we must demand immediate rezoning of the entire country into rural and urban zones only
only then can we judge
obviously it's hard to plan a night of drinking and know your options and no one in suburbia can afford a cab. suburban life is so harsh and oppressive, we have no choice but to accept drunk driving/s
those are interesting anecdotal edge cases that don't say much about the vast majority of problems with drinking and driving
obviously the asshole cop should have been more understanding with your wife, and if you want to drink and tip your mower and chop off your fingers, whatever makes you happy
assuming a good cop, and a well-meaning suspicion to apply the test (the vast majority of situations), there will be people who take the test and pass, and go on their way
it's impossible for a cop, a human being not a computer, to only apply the tests when they know for 100% certainty someone is drunk. that's why they do the test, to turn their suspicion into a certainty. it's a valid policy in the field to back up the suspicion with the test
so avoiding the test means you get to spend more quality time with law enforcement rather than get on with your life, which doesn't seem like good advice to me
now for the other kind of situation: the bad cop (the much smaller amount of situations)
this guy wants to railroad you. in which case, i'm not sure taking the test, or not taking the test, makes much difference. you can take the test, and he can muddy the results, and you're screwed. or you can choose not to take the test, and you get to spend much more quality time with a guy who wants to screw you over
they have to take you somewhere where the test will be applied in the presence of other people, to a higher standard of quality, which usually means that if you pass, you're good to go and you made the right choice. but now you've wasted a lot of time of your life. additionally, that time is spent alone with a guy who is looking to screw you over. faking or muddying a test isn't the only option he has to do that. maybe he'll find you in violation of some other trumped up charges. you've given him the time to be nosy, and you've pissed him off by refusing the field test. it's a lose/ lose situation if you run into a bad cop, and whatever you choose to do is only going to wind up with a different kind of pain
so i guess what you have to do is decide up front as quick as possible if you are dealing with a good cop or a bad cop. if a bad cop, maybe don't take the test. but look out for some pain anyways
the dystopian fantasy of laws against swearing, being somehow as arbitrary as real world laws against drinking and driving, is a comparison that only works in your feeble mind
your comment simply reveals more of your low character, attempting to weakly rationalize the irresponsible
the grave, grave crime of using potty words has nothing to do with drinking and driving. that you submit they are is a sign of desperation to make a valid argument, or you are genuinely low iq
assuming you aren't stupid, and just stubborn when proven wrong, then all i have to say is welcome for the education about reality
try to be more responsible in your life, and next time, show some true character and just admit when you're wrong, you immature piece of shit
So, the mere act if driving through a checkpoint is good enough reason to require you to stop your car, get out, take time out of your day and schedule to do some test because of an arbitrary head count.
that's not what i said, asshole. in fact it is the exact opposite of what i said. i said assuming the officer of the law has a good reason to apply the test
you can't completely reverse the meaning of someone's comment and reply to them
if you're drunk your judgment is impaired you dumb fuck. including your ability to gauge how impaired you actually are
you don't drive after drinking. ever. quibbling about what actually constitutes being drunk is an immature douchebag attempting to avoid responsibility
frankly, the really only valid response to the attitude and character you expose in your comment is for you to go choke on your mother's cock. you are the problem in this world, to be so cavalier with responsibilities that can easily result in the death of others
in fact, you are the reason the nanny state exists
it exists not because cartoon notions of statist authoritarians who want to take your freedoms away just for shits and giggles exists. but because some people with your attitude are so obviously irresponsible, with your weak self-serving rationalizations, that you *need* a nanny. you really do. you're an immature irresponsible piece of shit. that's what your comment reveals about your character
get a cab. take the bus. walk. arrange for a friend to drive, before or after. sleep it off at the location. get a hotel. prop yourself up on the side of the wall. all options infinitely better than driving drunk
while poor urban planning and poor civil engineering may explain why there are more drunk drivers in a given area statistically, it is no *individual* excuse nor explanation. suburban sprawl simply exposes more of the irresponsible douchebag fraction of society to limited transportation options, yes. if they were responsible, they still would not drive, no matter how much the transportation sucks. but because there are so many irresponsible assholes in the world, yes, there are more drunk drivers in florida
which is simply an argument against living in florida
failing a BAC because of a medical condition is not driving drunk, you moron. you don't win an argument by changing the topic
Also, to all those that would throw away everyone's liberties in the search of a small modicum of safety: fuck you.
the most frequent defiler of your freedoms and liberties is not cartoon authoritarian jackboots working for big government. it's the irresponsible douchebags you run into in your life who will take your property, your health, your life. simply because they think freedom means freedom from responsibility. in fact, there is no such thing as freedom without responsibility
and those who often do the most damage to the notion of freedom are not your cartoon notions of statist authoritarians, but social retards like yourself who think freedom means there is no such thing as consequences for *you* defiling the freedoms of those who have to live near you, share the roadway with you, work with you. you damage the notion of freedom by showing there are morons out there who don't even know what freedom is. and when you defile the freedom of others, do you know what society does? it limits your freedom, up to and including prison. as it should. to preserve the freedom of those of us who actually know what freedom fucking is: "i can do whatever i want, as long as i don't hurt anyone else"
you can't increase freedom in society when you allow people who are so egregiously stupid or malicious, that they constantly limiting the freedom of others they encounter with their behavior. freedom is not destroyed just by government. it is also destroyed by the irresponsible and the malicious and the social retards, which is the category you seem to fit into: people who don't have a grasp of what freedom actually means. it does not mean freedom from consequences and responsibility, and never did, and never will
you're giving legal advice to people who drive drunk
1. they obviously aren't the best decision makers, even before drinking, so you might as well be giving advice to farm animals on taking a calculus test
2. to all drunk driving irresponsible assholes: fuck you. the legal in and outs of the exact procedure to establish your level of inebriation is secondary. the primary topic is the police should do whatever they need to to take away your driving privileges, as they should be taken away. oh you need to drive to your job? you drove drunk you stupid asshole, you have proven to society you don't deserve to drive. take the bus you irresponsible douchebag
If you're in doubt about what to do
i know: how about don't drive drunk?
there are no lame ass whiny entitled excuses or explanations that apply. don't drive drunk, no exceptions
the primary difference between european culture and american culture on a number of issues: gun control, quality of cops, CEO salaries, etc., where european culture comes out ahead and american culture looks fucking moronic
most cops do a good job, but there are bad cops that teach kids that dealing with the police is always an unfair proposition. so they run, fight, resist
we don't need a course for police on how to deal professionally with the public, because most do know how already. but we do need cops to stop protecting the bad apples in their dept that make their job harder, and we need an IA dept that is not staffed by the same cops who are out to protect their own. us vs them makes a bunker mentality that escalates all interaction with the public unnecessarily
civilian oversight is also problematic as this comes with unrelated inquisition style agendas
i think the solution is a more european style approach. where getting a job as a cop is far more rigorous, far more difficult, and the higher barrier to entry most certainly involving psychological evaluation, to weed out those types of people who will go to go on to abuse the public
but we do have a problem in the usa with too many bad, unprofessional cops
if your first reaction to this statement is hostility, or blaming the public instead, like the comment i am responding to:
congratulations, you're part of the problem
because in 2015, after recent events, to pretend bad cops don't exist and don't have a detrimental effect, is severely unintelligent and dishonest
the NFL got a specific carve out for this crap when sheldon adelson and other las vegas oligarch assholes got online gambling in the usa shut down a few years ago as threat to their business (welcome to capitalism! aka, cronyism, but this is what most american morons don't understand about unregulated "capitalism"... also amazing that adelson donates to republicans, you know "free enterprise, get government out of business"... lies the poor morons believe for some reason while they do the bidding of the plutocrats)
too many idiots easily parted with their money for this gamblign shit not to continue
i actually did subscribe to the dead tree service, and will be doing so again. i have no problem with accessing my existing account through the paywall in the interim. if nytimes has a problem with that, they can contact me. i believe you don't have any authority on this matter, as much as it pains your trollish heart
when i get back a nytimes.com page that is paywalled i go to the url and i
1. chop off the nytimes.com domain upfront 2. chop off the trailing querystring 3. hit enter, you get a google result, the first link always being the story you want 4. follow that link
what are you babbling about? are you trying to support the lame excuses of a neoimperial mafia country?
