Register to Comment
Page 25 of 35 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 349
Like Tree116Likes
  1. #241
    cytex cytex is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,657

    Quote Originally Posted by NewGoldDream View Post
    Jaysis wept!

    I'll say it for the 3rd time, maybe the 4th, the penny will surely drop eventually!

    I did not say its alright. I said it happens. I do not think driving at 85kmph in an 80 zone is alright, I know speed kills, but it happens. I do not think texting or phoning while driving is alright, but I've done it, it happens. All of these events reduce concentration on the road. None of them are alright. All of them result in sanction. But I've done them. One balances risk and social utility. They allow the car creep over the limit, they send that text, they take excess alcohol. For some, living 10 or 15 miles from the nearest pub in a rural area with no taxis, they will decide that they would rather go out and take the risk. It's not good, I wouldn't pat them on the back, but it happens. Yes they break the law, and the law says they should get a sanction, for some drink driving offences that means an automatic disqualification, but it's nonsense to suggest its a jailing matter or to equate them with the person who has driven too fast, or tired, or after a few pints, or while on the phone, and caused an accident - in fairness you may not have said that, but others have.
    My life was wrecked because of a idiot like you newgolddream and yes you are a idiot. There is no difference between you or the guy who knocked me down. I really would like to meet you in person so you can see this is not a minor offence what you are trying to down play that this can and does effect complete strangers lifes . I would love for you to walk a mile in my shoes. Every single time you get behind that wheel drunk means you are increasing your risk of ploughing into some poor innocent. It means you are increasing the risk of killing or maming some inocent and belive me from first hand experince the excuse "I only had a couple" does not make anything better or easier.

    Jail would be too good for scum like you. You are attempting to kill someone every time you get behind the wheel of that projectile drunk.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #242
    NewGoldDream NewGoldDream is offline
    NewGoldDream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    20,965

    Quote Originally Posted by cytex View Post
    My life was wrecked because of a idiot like you newgolddream and yes you are a idiot. There is no difference between you or the guy who knocked me down. I really would like to meet you in person so you can see this is not a minor offence what you are trying to down play that this can and does effect complete strangers lifes .
    There is a rather very huge bit of a difference, I didn't knock you down!

    Clearly you are too emotional to allow logic into your argument, so you have resorted to nonsense. I can understand that, I can understand why you would let hysteria replace logic, that but you should understand that it is exactly that, nonsense.

    I don't need to meet you to know what drink drivers can do. I have known accidents cause by drink drivers, tired drivers, drivers on prescription medication, drivers on phones, and in one case a driver who was sick sneezing.

    But it is bad to base the law on emotion rather than sense. You are saying that just for intent alone, people who commit different acts should be treated the same. It doesn't make remote sense. It is a logical black hole. It's like saying that a person who decides to commit murder is the same as a murderer, never mind that they don't actually commit murder!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #243
    fuque fuque is offline
    fuque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,152

    Quote Originally Posted by potholedogger View Post
    Give starving cornflake eating Gardai a 500 bonus for every drunk and drugged driver they catch, adding the 500 to the fine imposed and we would have very few drunk & drugged drivers!
    Starving........surely not. Malnourished maybe cos of all them chipper/petrol station stops for junk?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #244
    cytex cytex is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,657

    Quote Originally Posted by NewGoldDream View Post
    There is a rather very huge bit of a difference, I didn't knock you down!
    No doubt the attitude was the same . "Sure i only have a few and it happens "

    Clearly you are too emotional to allow logic into your argument, so you have resorted to nonsense. I can understand that, I can understand why you would let hysteria replace logic, that but you should understand that it is exactly that, nonsense.
    whats nonsense newgolddream . The fact that drink drivers should be behind bars if they hit someone. Or the fact that they should never be allowed to drive again otherwise. Neither is nonsense.

    I don't need to meet you to know what drink drivers can do. I have known accidents cause by drink drivers, tired drivers, drivers on prescription medication, drivers on phones, and in one case a driver who was sick sneezing.
    And yet you still try to trivalise it to "it happens" and the fact you keep saying you will do it until someone stops you.


    But it is bad to base the law on emotion rather than sense. You are saying that just for intent alone, people who commit different acts should be treated the same. It doesn't make remote sense. It is a logical black hole. It's like saying that a person who decides to commit murder is the same as a murderer, never mind that they don't actually commit murder!
    never said that newgolddream . I said people who drink and drive should be behind bars. that is my belief people who do this are the lowest of the low. People who hit someone while drunk in a car should be done for murder . attempted murder for that is exactly what they have done. there is no difference between them and the guy that gets drunk and stabs someone . Call the charge what you wanted but that person should never get out of prision.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #245
    NewGoldDream NewGoldDream is offline
    NewGoldDream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    20,965

    Quote Originally Posted by cytex View Post
    No doubt the attitude was the same . "Sure i only have a few and it happens "
    But you surely understand that the law does not depend on "attitude".

