Not that this has anything to do with organic vs non-organic but...
We have been much less successful (particularly over longer time scales) at manipulating biological systems...This is not to say that we should return to an agrarian society
You do realize that we have the option to return to an agrarian society because we were very successful at manipulating biological systems. It was that manipulation that allowed us to move to an agrarian society instead of just a bunch of hunter-gathererers. It's not like pigs, sheep, cows and chickens domesticated themselves and willing allowed us to become the leaders of their domesticated societies. Our early ancestors didn't just happen chance upon large fields of grain and corn. Quite the opposite of what you said is true: Over longer time scales is where we show how successful we've been at manipulating biological systems.
A mormon chooses to life without modern technology
I think you got your religions mixed up. As far as I can tell, Mormons are perfectly happy to use modern technology. You are probably referring to the Amish. But even then you'd be not entirely correct. They don't use nearly all the modern technologies that you are I employ, but they don't reject it all.
I'd like to take your thought experiment one step farther and say the reason that someone needs to be hooked up to you for nine months is because of a choice you made. Let's say you caused a car accident where you caused someone's heart to need to be replaced, so they hooked them up to you and now your heart is doing double duty until they can find a replacement heart (I don't know if that's even possible, but this is a thought experiment, so let's run with it).
I realize that contraceptives fail even under strict usage, but is that any different than the car accident analogy. The vast majority of car trips do not cause [near] fatal accidents. But it doesn't matter what your intent was, you caused someone to have to be hooked up to you for 9 months in order to live. How does that change your thought experiment?
Tell me about it. That stuff is the most addictive crap in the world. I was warned about it, but I still fed both of my daughters when they were born. You would think I would learn after the first one, but no, the second one comes along and I do the same thing. You only need it once, that's how powerfully addictive it is. It controls everything we do in my family. We can't leave the house for a day without having to think about it. Have to bring some with us when we go camping. Every week, sometimes daily, we find ourselves going back to our suppliers. Imagine the money we could save if we could cut the habit. In fact, we have two entire rooms in our house devoted to it; one for preparation and one for eating. I'm getting hungry right now just thinking about it!! I'm out of control!!!
I think a consumer has a right to know about all safetey hazards.
I agree to a certain extent. Everything has risks. Too many warning labels and you start to ignore the real hazards. There is a lawsuit against hot dog makers wanting them to put warning labels on hot dogs and other processed meats stating to the effect that eating processed meats raises your risk of colon cancer. It's stupid. If you put warning stickers on everything that could possibly cause problems, you wouldn't be able to see the actual product.
No the GPS is a bad idea. I can't tell you the number of times my GPS unit has told me I'm not on a road, that I'm off in some field or at the bottom of a lake or something else equally as stupid. I drive a Honda Fit. I stick to paved roads, no matter what my GPS unit would like me to believe where I am. And since I drive a Fit, I certainly wouldn't want my insurance company thinking that I'm driving in weird places and thus charging me more.
It's visible from outside the car, but unless they use a >72 point font and don't fold the note up, it would be no more visible from outside than the door lock sticking up.
That being said, I think the wardriving is pointless (especially if it's perfectly legal to have an open access point) and the door locking is just plain stupid. Everyone by now knows why they should or shouldn't lock their car door. If I had to venture a guess, the vast majority of unlocked cars were left unlocked intentionally.
I know what you're trying to get at here, but it appears that you don't understand what prima facie means. It is true, take two things that are not illegal, no matter what two things you choose, and prima facie, they are not illegal. All the ingredients of crystal meth are legal and combining those ingredients is prima facie legal. It's not until you take a second look and find that crystal meth is illegal that you see that the combination is therefore illegal.
The problem with googling for exercise advice is that so many places contradict each other. Some times it's because they are selling something, but sometimes it's because they are just behind the times. It would be nice if I could find a trust worthy site all about exercise science. Specifically I want to build muscle mass. I don't want to look like Flex Wheeler. I'm just a skinny guy that wants to get bigger, more http://www.fastmusclegain.com/>like this transition. But even that last link looks more like they're trying to sell something so I have a hard time believing any of it.
In short, where are we supposed to go to get the most up-to-date info on exercising?
You'll more than likely find that property taxes are the biggest source of revenue for that purpose.
