there is no risk of getting caught
Bullshit, you made that decision to drive drunk when ordered another beer in the bar.
Knowing when you are drunk isn't some fucking mystery, do you really need a breathalyzer to tell you are drunk when you are crashing into things on the way home?
And if that is really the case go buy your own breathalyzer for 40 bucks, it is a hell of a lot cheaper than a DUI
Yes that purpose of laws is to protect the public, the it way to enforce them is by having repercussions for breaking them. Who would bother following laws at all if they weren't any penalties if you are caught breaking them?
Like I said before, unless you are litterally retarded you will know when you are over or close to limit, so having a cop handing out breathalyzers really won't inform the public of much
That is a bold claim to imply you knew my situation or intentions, maybe I only planned on having a few drinks with a client, until he whipped out a bottle of JW blue label whiskey. I usually try and take a cab home, but when you are really drunk you don't care about safety, I know I didn't at that point. What I needed was someone to stop me from getting in my car. If there was a cop there, he would stop drunk people from driving, by reasoning, or through force.
TBK_ski.co1. I never even implied that admitting to drunk driving made it less dumb, I believe I called it a Bad decision.
2. I most definitely was not crashing into things (curbs, my mail box) intentionally, I don't know why you would think that would be deliberate.
3. DUI ride checks don't specifically target reckless drivers, and get people who were driving responsibly in trouble. You should get a DUI for driving like you are drunk, not blowing a .09.
4. http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/objections Pretty much sums up why red light cams are worthless
5. "but its the law" is a horrible argument, my whole stance is questioning the laws.
6. You don't seem to have much or an argument besides calling me stupid, and twisting my words to prove irrelevant points.
1. Ok so you're agreeing it was a stupid thing to do? And my original comment was justified?
2. Obviously you weren't intentionally running into things, I never said you were. You intentionally drove drunk, which is beyond moronic, and unbelievably dangerous.
3. RIDE checks are basically a road block, you would have to be a special kind of stupid to recklessly drive into a police road block. Their purpose is to get drunk drivers off the roads, I don't understand how you can argue against that.
4. The only people that red light cameras inconvenience are people who run stale yellow/red lights. I know maybe one person who has ever even been mildly inconvenienced by a red light camera, and they had it all sorted out within a week.
5. Cops can't pick and choose which laws to enforce. If they see someone break a law, they have to stop them and issue a ticket / arrest them. That is their job, how do you not understand this?
6. My argument is that you are absolutely stupid for driving drunk, and I stand by it. It's the most unnecessary risk you could take. I haven't twisted any of your words, just gave you a pretty clear argument on why its stupid to drive drunk and why you blaming police officers for not going after speeders instead of your drunk ass is ludicrous. Reckless endangerment and stunt driving are also both arrest-able offences as well, so I'm not sure why you're arguing cops don't go after these people
KayngBayngIve read all of your two posts in this thread, so theres the situation aspect.
I also fully understand what being self righteous is.
And here is proof that you have 0 understanding of the situation your in,
I called you a fucking idiot, because it seems that you restate yourself and put far too much effort with very little thought into your arguments. If you took the time to think about what I posted, you would have realized that I personally do not give a shit what you do while you drive, or how big of a self righteous tool you are. Simply put, Im calling you dumb. The fact that I feel the need to even offer this much explanation says a lot about what I think about you, and probably my social life.
1. "Here is proof that you have 0 understanding" your proof is saying I restate my argument, which I do. But how then do I have 0 understanding?
2." I personally don't give a shut what you do when you drive, or how big of a self righteous tool you are" is this also proof how I have 0 understanding? And if you didn't care why did you feel the need to say ssomething? Compensating?
3. "I read your 2 posts so there's the situation aspect" ..I have multiple posts to multiple people throughout this so that is just false? Maybe you should use some more thought in your arguments or "proof"
4. Are you stupid?
plyswthsqrrls1. Ok so you're agreeing it was a stupid thing to do? And my original comment was justified?
2. Obviously you weren't intentionally running into things, I never said you were. You intentionally drove drunk, which is beyond moronic, and unbelievably dangerous.
3. RIDE checks are basically a road block, you would have to be a special kind of stupid to recklessly drive into a police road block. Their purpose is to get drunk drivers off the roads, I don't understand how you can argue against that.
4. The only people that red light cameras inconvenience are people who run stale yellow/red lights. I know maybe one person who has ever even been mildly inconvenienced by a red light camera, and they had it all sorted out within a week.
5. Cops can't pick and choose which laws to enforce. If they see someone break a law, they have to stop them and issue a ticket / arrest them. That is their job, how do you not understand this?
6. My argument is that you are absolutely stupid for driving drunk, and I stand by it. It's the most unnecessary risk you could take. I haven't twisted any of your words, just gave you a pretty clear argument on why its stupid to drive drunk and why you blaming police officers for not going after speeders instead of your drunk ass is ludicrous. Reckless endangerment and stunt driving are also both arrest-able offences as well, so I'm not sure why you're arguing cops don't go after these people
1. I agree, driving impaired to the point that you are reckless is dumb. But I am trying to explain there is a difference between driving over the limit, and driving recklessly
2. I did not plan on getting drunk if you read my last comment on cool_name's post
3. I am saying that cops should not target every driver on the road, just people driving in a reckless manner.
4. The arguments against red light cams outweigh and support they have. If someone runs a red light when cars are passing through, I doubt they will notice a red light cam. I don't know about where you live, but certain county's near Portland have tons of red light cams, and you get a ticket if you enter the intersection once the light turns yellow (even though there is a delay period where both roads have red for a couple seconds). It is really easy to get a ticket, and this causes people to slam on the breaks when the light turns yellow, even if they are about to go through.