    We do not engage in throught control or hire a mind police. As I keep saying, the mens rea, the negligence/recklessness/intent, call it what you like, is not enough in any crime. No matter what you say. This is simply fact. Layering hysteria on top doesn't change that.

    Quote Originally Posted by cytex View Post
    whats nonsense newgolddream .
    It is nonsense to say that someone who strikes another while drunk is the exact same as the person who doesn't. And that is a matter of fact. Read up about the role of the actus reus in crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by cytex View Post
    And yet you still try to trivalise it to "it happens" and the fact you keep saying you will do it until someone stops you.
    Meanwhile you exaggerrate it and say "they should all go to jail for life".

    Quote Originally Posted by cytex View Post
    never said that newgolddream . I said people who drink and drive should be behind bars. that is my belief people who do this are the lowest of the low. People who hit someone while drunk in a car should be done for murder . attempted murder for that is exactly what they have done. there is no difference between them and the guy that gets drunk and stabs someone . Call the charge what you wanted but that person should never get out of prision.
    But it's nonsense. Thankfully, the law does not agree with you, it states that if I am caught drink driving I can expect a fine and I may get a disqualification. That's it. And I agree with that law. Yes, it's a step above the illegal parking or speeding stuff granted. But no Judge Dredd life in jail without possibility of parole stuff.

    When you are making pronouncements about what the law should be, you really should do yourself a favour and just get to grips to some small extent with the whole actus reus, or why a crime that hasn't been committed isn't that crime, so the drink driver is not the exact same as thee drink driver causing death etc. etc.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #246
    Dadaist Dadaist is offline
    Dadaist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    7,468

    Quote Originally Posted by NewGoldDream View Post
    There is a rather very huge bit of a difference, I didn't knock you down!

    Clearly you are too emotional to allow logic into your argument, so you have resorted to nonsense. I can understand that, I can understand why you would let hysteria replace logic, that but you should understand that it is exactly that, nonsense.

    I don't need to meet you to know what drink drivers can do. I have known accidents cause by drink drivers, tired drivers, drivers on prescription medication, drivers on phones, and in one case a driver who was sick sneezing.

    But it is bad to base the law on emotion rather than sense. You are saying that just for intent alone, people who commit different acts should be treated the same. It doesn't make remote sense. It is a logical black hole. It's like saying that a person who decides to commit murder is the same as a murderer, never mind that they don't actually commit murder!
    Are you suggesting your argument is based on logic?

    Your argument is based on an inability to go out and drive to a social occasion without drinking. That's not logical. That's a lack of restraint.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #247
    cytex cytex is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,657

    Quote Originally Posted by NewGoldDream View Post
    But you surely understand that the law does not depend on "attitude".
    No never said it didnt why dont you actually adress what i said ?

    Your attidude and his must have been identical . "sure ill only have a couple" the only difference is you havent hit someone YET. This attitude needs to change . People need to waken up and see the damage they can do driving after a couple. Something that hasnt sunk into you yet.

    We do not engage in throught control or hire a mind police. As I keep saying, the mens rea, the negligence/recklessness/intent, call it what you like, is not enough in any crime. No matter what you say. This is simply fact. Layering hysteria on top doesn't change that.
    what hysteria . Drink driving is a crime the punishment does not fit the crime . Drinking and driving should have a jail term for that crime that is how serious the crime is.



    [quote]It is nonsense to say that someone who strikes another while drunk is the exact same as the person who doesn't. And that is a matter of fact. Read up about the role of the actus reus in crime.[quote]

    no i didnt say that at all Can you address what i said instead of making stuff up to trivialise the argument please.



    Meanwhile you exaggerrate it and say "they should all go to jail for life".
    Adress the point . And yes they should no exaggeration.



    But it's nonsense. Thankfully, the law does not agree with you, it states that if I am caught drink driving I can expect a fine and I may get a disqualification. That's it. And I agree with that law. Yes, it's a step above the illegal parking or speeding stuff granted. But no Judge Dredd life in jail without possibility of parole stuff.
    the law is wrong . Drinking and driving the punishment does not fit the crime . It allows idiots like your good self to trivialise it as you are doing . People like you need to waken up and see the harm people like you cause.

    When you are making pronouncements about what the law should be, you really should do yourself a favour and just get to grips to some small extent with the whole actus reus, or why a crime that hasn't been committed isn't that crime, so the drink driver is not the exact same as thee drink driver causing death etc. etc.
    Maybe you should stop making up what i said and try address what i said . Belive me it will make you seem like less of a idiot than you are.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #248
    NewGoldDream NewGoldDream is offline
    NewGoldDream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    20,965

    Quote Originally Posted by Dadaist View Post
    Are you suggesting your argument is based on logic?

