What a bunch of rubes. Get tough on drunk drivers! ASND is defending a drunk driver!
Raise your hand if you never received a speeding ticket or spoke on your cell phone while driving.
Sober inattentive driving and/or sober speeding driver do the majority of killing on the roads and they receive no prison time for killing someone with a 2 Ton Weapon.
Get a clue…laws are tough enough….it’s the mental midgets like all of you that blindly believe MADD and NHTSA IMPUTED statistics and the media propaganda blitz for MADD that blind you to the fact you are being hoodwinked.
I bet none of you ever went to a ball game, had a beer and drove afterward either. According to MADD you are a drunk driver.
If drinkers that don’t kill can receive jail time after so many offenses, we should be treating speeders in the same fashion. Both might cause harm to another human being but didn’t.
A concept most of you as speeders need to wake up to.
Thank you for presenting a completely absurd position to demonstrate how stupid people sound when they defend drinking and driving. It was like a skit from the Daily Show – hilarious satire. It’s a great relief to know that nobody is really that ignorant.
We’re making headway. We got the drunks, tee toddlers, cell phone users and speeders off of the road. If we also include teenage drivers, non insureds, senior citizens and trucks, the roads will be almost safe. Unfortunately we have adults with problems and no self control and a system that is unable to hold them accountable and prevent it. In three different states, I have seen drunks walking on city, state and interstate highways late at night. Some don’t need a car to do damage.
“Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition”, but look around and there we are. Seriously, I feel like I’m trapped in a Monty Python skit. Nobody’s defending drunk driving, you simple-minded-Lemming. But apparently you are incappable of comprehending such concepts as presumption of innocence, evidence which supports a reasonable burden of proof and the proportionality of an offence.
You want to lock him up for driving on a suspended license as a repeat offender; that’s proper. You want to be outraged that after 10 DUIs the state did not permanently revoke his license; I’m with you on that. I only know of one perfect person and even he was executed for that! If you’re not willing to demonstrate some thoughtful perspective, don’t expect the rest of us to cut you any slack!
I’m a little confused, One More Time. The article wasn’t entirely clear on why the individual was convicted. Have you ever known an IJ article to be complete? Do you have a link that shows that there was no other proof or you being as ignorant as you accuse others of being? You need to get a little perspective yourself.
lets just all agree that the problem seems to be that he was allowed to get that many DUIs at all. He should have been serving jail time. I have lost an aunt and a cousin to drunk drivers and yet i do understand that one drink at a ballgame doesnt make you a worse driver than i am when i am driving while talking on my cell. lets not fight
First off, I prefer the term hick. Rubes is too European.
Did anyone say anything about speeders? I’m pissed off about people who are repeat offenders of letting their dogs crap in my yard, but unfortunately this article was about repeat DUI offenders.
The media makes you think this…The media makes you think that…
Look buddy if I wanted to hear some Rush L. retoric I’d tune in and listen to him.
The dude had 10 DUI convictions. There is no excuse. Shut your mouth and start reading the article before you talk.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
What a bunch of rubes. Get tough on drunk drivers! ASND is defending a drunk driver!
Raise your hand if you never received a speeding ticket or spoke on your cell phone while driving.
Sober inattentive driving and/or sober speeding driver do the majority of killing on the roads and they receive no prison time for killing someone with a 2 Ton Weapon.
Get a clue…laws are tough enough….it’s the mental midgets like all of you that blindly believe MADD and NHTSA IMPUTED statistics and the media propaganda blitz for MADD that blind you to the fact you are being hoodwinked.
I bet none of you ever went to a ball game, had a beer and drove afterward either. According to MADD you are a drunk driver.
If drinkers that don’t kill can receive jail time after so many offenses, we should be treating speeders in the same fashion. Both might cause harm to another human being but didn’t.
A concept most of you as speeders need to wake up to.
Good day!.
Thank you for presenting a completely absurd position to demonstrate how stupid people sound when they defend drinking and driving. It was like a skit from the Daily Show – hilarious satire. It’s a great relief to know that nobody is really that ignorant.
We’re making headway. We got the drunks, tee toddlers, cell phone users and speeders off of the road. If we also include teenage drivers, non insureds, senior citizens and trucks, the roads will be almost safe. Unfortunately we have adults with problems and no self control and a system that is unable to hold them accountable and prevent it. In three different states, I have seen drunks walking on city, state and interstate highways late at night. Some don’t need a car to do damage.
“Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition”, but look around and there we are. Seriously, I feel like I’m trapped in a Monty Python skit. Nobody’s defending drunk driving, you simple-minded-Lemming. But apparently you are incappable of comprehending such concepts as presumption of innocence, evidence which supports a reasonable burden of proof and the proportionality of an offence.
You want to lock him up for driving on a suspended license as a repeat offender; that’s proper. You want to be outraged that after 10 DUIs the state did not permanently revoke his license; I’m with you on that. I only know of one perfect person and even he was executed for that! If you’re not willing to demonstrate some thoughtful perspective, don’t expect the rest of us to cut you any slack!
I’m a little confused, One More Time. The article wasn’t entirely clear on why the individual was convicted. Have you ever known an IJ article to be complete? Do you have a link that shows that there was no other proof or you being as ignorant as you accuse others of being? You need to get a little perspective yourself.
lets just all agree that the problem seems to be that he was allowed to get that many DUIs at all. He should have been serving jail time. I have lost an aunt and a cousin to drunk drivers and yet i do understand that one drink at a ballgame doesnt make you a worse driver than i am when i am driving while talking on my cell. lets not fight
First off, I prefer the term hick. Rubes is too European.
Did anyone say anything about speeders? I’m pissed off about people who are repeat offenders of letting their dogs crap in my yard, but unfortunately this article was about repeat DUI offenders.
The media makes you think this…The media makes you think that…
Look buddy if I wanted to hear some Rush L. retoric I’d tune in and listen to him.
The dude had 10 DUI convictions. There is no excuse. Shut your mouth and start reading the article before you talk.
Dread, chill out man – YOU NEED A BEER. Its not that big of deal man………