5. My whole argument is over the laws, and why they should be changed.
6. When did I ever say cops should go after speeders and not worry about drunk drivers? And I'm not sure what you are exactly trying to say with your last sentence, I never said they didn't.
TBK_ski.co1. I agree, driving impaired to the point that you are reckless is dumb. But I am trying to explain there is a difference between driving over the limit, and driving recklessly
2. I did not plan on getting drunk if you read my last comment on cool_name's post
3. I am saying that cops should not target every driver on the road, just people driving in a reckless manner.
4. The arguments against red light cams outweigh and support they have. If someone runs a red light when cars are passing through, I doubt they will notice a red light cam. I don't know about where you live, but certain county's near Portland have tons of red light cams, and you get a ticket if you enter the intersection once the light turns yellow (even though there is a delay period where both roads have red for a couple seconds). It is really easy to get a ticket, and this causes people to slam on the breaks when the light turns yellow, even if they are about to go through.
5. My whole argument is over the laws, and why they should be changed.
6. When did I ever say cops should go after speeders and not worry about drunk drivers? And I'm not sure what you are exactly trying to say with your last sentence, I never said they didn't.
1. Ok... but there isn't one. That's why its a limit. If you are over the limit, you are endangering others, whether or not you're aware of it is an entirely different story.
2. If you planned on net getting drunk, why couldn't you just have not gotten drunk? Are you 13 years old? Did they peer pressure you?
3. Cops don't target everyone on the road. A RIDE check isn't "targeting" anybody, cops just ask if you've had anything to drink and if you haven't, they send you on your way.
4. Red Light Cameras activate when the light turns yellow, according to the City of Portland.
5. Your argument makes no sense. What laws do you want to change? Get rid of DUI altogether?
6. You said cops should spend less time trying to catch people and throwing them in jail for DUIs and go after people driving "intentionally recklessly," because apparently driving drunk isn't intentionally reckless.
plyswthsqrrls1. Ok... but there isn't one. That's why its a limit. If you are over the limit, you are endangering others, whether or not you're aware of it is an entirely different story.
2. If you planned on net getting drunk, why couldn't you just have not gotten drunk? Are you 13 years old? Did they peer pressure you?
3. Cops don't target everyone on the road. A RIDE check isn't "targeting" anybody, cops just ask if you've had anything to drink and if you haven't, they send you on your way.
4. Red Light Cameras activate when the light turns yellow, according to the City of Portland.
5. Your argument makes no sense. What laws do you want to change? Get rid of DUI altogether?
6. You said cops should spend less time trying to catch people and throwing them in jail for DUIs and go after people driving "intentionally recklessly," because apparently driving drunk isn't intentionally reckless.
1. Says who?
2. It was fucking blue label, and yes they peer pressured me. Sorry I'm not you Mr. Perfect
3. Still get breathalyzed
4. That's exactly what I said
5. I have already gone over this in previous posts
6. Its only reckless if you are driving reckless, and driving over the limit is not always intentional. I also never said "intentionally reckless" just reckless, I don't know why you keep putting words in my mouth, and I don't know why it would matter if it was intentional or not when it comes to public safety.
Whelp, after posting in this thread a bunch, my "don't drink and drive" came to a reality yesterday. Some asshole drilled two parked cars (including mine) totaling them both. He also had his dogs in the car which were taken away by animal services (they didn't look too beat up). He was SO belligerent, yelling at the cops telling em he was going to sue them for hitting him, yelling constantly "fuck you, fuck you, fuck you", and kicking the rear window out of a police car. A real winner for sure.
shocker611Whelp, after posting in this thread a bunch, my "don't drink and drive" came to a reality yesterday. Some asshole drilled two parked cars (including mine) totaling them both. He also had his dogs in the car which were taken away by animal services (they didn't look too beat up). He was SO belligerent, yelling at the cops telling em he was going to sue them for hitting him, yelling constantly "fuck you, fuck you, fuck you", and kicking the rear window out of a police car. A real winner for sure.
TBK_ski.co1. I never even implied that admitting to drunk driving made it less dumb, I believe I called it a Bad decision.
2. I most definitely was not crashing into things (curbs, my mail box) intentionally, I don't know why you would think that would be deliberate.
3. DUI ride checks don't specifically target reckless drivers, and get people who were driving responsibly in trouble. You should get a DUI for driving like you are drunk, not blowing a .09.
4. http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/objections Pretty much sums up why red light cams are worthless
5. "but its the law" is a horrible argument, my whole stance is questioning the laws.
6. You don't seem to have much or an argument besides calling me stupid, and twisting my words to prove irrelevant points.
That is a bold claim to imply you knew my situation or intentions, maybe I only planned on having a few drinks with a client, until he whipped out a bottle of JW blue label whiskey. I usually try and take a cab home, but when you are really drunk you don't care about safety, I know I didn't at that point. What I needed was someone to stop me from getting in my car. If there was a cop there, he would stop drunk people from driving, by reasoning, or through force.
This thread has gotten so far off base. Drinking and driving is a dangerous thing to do, period. There really is no justification for doing it. With that said, circumstances arise where people make a poor decision, drive and everything works out; that is not always the case though. You can't change the past and any decisions you've made in the past but you can make better choices in the future. Be safe and remember that life is fickle. Having an extra couple beers is not worth dying over or killing others.
I can't believe some of you are arguing for drunk driving. I mean OK you might not have screwed up yet, but that doesn't mean it can't happen and is no justification for carrying on.
I don’t think drinking age is a limiting factor. Those who have to try do try even in early teens. I have seen people not drinking for their whole life and then someone start in their teens. My cousin who assist a DUI attorney Los Angeles often tells me that kids needs to be counseled when they enter teens so no one does drunk driving.