georgia, ukraine: invaded because they were neighboring weak countries. and russia just takes territory from them. it's living in 1815. the lame ass bullshit excuses for the thugging don't mean one fucking thing, except as a barometer of how many people are ignorant gullible retards who will believe lies
but russia is failing. it exercises it's military muscle because it is all it has left. but tanks rust, you need a strong economy to back up that military. and it's corrupt oligarch petrostate economy is crumbling, putin never diversified it. it alienates all it's neighbors it thugs on, it has no friends except other authoritarian jokes like kazakhstan and belarus. it's society is rife with authoritarian abuse: of the press, of freedoms of speech and sexuality, of political expression and to assemble. it's destroyed all political maturity and replaced it with immature cult of personality bullshit from north korea, centered around a kgb goon. when he dies, there's no mature succession because there's no mature political apparatus
so russia is at an end game. it will revolt and collapse. could take 20 years, could take 5. hey maybe they can make the 100 year anniversary in 2017. russia is a pathetic joke of a country that deserves all of the misery that is coming to it, because russians haven't learned a fucking thing since 1917, apparently. "we need big strong leader" yeah, actual strength doesn't work that way, complete morons
chernobyl is actually in ukraine, just outside belarus
it was a soviet disaster (although the soviet union was merely a construct of russian imperialism, so it can be thought of as a russian disaster, so perhaps i'm just tweaking the meaning of your joke)
but like the holodomor ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ), and the continuing vivisection of east ukraine and crimea, russians sure do treat their slavic brothers like shit
Slashdot Mirror
we must demand immediate rezoning of the entire country into rural and urban zones only
only then can we judge
obviously it's hard to plan a night of drinking and know your options and no one in suburbia can afford a cab. suburban life is so harsh and oppressive, we have no choice but to accept drunk driving /s
unrelated topic moron
those are interesting anecdotal edge cases that don't say much about the vast majority of problems with drinking and driving
obviously the asshole cop should have been more understanding with your wife, and if you want to drink and tip your mower and chop off your fingers, whatever makes you happy
assuming a good cop, and a well-meaning suspicion to apply the test (the vast majority of situations), there will be people who take the test and pass, and go on their way
it's impossible for a cop, a human being not a computer, to only apply the tests when they know for 100% certainty someone is drunk. that's why they do the test, to turn their suspicion into a certainty. it's a valid policy in the field to back up the suspicion with the test
so avoiding the test means you get to spend more quality time with law enforcement rather than get on with your life, which doesn't seem like good advice to me
now for the other kind of situation: the bad cop (the much smaller amount of situations)
this guy wants to railroad you. in which case, i'm not sure taking the test, or not taking the test, makes much difference. you can take the test, and he can muddy the results, and you're screwed. or you can choose not to take the test, and you get to spend much more quality time with a guy who wants to screw you over
they have to take you somewhere where the test will be applied in the presence of other people, to a higher standard of quality, which usually means that if you pass, you're good to go and you made the right choice. but now you've wasted a lot of time of your life. additionally, that time is spent alone with a guy who is looking to screw you over. faking or muddying a test isn't the only option he has to do that. maybe he'll find you in violation of some other trumped up charges. you've given him the time to be nosy, and you've pissed him off by refusing the field test. it's a lose/ lose situation if you run into a bad cop, and whatever you choose to do is only going to wind up with a different kind of pain
so i guess what you have to do is decide up front as quick as possible if you are dealing with a good cop or a bad cop. if a bad cop, maybe don't take the test. but look out for some pain anyways
lol
nice point
the dystopian fantasy of laws against swearing, being somehow as arbitrary as real world laws against drinking and driving, is a comparison that only works in your feeble mind
your comment simply reveals more of your low character, attempting to weakly rationalize the irresponsible
the grave, grave crime of using potty words has nothing to do with drinking and driving. that you submit they are is a sign of desperation to make a valid argument, or you are genuinely low iq
assuming you aren't stupid, and just stubborn when proven wrong, then all i have to say is welcome for the education about reality
try to be more responsible in your life, and next time, show some true character and just admit when you're wrong, you immature piece of shit
well thank you for changing the subject and randomly making me the bad guy in a scenario that has nothing to do with what i am saying, douchebag
if you're going to hijack the fucking topic, have the decency to note that you are changing the fucking topic
you're an irresponsible douchebag
you don't drink then drive
period. ever. no excuses or explanations
your lame self-serving weak rationalizations only reveal your poor character
if you drink and then drive, you are an irresponsible asshole and you deserve punishment. yes, it is actually that binary
human's aren't binary, but the choices we make can place us pretty clearly in the wrong. drinking and driving is exactly such a choice
that's not what i said, asshole. in fact it is the exact opposite of what i said. i said assuming the officer of the law has a good reason to apply the test
you can't completely reverse the meaning of someone's comment and reply to them
if you're drunk your judgment is impaired you dumb fuck. including your ability to gauge how impaired you actually are
you don't drive after drinking. ever. quibbling about what actually constitutes being drunk is an immature douchebag attempting to avoid responsibility
frankly, the really only valid response to the attitude and character you expose in your comment is for you to go choke on your mother's cock. you are the problem in this world, to be so cavalier with responsibilities that can easily result in the death of others
in fact, you are the reason the nanny state exists
it exists not because cartoon notions of statist authoritarians who want to take your freedoms away just for shits and giggles exists. but because some people with your attitude are so obviously irresponsible, with your weak self-serving rationalizations, that you *need* a nanny. you really do. you're an immature irresponsible piece of shit. that's what your comment reveals about your character
only 1 in 10,000 anonymous coward comments are intelligent
yours isn't that comment
if all law enforcement officers are all cartoon goons out to violate your rights via lying and cheating, you would be right
since that is a cartoon universe that only exists your head, you're simply revealing your feeble grasp on reality
there are bad apples in law enforcement. they aren't that prevalent, and they aren't out to get you
paranoid schizophrenia has treatment options. good luck to you
get a cab. take the bus. walk. arrange for a friend to drive, before or after. sleep it off at the location. get a hotel. prop yourself up on the side of the wall. all options infinitely better than driving drunk
while poor urban planning and poor civil engineering may explain why there are more drunk drivers in a given area statistically, it is no *individual* excuse nor explanation. suburban sprawl simply exposes more of the irresponsible douchebag fraction of society to limited transportation options, yes. if they were responsible, they still would not drive, no matter how much the transportation sucks. but because there are so many irresponsible assholes in the world, yes, there are more drunk drivers in florida
which is simply an argument against living in florida
assuming the officer of the law has a good reason to apply the test, then they pass it, and there is no problem
failing a BAC because of a medical condition is not driving drunk, you moron. you don't win an argument by changing the topic
the most frequent defiler of your freedoms and liberties is not cartoon authoritarian jackboots working for big government. it's the irresponsible douchebags you run into in your life who will take your property, your health, your life. simply because they think freedom means freedom from responsibility. in fact, there is no such thing as freedom without responsibility
and those who often do the most damage to the notion of freedom are not your cartoon notions of statist authoritarians, but social retards like yourself who think freedom means there is no such thing as consequences for *you* defiling the freedoms of those who have to live near you, share the roadway with you, work with you. you damage the notion of freedom by showing there are morons out there who don't even know what freedom is. and when you defile the freedom of others, do you know what society does? it limits your freedom, up to and including prison. as it should. to preserve the freedom of those of us who actually know what freedom fucking is: "i can do whatever i want, as long as i don't hurt anyone else"
you can't increase freedom in society when you allow people who are so egregiously stupid or malicious, that they constantly limiting the freedom of others they encounter with their behavior. freedom is not destroyed just by government. it is also destroyed by the irresponsible and the malicious and the social retards, which is the category you seem to fit into: people who don't have a grasp of what freedom actually means. it does not mean freedom from consequences and responsibility, and never did, and never will
you're giving legal advice to people who drive drunk
1. they obviously aren't the best decision makers, even before drinking, so you might as well be giving advice to farm animals on taking a calculus test
2. to all drunk driving irresponsible assholes: fuck you. the legal in and outs of the exact procedure to establish your level of inebriation is secondary. the primary topic is the police should do whatever they need to to take away your driving privileges, as they should be taken away. oh you need to drive to your job? you drove drunk you stupid asshole, you have proven to society you don't deserve to drive. take the bus you irresponsible douchebag
i know: how about don't drive drunk?
there are no lame ass whiny entitled excuses or explanations that apply. don't drive drunk, no exceptions
the primary difference between european culture and american culture on a number of issues: gun control, quality of cops, CEO salaries, etc., where european culture comes out ahead and american culture looks fucking moronic
most cops do a good job, but there are bad cops that teach kids that dealing with the police is always an unfair proposition. so they run, fight, resist
we don't need a course for police on how to deal professionally with the public, because most do know how already. but we do need cops to stop protecting the bad apples in their dept that make their job harder, and we need an IA dept that is not staffed by the same cops who are out to protect their own. us vs them makes a bunker mentality that escalates all interaction with the public unnecessarily
civilian oversight is also problematic as this comes with unrelated inquisition style agendas
i think the solution is a more european style approach. where getting a job as a cop is far more rigorous, far more difficult, and the higher barrier to entry most certainly involving psychological evaluation, to weed out those types of people who will go to go on to abuse the public
but we do have a problem in the usa with too many bad, unprofessional cops
if your first reaction to this statement is hostility, or blaming the public instead, like the comment i am responding to:
congratulations, you're part of the problem
because in 2015, after recent events, to pretend bad cops don't exist and don't have a detrimental effect, is severely unintelligent and dishonest
but this type of gambling will continue
the NFL got a specific carve out for this crap when sheldon adelson and other las vegas oligarch assholes got online gambling in the usa shut down a few years ago as threat to their business (welcome to capitalism! aka, cronyism, but this is what most american morons don't understand about unregulated "capitalism"... also amazing that adelson donates to republicans, you know "free enterprise, get government out of business"... lies the poor morons believe for some reason while they do the bidding of the plutocrats)
too many idiots easily parted with their money for this gamblign shit not to continue
i actually did subscribe to the dead tree service, and will be doing so again. i have no problem with accessing my existing account through the paywall in the interim. if nytimes has a problem with that, they can contact me. i believe you don't have any authority on this matter, as much as it pains your trollish heart
thank you for repeating what i said
you can attack the problem from another direction and render the supreme's decision moot
why do you feel a need to disagree with me when you agree with me? the point of arguing is to make a point, not to just argue for no fucking reason
or mangle the url
when i get back a nytimes.com page that is paywalled i go to the url and i
1. chop off the nytimes.com domain upfront
2. chop off the trailing querystring
3. hit enter, you get a google result, the first link always being the story you want
4. follow that link
the referer is now sanitized
so you get the article. you even stay logged in
what are you babbling about? are you trying to support the lame excuses of a neoimperial mafia country?
georgia, ukraine: invaded because they were neighboring weak countries. and russia just takes territory from them. it's living in 1815. the lame ass bullshit excuses for the thugging don't mean one fucking thing, except as a barometer of how many people are ignorant gullible retards who will believe lies
but russia is failing. it exercises it's military muscle because it is all it has left. but tanks rust, you need a strong economy to back up that military. and it's corrupt oligarch petrostate economy is crumbling, putin never diversified it. it alienates all it's neighbors it thugs on, it has no friends except other authoritarian jokes like kazakhstan and belarus. it's society is rife with authoritarian abuse: of the press, of freedoms of speech and sexuality, of political expression and to assemble. it's destroyed all political maturity and replaced it with immature cult of personality bullshit from north korea, centered around a kgb goon. when he dies, there's no mature succession because there's no mature political apparatus
so russia is at an end game. it will revolt and collapse. could take 20 years, could take 5. hey maybe they can make the 100 year anniversary in 2017. russia is a pathetic joke of a country that deserves all of the misery that is coming to it, because russians haven't learned a fucking thing since 1917, apparently. "we need big strong leader" yeah, actual strength doesn't work that way, complete morons
chernobyl is actually in ukraine, just outside belarus
it was a soviet disaster (although the soviet union was merely a construct of russian imperialism, so it can be thought of as a russian disaster, so perhaps i'm just tweaking the meaning of your joke)
but like the holodomor ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ), and the continuing vivisection of east ukraine and crimea, russians sure do treat their slavic brothers like shit