You'll also more than likely find that UPS and FedEx have a physical presence in whatever state they deliver in. Even if they don't own the land that their physical presence is located on, the cost of their lease will most certainly factor in the property tax. So they pay property tax, they pay fuel taxes. The state is getting its funds.
Google drives down my street with cameras pointed at my house
Almost true. They are not pointed at your house, your house just happens to be in the field of view. It is possible that the camera was pointed at your house the very instant the picture was taken, but unlikely.
Google does not live on my street
I don't know where you live, but I'll assume it's true and grant you this one.
Google is not visiting me or anyone that lives in my neighborhood.
Also true, but totally irrelevant. Lots of people drive down my street that neither live there nor are they going to visit me. In fact, people drive down that aren't going to visit anyone on that street. But that's not illegal, nor is it even socially unacceptable.
Google is not providing me with a service
That's because you choose not to use their service. They provide me with a service. I like knowing what things will should look like from the street view before I arrive. It helps me find things.
and they are doing a public "good."
This is true. Unfortunately, I think this is probably a type and you meant to write "not doing" instead.
Google has no business driving down my street taking pictures of my property for profit
False. They do have business. In fact, they are making a profit on it as you suggest a little later.
without my consent
They don't need it. The view of your house from the street is not private.
and worse yet while NOT sharing those profits with me.
Why would they need to? You aren't doing anything for them. There was no contract that required them to pay you. If anything, your home builder might have a copyright on the design of your home. They might have a case. You on the other hand have no case.
My property exists in a community.
Nice to know, but again, irrelevant.
My community is not open to the public,
So you live in a gated community? How then did the google cam cars get in?
and you can bet
I'm not much of a gambling man.
your sweet virgin
No, I have two kids.
(you ARE reading slashdot after all...)
This is true.
ass that if we perceived an abundance of inappropriate traffic that we would react quite defensively.
Sure, go ahead and do that. But one car driving down the street is hardly going to be considered an "abundance of inappropriate traffic". Also, street view is not going to cause people to want to drive down your street. Your county already created a map with your street on it, perhaps you can go cry to them.
Where do you stop? Just because someone needs something artificial, does that mean we don't let them procreate. Do we stop people who need pacemakers (I know two guys that had to get one before they were 20)? Do we stop people who need glasses or hearing aids? What about people who require prosthetics?
You're position is actually really silly. So what if they need something artificial. That artificial thing exists now and it will exist when their children want to have children. Advocating that if someone needs IVF in order to have children should be barred from having children is the same that someone who needs glasses in order to find food should be barred from having children.
I don't understand this use. If you need to slam on your brakes, how do you have time to flash your hazard lights? How is that different than just hitting the brakes and letting the brake lights light up. In fact, if you have the time to flash your hazards, then you probably have the time to tap and release your brakes and then slam them and the flashing of the brake lights will act just the same as flashing your hazards. Maybe it's a color issue (I'm color blind). Please explain why this is in any way useful.
I simply pointed out that just being on Amazon isn't what's going to drive your book sales.
Then you aren't on the same topic. The original question was: why have a store? You are talking about what will get you the most sales. Nobody is saying put your stuff for sale (whether on Amazon or your website) and call it good. The question is why should you sell an ebook on Amazon at all. If all you did was list your ebook for sale, then you'll get dismal sales at best. If you list it for sale and advertise it everywhere you'll make decent sales. But that's irrelevant to the topic at hand. You have to make the comparison with all other things being equal. Advertise it the same amount, but sell it exclusively on your website or exclusively on Amazon. I doubt that you will make more sales on your website than you would by selling it on Amazon because of the things I listed above.
On Amazon, more people will find it, and of those that find it, more are willing to buy. All other things being equal, more people will accidentally find your book on Amazon than will accidentally find it on your website and it is because of those things I listed. Also, of the people that accidentally find it, a greater percentage will be willing to buy it from Amazon than from your unknown (and thus untrusted) website.
And before we get into the fees Amazon charges, remember you have to compare those to the cost of implementing your own secure website store, hosting costs, etc. The OP may or may not be able to do it on his own. The vast majority of authors would have to hire others to do it for them.
So what you are saying is it's easier for me to find your book on your website when I've never heard of either than to find it on amazon which already has
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
Frequently Bought Together
What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item?
Looking for "[your search here]" Products?
Tags Customers Associate with This Product
Customer Reviews
Customer Discussions
Listmania!
So You'd Like to...
Look for Similar Items by Category
Recommended for You
By all means, sell your book on your website, and if I've already heard of it then I might go there to buy it. If I've not heard of it, I'm much more likely to find it on Amazon. But that's not all. Even if I have heard of it, I'd much rather have on place to go to buy stuff. If my options are
Yeah, but what if they introduced encryption and then made it illegal to circumvent that encryption.
Now choose carefully. Do you:
A) stand up for yourself and say the media companies have gone too far
or
B) say "you can't just make up arbitrary realities"
Congratulations. You chose B. Welcome to the real world, where if you don't stand up for your rights at even the smallest infraction, those stepping on your rights will continue down that path until your reality is based on their arbitrary actions.
Actually, the Spongebob Squarepants DVDs are relatively good. They have a copyright notification but then go straight into the menu. As you mentioned however, Disney is awful, though I don't remember Wall-e being that bad. Dreamworks, OTOH, can go screw themselves. If I want one of their movies, I'll get it used, and it'll go straight to a ripper.
I wish I could mod you off-topic. The PS3 may or may not be a perfectly capable gaming machine. That is not the point. The point is that a console is not a "PC gaming" machine. This isn't a discussion about PC vs Console and I think that is where the confusion lies. This is not about what is best to play games. It is about being able to build a cheap PC in order to play games. In that vein, the PS3, Xbox360, Wii, etc. are not relevant to the discussion. As alvinrod pointed out, the PS3 is the closest one to come to being a PC gaming machine, but as you cannot get access to the GPU, it limits its value as a PC gaming machine. Consoles may or may not be the best gaming machines and the PS3 may or may not be the best console, and it may or may not be a decent PC, but it makes for a subpar "PC gaming" machine.
My wife is full blooded Vietnamese. When people ask where she's from she asks them to guess. I don't think anyone has gotten it right yet. Most guess that she is half of one thing and half of another (usually Mexican, white, and/or some some Asian country though rarely Viet) and one lady said she looked exactly like a Brazilian singer. We looked her up and were surprised at the closeness of resemblance. My wife's brother looks very SE Asian, two of her sisters look more Chinese, and one sister looks Cambodian, her Dad looks stereotypical Mexican, but they are all Viet. I'm white and have never been confused for anything else, but I'm very interested to see what our kids will look like.
We knew a full blooded white girl who many thought to be half Korean. A cashier the other day looked fully white, including her eyes, until she looked down at the register and suddenly her eyes looked Japanese so I asked. She said I was the one of the few people who knew she had some Japanese in her.
Google might very well have been a reference to googol, but the first time I heard of it I thought it was much more like ogle or goggle and I know I'm not alone (perhaps a statistically meaningless sample, but not a solitary one). So it might have a reference to all the massive number of webpages available through their service but I thought it was more that you could look at the web through their service.
That being said, whether I'm right or you are (or perhaps both), it has some reference to what the service does. Bing on the other hand is just the name of a roommate I had in college.
I believe the most relevant terms that you don't seem to be grasping is Gaming PC. You seem to get the gaming part, but you are missing out on the PC part. IOW, this article is about building a "gaming PC" for $800. It is not about being able to play games for $800. It is about building a PC, specifically in order to play PC games. As the PS3 cannot play PC games, it does not fit in well as a PC gaming machine.
My point was that people shouldn't be able to weasel out of crimes or get lesser punishments by saying "But I was drunk/high so I didn't know I was speeding." They made the decision to drink, they knew what could happen, they knew the risks, they knew it was possible to end up in a state where they couldn't control themselves. They decided to take that risk. They then need to take full responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
That being said, I agree that hedge laws are silly. We don't need hedge laws like DUIs or texting while driving. All you need is the reckless driving laws which are already around. I also think that there should be some kind of gradation. Second time you get pulled over for reckless driving the punishment is more severe than the first time. But I also think the reason for your reckless driving ought to be recorded so if you get pulled over for the same reason (whether DUI, or texting, or eating, etc) then it will be an even more severe punishment. Also, I'm not opposed to a three strikes type of law wherein you lose driving privileges permanently.
All bad drivers, whether drunk/high/sleepy/stupid/etc, should be made to straighten up their act. If they aren't willing to do so, then the privilege of driving on public roads is too dangerous for them to have.
Maybe he's not so much worried that DUIs will suddenly become OK, but instead is advocating for harsher punishments for DUIs. He did say
[O]perating a car, boat, train, or plane while under the influence should result in the permanent loss of one's license to operate said vehicle.
I'm all for that as well. I say you can do what you want so long as you are harming only yourself, but if you do harm to others while under the influence, you don't get to claim temporary insanity and you lose privileges that you abused (driver's license, etc).
Slashdot Mirror
Not that this has anything to do with organic vs non-organic but...
You do realize that we have the option to return to an agrarian society because we were very successful at manipulating biological systems. It was that manipulation that allowed us to move to an agrarian society instead of just a bunch of hunter-gathererers. It's not like pigs, sheep, cows and chickens domesticated themselves and willing allowed us to become the leaders of their domesticated societies. Our early ancestors didn't just happen chance upon large fields of grain and corn. Quite the opposite of what you said is true: Over longer time scales is where we show how successful we've been at manipulating biological systems.
I think you got your religions mixed up. As far as I can tell, Mormons are perfectly happy to use modern technology. You are probably referring to the Amish. But even then you'd be not entirely correct. They don't use nearly all the modern technologies that you are I employ, but they don't reject it all.
I'd like to take your thought experiment one step farther and say the reason that someone needs to be hooked up to you for nine months is because of a choice you made. Let's say you caused a car accident where you caused someone's heart to need to be replaced, so they hooked them up to you and now your heart is doing double duty until they can find a replacement heart (I don't know if that's even possible, but this is a thought experiment, so let's run with it).
I realize that contraceptives fail even under strict usage, but is that any different than the car accident analogy. The vast majority of car trips do not cause [near] fatal accidents. But it doesn't matter what your intent was, you caused someone to have to be hooked up to you for 9 months in order to live. How does that change your thought experiment?
Tell me about it. That stuff is the most addictive crap in the world. I was warned about it, but I still fed both of my daughters when they were born. You would think I would learn after the first one, but no, the second one comes along and I do the same thing. You only need it once, that's how powerfully addictive it is. It controls everything we do in my family. We can't leave the house for a day without having to think about it. Have to bring some with us when we go camping. Every week, sometimes daily, we find ourselves going back to our suppliers. Imagine the money we could save if we could cut the habit. In fact, we have two entire rooms in our house devoted to it; one for preparation and one for eating. I'm getting hungry right now just thinking about it!! I'm out of control!!!
Help me! Some one please help us!
I agree to a certain extent. Everything has risks. Too many warning labels and you start to ignore the real hazards. There is a lawsuit against hot dog makers wanting them to put warning labels on hot dogs and other processed meats stating to the effect that eating processed meats raises your risk of colon cancer. It's stupid. If you put warning stickers on everything that could possibly cause problems, you wouldn't be able to see the actual product.
No the GPS is a bad idea. I can't tell you the number of times my GPS unit has told me I'm not on a road, that I'm off in some field or at the bottom of a lake or something else equally as stupid. I drive a Honda Fit. I stick to paved roads, no matter what my GPS unit would like me to believe where I am. And since I drive a Fit, I certainly wouldn't want my insurance company thinking that I'm driving in weird places and thus charging me more.
It's visible from outside the car, but unless they use a >72 point font and don't fold the note up, it would be no more visible from outside than the door lock sticking up.
That being said, I think the wardriving is pointless (especially if it's perfectly legal to have an open access point) and the door locking is just plain stupid. Everyone by now knows why they should or shouldn't lock their car door. If I had to venture a guess, the vast majority of unlocked cars were left unlocked intentionally.
I know what you're trying to get at here, but it appears that you don't understand what prima facie means. It is true, take two things that are not illegal, no matter what two things you choose, and prima facie, they are not illegal. All the ingredients of crystal meth are legal and combining those ingredients is prima facie legal. It's not until you take a second look and find that crystal meth is illegal that you see that the combination is therefore illegal.
The problem with googling for exercise advice is that so many places contradict each other. Some times it's because they are selling something, but sometimes it's because they are just behind the times. It would be nice if I could find a trust worthy site all about exercise science. Specifically I want to build muscle mass. I don't want to look like Flex Wheeler. I'm just a skinny guy that wants to get bigger, more http://www.fastmusclegain.com/>like this transition. But even that last link looks more like they're trying to sell something so I have a hard time believing any of it.
In short, where are we supposed to go to get the most up-to-date info on exercising?
You'll also more than likely find that UPS and FedEx have a physical presence in whatever state they deliver in. Even if they don't own the land that their physical presence is located on, the cost of their lease will most certainly factor in the property tax. So they pay property tax, they pay fuel taxes. The state is getting its funds.
How's this? It includes both text and videos.
Almost true. They are not pointed at your house, your house just happens to be in the field of view. It is possible that the camera was pointed at your house the very instant the picture was taken, but unlikely.
I don't know where you live, but I'll assume it's true and grant you this one.
Also true, but totally irrelevant. Lots of people drive down my street that neither live there nor are they going to visit me. In fact, people drive down that aren't going to visit anyone on that street. But that's not illegal, nor is it even socially unacceptable.
That's because you choose not to use their service. They provide me with a service. I like knowing what things will should look like from the street view before I arrive. It helps me find things.
This is true. Unfortunately, I think this is probably a type and you meant to write "not doing" instead.
False. They do have business. In fact, they are making a profit on it as you suggest a little later.
They don't need it. The view of your house from the street is not private.
Why would they need to? You aren't doing anything for them. There was no contract that required them to pay you. If anything, your home builder might have a copyright on the design of your home. They might have a case. You on the other hand have no case.
Nice to know, but again, irrelevant.
My community is not open to the public,
So you live in a gated community? How then did the google cam cars get in?
I'm not much of a gambling man.
No, I have two kids.
This is true.
Sure, go ahead and do that. But one car driving down the street is hardly going to be considered an "abundance of inappropriate traffic". Also, street view is not going to cause people to want to drive down your street. Your county already created a map with your street on it, perhaps you can go cry to them.
Where do you stop? Just because someone needs something artificial, does that mean we don't let them procreate. Do we stop people who need pacemakers (I know two guys that had to get one before they were 20)? Do we stop people who need glasses or hearing aids? What about people who require prosthetics?
You're position is actually really silly. So what if they need something artificial. That artificial thing exists now and it will exist when their children want to have children. Advocating that if someone needs IVF in order to have children should be barred from having children is the same that someone who needs glasses in order to find food should be barred from having children.
I don't understand this use. If you need to slam on your brakes, how do you have time to flash your hazard lights? How is that different than just hitting the brakes and letting the brake lights light up. In fact, if you have the time to flash your hazards, then you probably have the time to tap and release your brakes and then slam them and the flashing of the brake lights will act just the same as flashing your hazards. Maybe it's a color issue (I'm color blind). Please explain why this is in any way useful.
Then you aren't on the same topic. The original question was: why have a store? You are talking about what will get you the most sales. Nobody is saying put your stuff for sale (whether on Amazon or your website) and call it good. The question is why should you sell an ebook on Amazon at all. If all you did was list your ebook for sale, then you'll get dismal sales at best. If you list it for sale and advertise it everywhere you'll make decent sales. But that's irrelevant to the topic at hand. You have to make the comparison with all other things being equal. Advertise it the same amount, but sell it exclusively on your website or exclusively on Amazon. I doubt that you will make more sales on your website than you would by selling it on Amazon because of the things I listed above.
On Amazon, more people will find it, and of those that find it, more are willing to buy. All other things being equal, more people will accidentally find your book on Amazon than will accidentally find it on your website and it is because of those things I listed. Also, of the people that accidentally find it, a greater percentage will be willing to buy it from Amazon than from your unknown (and thus untrusted) website.
And before we get into the fees Amazon charges, remember you have to compare those to the cost of implementing your own secure website store, hosting costs, etc. The OP may or may not be able to do it on his own. The vast majority of authors would have to hire others to do it for them.
By all means, sell your book on your website, and if I've already heard of it then I might go there to buy it. If I've not heard of it, I'm much more likely to find it on Amazon. But that's not all. Even if I have heard of it, I'd much rather have on place to go to buy stuff. If my options are
Guess which most people would rather do?
How about this 'what if' scenario:
/. is running an article about how the movie The Cotton Club can't be recorded from one VCR to another. You say,
Imagine it is 1985 and
It doesn't stop you from recording your decaying tape if you have a macrovision free VCR, and most of them are.
Runaway1956 posts:
Yeah, but what if they introduced encryption and then made it illegal to circumvent that encryption.
Now choose carefully. Do you:
A) stand up for yourself and say the media companies have gone too far
or
B) say "you can't just make up arbitrary realities"
Congratulations. You chose B. Welcome to the real world, where if you don't stand up for your rights at even the smallest infraction, those stepping on your rights will continue down that path until your reality is based on their arbitrary actions.
Actually, the Spongebob Squarepants DVDs are relatively good. They have a copyright notification but then go straight into the menu. As you mentioned however, Disney is awful, though I don't remember Wall-e being that bad. Dreamworks, OTOH, can go screw themselves. If I want one of their movies, I'll get it used, and it'll go straight to a ripper.
I wish I could mod you off-topic. The PS3 may or may not be a perfectly capable gaming machine. That is not the point. The point is that a console is not a "PC gaming" machine. This isn't a discussion about PC vs Console and I think that is where the confusion lies. This is not about what is best to play games. It is about being able to build a cheap PC in order to play games. In that vein, the PS3, Xbox360, Wii, etc. are not relevant to the discussion. As alvinrod pointed out, the PS3 is the closest one to come to being a PC gaming machine, but as you cannot get access to the GPU, it limits its value as a PC gaming machine. Consoles may or may not be the best gaming machines and the PS3 may or may not be the best console, and it may or may not be a decent PC, but it makes for a subpar "PC gaming" machine.
My wife is full blooded Vietnamese. When people ask where she's from she asks them to guess. I don't think anyone has gotten it right yet. Most guess that she is half of one thing and half of another (usually Mexican, white, and/or some some Asian country though rarely Viet) and one lady said she looked exactly like a Brazilian singer. We looked her up and were surprised at the closeness of resemblance. My wife's brother looks very SE Asian, two of her sisters look more Chinese, and one sister looks Cambodian, her Dad looks stereotypical Mexican, but they are all Viet. I'm white and have never been confused for anything else, but I'm very interested to see what our kids will look like.
We knew a full blooded white girl who many thought to be half Korean. A cashier the other day looked fully white, including her eyes, until she looked down at the register and suddenly her eyes looked Japanese so I asked. She said I was the one of the few people who knew she had some Japanese in her.
Google might very well have been a reference to googol, but the first time I heard of it I thought it was much more like ogle or goggle and I know I'm not alone (perhaps a statistically meaningless sample, but not a solitary one). So it might have a reference to all the massive number of webpages available through their service but I thought it was more that you could look at the web through their service.
That being said, whether I'm right or you are (or perhaps both), it has some reference to what the service does. Bing on the other hand is just the name of a roommate I had in college.
I believe the most relevant terms that you don't seem to be grasping is Gaming PC. You seem to get the gaming part, but you are missing out on the PC part. IOW, this article is about building a "gaming PC" for $800. It is not about being able to play games for $800. It is about building a PC, specifically in order to play PC games. As the PS3 cannot play PC games, it does not fit in well as a PC gaming machine.
HTH. HAND.
My point was that people shouldn't be able to weasel out of crimes or get lesser punishments by saying "But I was drunk/high so I didn't know I was speeding." They made the decision to drink, they knew what could happen, they knew the risks, they knew it was possible to end up in a state where they couldn't control themselves. They decided to take that risk. They then need to take full responsibility for the consequences of their actions.
That being said, I agree that hedge laws are silly. We don't need hedge laws like DUIs or texting while driving. All you need is the reckless driving laws which are already around. I also think that there should be some kind of gradation. Second time you get pulled over for reckless driving the punishment is more severe than the first time. But I also think the reason for your reckless driving ought to be recorded so if you get pulled over for the same reason (whether DUI, or texting, or eating, etc) then it will be an even more severe punishment. Also, I'm not opposed to a three strikes type of law wherein you lose driving privileges permanently.
All bad drivers, whether drunk/high/sleepy/stupid/etc, should be made to straighten up their act. If they aren't willing to do so, then the privilege of driving on public roads is too dangerous for them to have.
I don't know when it started, but sites like it already exist, which is a big reason why Craigslist is going after this idiot.
Maybe he's not so much worried that DUIs will suddenly become OK, but instead is advocating for harsher punishments for DUIs. He did say
I'm all for that as well. I say you can do what you want so long as you are harming only yourself, but if you do harm to others while under the influence, you don't get to claim temporary insanity and you lose privileges that you abused (driver's license, etc).