    Your argument is based on an inability to go out and drive to a social occasion without drinking. That's not logical. That's a lack of restraint.
    Huh? Ah come on, this is getting downright silly.

    Please tell me you know the difference between constructing an argument here, and going out for a few drinks? I was suggesting that logic be applied here, as I said to you again and again there are many acts where I haven't applied logic as carefully as you may have done throughout your life, I have stolen apples, I have texted while driving etc. etc.

    Do you really think that "the person who doesn't injure anyone is the exact same as the person who does" is logic? It isn't the first cousin of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by cytex View Post
    the only difference is you havent hit someone YET. This attitude needs to change .
    Which is a bit like saying that you could be the next Yorkshire Ripper...you just haven't killed 15 prostitutes YET...

    Can you and Dadaist answer one simple question.

    Do you actually know what the actus reus is in crime? I can't believe I have met two people who are being so evasive of one of the two fundamental elements of any crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by cytex View Post
    Belive me it will make you seem like less of a idiot than you are.
    You are clearly wound up and railing against me and the law. I happen to agree with it, though like other laws I don't always abide by it.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #249
    cytex cytex is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,657

    Quote Originally Posted by NewGoldDream View Post
    Huh? Ah come on, this is getting downright silly.

    Please tell me you know the difference between constructing an argument here, and going out for a few drinks? I was suggesting that logic be applied here, as I said to you again and again there are many acts where I haven't applied logic as carefully as you may have done throughout your life, I have stolen apples, I have texted while driving etc. etc.

    Do you really think that "the person who doesn't injure anyone is the exact same as the person who does" is logic? It isn't the first cousin of it.
    Logic was applied you just decided to make up your own argument and say that logic wasnt applied.



    Which is a bit like saying that you could be the next Yorkshire Ripper...you just haven't killed 15 prostitutes YET...
    But you have drunk drive . For that at the very least you should have your car taken off you and a life time ban so you dont get the oppurtunity , If not serve time in jail.

    Can you and Dadaist answer one simple question.

    Do you actually know what the actus reus is in crime? I can't believe I have met two people who are being so evasive of one of the two fundamental elements of any crime.
    It tech here dont speak latin .
    But maybe if you would stop evading making up arguments that people are making and answer there points.



    You are clearly wound up and railing against me and the law. I happen to agree with it, though like other laws I don't always abide by it.
    Your damnded right im riled up.
    Railing against you you are a self confest drunk driver . Someone needs to go up and slap some sense into you. Or at the very least take the car or you before you do some damage. If it wasnt for people like you I would have two good legs and less scarring over my entire body. I wouldnt have the need for painkillers to allow me to do stuff you take for granted or a cane to aid in my balance when walking then you have the gaul to try and justifiy as not that serious thing im just going out for a couple of drinks. You are worse than scum for what you do you makes me sick.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #250
    Dadaist Dadaist is offline
    Dadaist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    7,468

    Quote Originally Posted by NewGoldDream View Post
    Huh? Ah come on, this is getting downright silly.
    The vast majority of people in this country believe that drink driving is more than silly, they believe that it is reckless and dangerous, to people in your car and people on the road.

    Please tell me you know the difference between constructing an argument here, and going [driving] out for a few drinks?
    I find it telling that you left out the word driving from this sentence. You seem to see going out drink driving as the same as going out drinking. People go out drinking all the time, they don't bring the car.

    I was suggesting that logic be applied here, as I said to you again and again there are many acts where I haven't applied logic as carefully as you may have done throughout your life, I have stolen apples, I have texted while driving etc. etc.
    Strawman, deal with the issue of drink driving. As you know there is a law covering texting and driving and there is technology to prove it's involvement in accidents.

    Do you really think that "the person who doesn't injure anyone is the exact same as the person who does" is logic? It isn't the first cousin of it.
    I'll give you the benifit of doubt and assume you aren't attributing this quote to me. To answer, no I don't agree with this statement and I don't believe prison time is necessary for this crime. A ban is perfectly acceptable to me.

    Can you and Dadaist answer one simple question.

    Do you actually know what the actus reus is in crime? I can't believe I have met two people who are being so evasive of one of the two fundamental elements of any crime.
    I'm sure a judge would explain it better than I, when it doesn't stop him charging someone guilty of this crime. That's good enough for me, but if you have an explanation of how it would impact on a case of drink driving, I'm all ears.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 25 of 35 FirstFirst ... 152324252627 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment