|
For the children's sake...
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. ********************************** He may be a buddy, but I sense that you are a reasonably sensible , well adjusted person. Would you want this character running the roads drunk when your kids are driving back from a social or sporting event? The Mounties and city cops hold random traffic stops here..especially at this time of year, to try and weed out the drunks, the unlicensed & uninsured and those driving unsafe vehicles. I say the more they catch, the safer it is for my family. |
For the children's sake...
wrote in message ... On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:45:46 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:30:43 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...y.aspx?ref=rss NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. Why? I'm too short of time this morning to speak to this adequately. For the time being, I'll repost what I posted in another thread. I think it spells out my position somewhat; To state the case generically does not do the topic justice. There is a distinction here between retributive justice and preventive sanctions. The question is which application respects an individual's personal autonomy and responsibility. Preventive sanctions presume that the individual must be compelled by legislation to be civically, morally, and ethically responsible. In this sense, the individual's autonomy must necessarily be reduced for what is considered the social good. IMO, this stands in contrast to the deference given to personal autonomy and liberty by the earliest lawmakers in this country. We've become to conditioned over time, as a society, to accept the utility of preventive sanctions at the cost of personal liberty, and this to the point that a perspective such as mine is considered savagely extreme. I don't think my perspective would have seemed extreme in this country's youth. Retributive justice does not presuppose that the individual must be necessarily be constrained for the good of society. If I have time this evening, I'll return to this. -- Bottom line... some people just have to have someone try to control their anti-social or violent behavior. It's great to say they will suffer the consequences of their own actions after the fact, but I'm more concerned with their innocent victims who want no part of it. |
For the children's sake...
Don White wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. ********************************** He may be a buddy, but I sense that you are a reasonably sensible , well adjusted person. Would you want this character running the roads drunk when your kids are driving back from a social or sporting event? The Mounties and city cops hold random traffic stops here..especially at this time of year, to try and weed out the drunks, the unlicensed & uninsured and those driving unsafe vehicles. I say the more they catch, the safer it is for my family. Serious question. Do you take your boy's car keys from him after he throws back more than one beer? That would be the resonably sensible thing to do. -- Imagine being such a worthless p.o.s. that you post on usenet using someone else's ID |
For the children's sake...
Don White wrote:
wrote in message ... On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:45:46 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:30:43 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...y.aspx?ref=rss NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. Why? I'm too short of time this morning to speak to this adequately. For the time being, I'll repost what I posted in another thread. I think it spells out my position somewhat; To state the case generically does not do the topic justice. There is a distinction here between retributive justice and preventive sanctions. The question is which application respects an individual's personal autonomy and responsibility. Preventive sanctions presume that the individual must be compelled by legislation to be civically, morally, and ethically responsible. In this sense, the individual's autonomy must necessarily be reduced for what is considered the social good. IMO, this stands in contrast to the deference given to personal autonomy and liberty by the earliest lawmakers in this country. We've become to conditioned over time, as a society, to accept the utility of preventive sanctions at the cost of personal liberty, and this to the point that a perspective such as mine is considered savagely extreme. I don't think my perspective would have seemed extreme in this country's youth. Retributive justice does not presuppose that the individual must be necessarily be constrained for the good of society. If I have time this evening, I'll return to this. -- Bottom line... some people just have to have someone try to control their anti-social or violent behavior. It's great to say they will suffer the consequences of their own actions after the fact, but I'm more concerned with their innocent victims who want no part of it. Absolutely correct. You are speaking from first hand experience, no doubt. Keep up the good work. -- Imagine being such a worthless p.o.s. that you post on usenet using someone else's ID |
For the children's sake...
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:34:23 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: On Dec 9, 10:54*pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:30:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:06*pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:39:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:35 pm, Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. Actually, not really. we attend separate churches, however we share close to the same beliefs. if by chance J. *had kids the same age as mine who were active in sports, then they probably did compete with each other Uh oh, spilled the beans and feeling like you overstepped? No. He'd have done well as a church official during the crusades. *Don't know what he's like live but he sure comes off as the true heir to William F. Buckley, minus the intellect. you're probably right. Yes, I thought so. Lets refresh my origional post, shall we? you're probably right. Thanks for confirming. |
For the children's sake...
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 22:07:19 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: wrote in message .. . On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:45:43 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:06:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:01:16 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...y.aspx?ref=rss NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... Not that you asked, but my opinion is that anybody driving DUI with a passenger should be prosecuted as a felon. I realize that many share that view, and it may be a consensus view. I don't. IMHO, persons who injure another out of their own irresponsible actions should be subject to equitable and severe penalties meted out by the justice system. I think that legislated behavioral controls are Orwellian and rob the individual of his or her personal autonomy. Ummm... laws are not a form of behavioral control? To state the case generically does not do the topic justice. There is a distinction here between retributive justice and preventive sanctions. The question is which application respects an individual's personal autonomy and responsibility. Preventive sanctions presume that the individual must be compelled by legislation to be civically, morally, and ethically responsible. In this sense, the individual's autonomy must necessarily be reduced for what is considered the social good. IMO, this stands in contrast to the deference given to personal autonomy and liberty by the earliest lawmakers in this country. We've become to conditioned over time, as a society, to accept the utility of preventive sanctions at the cost of personal liberty, and this to the point that a perspective such as mine is considered savagely extreme. I don't think my perspective would have seemed extreme in this country's youth. Retributive justice does not presuppose that the individual must be necessarily be constrained for the good of society. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access Hate to break it to you, but we live in this century, not the 1700s. Get with the program. The conditions and situations are vastly different. He's into old testament justice. Stoning and crucifixions. |
For the children's sake...
On Dec 10, 7:45*am, wrote:
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:34:23 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:54 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:30:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:06 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:39:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:35 pm, Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. Actually, not really. we attend separate churches, however we share close to the same beliefs. if by chance J. had kids the same age as mine who were active in sports, then they probably did compete with each other Uh oh, spilled the beans and feeling like you overstepped? No. He'd have done well as a church official during the crusades. Don't know what he's like live but he sure comes off as the true heir to William F. Buckley, minus the intellect. you're probably right. Yes, I thought so. Lets refresh my origional post, shall we? "in you're eyes you're probably right. But you see only what you wish. " I wouldn't bother, Tim. *You're arguing with a sophist. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service * * * * * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - A sophist. I'd say that's being complimentary. |
For the children's sake...
On Dec 10, 9:00*am, jps wrote:
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 22:07:19 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:45:43 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:06:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:01:16 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... Not that you asked, but my opinion is that anybody driving DUI with a passenger should be prosecuted as a felon. I realize that many share that view, and it may be a consensus view. I don't. *IMHO, persons who injure another out of their own irresponsible actions should be subject to equitable and severe penalties meted out by the justice system. *I think that legislated behavioral controls are Orwellian and rob the individual of his or her personal autonomy. Ummm... laws are not a form of behavioral control? To state the case generically does not do the topic justice. *There is a distinction here between retributive justice and preventive sanctions. *The question is which application respects an individual's personal autonomy and responsibility. *Preventive sanctions presume that the individual must be compelled by legislation to be civically, morally, and ethically responsible. *In this sense, the individual's autonomy must necessarily be reduced for what is considered the social good. *IMO, this stands in contrast to the deference given to personal autonomy and liberty by the earliest lawmakers in this country. *We've become to conditioned over time, as a society, to accept the utility of preventive sanctions at the cost of personal liberty, and this to the point that a perspective such as mine is considered savagely extreme. *I don't think my perspective would have seemed extreme in this country's youth. *Retributive justice does not presuppose that the individual must be necessarily be constrained for the good of society. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access Hate to break it to you, but we live in this century, not the 1700s. Get with the program. The conditions and situations are vastly different. He's into old testament justice. *Stoning and crucifixions.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Really? I've seen no implication of hat. Can you point out where you get such an idea? |
For the children's sake...
Don White wrote:
"H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. ********************************** He may be a buddy, but I sense that you are a reasonably sensible , well adjusted person. Would you want this character running the roads drunk when your kids are driving back from a social or sporting event? The Mounties and city cops hold random traffic stops here..especially at this time of year, to try and weed out the drunks, the unlicensed & uninsured and those driving unsafe vehicles. I say the more they catch, the safer it is for my family. Serious question. Do you take your boy's car keys from him after he throws back more than one beer? That would be the resonably sensible thing to do. -- I watch him carefully, but he is a very responsible sensible young man. Certainly more so than I was at his age, and yes he takes taxies if he plans on consuming "more than one beer". Good man. Taxies? -- Imagine being such a worthless p.o.s. that you post on usenet using someone else's ID |
For the children's sake...
Tim wrote:
On Dec 10, 7:45 am, wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:34:23 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:54 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:30:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:06 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:39:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:35 pm, Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. Actually, not really. we attend separate churches, however we share close to the same beliefs. if by chance J. had kids the same age as mine who were active in sports, then they probably did compete with each other Uh oh, spilled the beans and feeling like you overstepped? No. He'd have done well as a church official during the crusades. Don't know what he's like live but he sure comes off as the true heir to William F. Buckley, minus the intellect. you're probably right. Yes, I thought so. Lets refresh my origional post, shall we? "in you're eyes you're probably right. But you see only what you wish. " I wouldn't bother, Tim. You're arguing with a sophist. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - A sophist. I'd say that's being complimentary. Right on the money, I'd say "a captious or fallacious reasoner" It fits Harry, JPS, and Plume to a T. |
For the children's sake...
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 10, 8:28 am, "Don White" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. ********************************** He may be a buddy, but I sense that you are a reasonably sensible , well adjusted person. Would you want this character running the roads drunk when your kids are driving back from a social or sporting event? The Mounties and city cops hold random traffic stops here..especially at this time of year, to try and weed out the drunks, the unlicensed & uninsured and those driving unsafe vehicles. I say the more they catch, the safer it is for my family.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I try to be a person of reason, Don. but well, it's been a proven point that you don't need a license to be able to drive a car. I'll try to convey my views but theres a chance I'll be misconstrued. but I believe there should be stiff penalties for DUI/DWI, and I believe there should be insurance on the vehicle, And it is proper to have current tags on the auto's plates. But really what good is a "drivers license?" except of ID purposes?Does a drivers license prove you are able to drive a car? Not really. I know of people who have a license in good standing and are horrible behind the wheel. And there's a lot of people with revoked or suspended licenses who continually drive. So, really, what good does a drivers license do? ************************************************** ********** Around here, they still call driving a 'privlege', and I would hope that the license showes that the driver had the skill/knowledge to pass the requirements at one time. Maybe there should be re-tests every 5-10 years...at least for those 60 & over. This comes up every time someone in their '80s kills a younger person in a traffic 'accident'. Here in the city that usually means a vehicle/pedestrian encounter as often as not with the victim in a crosswalk. |
For the children's sake...
Don White wrote:
This comes up every time someone in their '80s kills a younger person in a traffic 'accident'. Here in the city that usually means a vehicle/pedestrian encounter as often as not with the victim in a crosswalk. Don't you have any laws up there that prohibit such activities? -- Imagine being such a worthless p.o.s. that you post on usenet using someone else's ID |
For the children's sake...
On Dec 10, 10:09*am, "Don White" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 10, 8:28 am, "Don White" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message .... On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. ********************************** He may be a buddy, but I sense that you are a reasonably sensible , well adjusted person. Would you want this character running the roads drunk when your kids are driving back from a social or sporting event? The Mounties and city cops hold random traffic stops here..especially at this time of year, to try and weed out the drunks, the unlicensed & uninsured and those driving unsafe vehicles. I say the more they catch, the safer it is for my family.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I try to be a person of reason, Don. but well, it's been a proven point that you don't need a license to be able to drive a car. *I'll try to convey my views but theres a chance I'll be misconstrued. *but *I believe there should be stiff penalties for DUI/DWI, and I believe there should be insurance on the vehicle, And it is proper to have current tags on the auto's plates. But really what good is a "drivers license?" except of ID purposes?Does a drivers license prove you are able to drive a car? Not really. I know of people who have a license in good standing and are horrible behind the wheel. And there's a lot of people with revoked or suspended licenses who continually drive. So, really, what good does a drivers license do? ************************************************** ********** Around here, they still call driving a 'privlege', and I would hope that the license showes that the driver had the skill/knowledge to pass the requirements at one time. Maybe there should be re-tests every 5-10 years...at least for those 60 & over. This comes up every time someone in their '80s kills a younger person in a traffic 'accident'. Here in the city that usually means a vehicle/pedestrian encounter as often as not with the victim in a crosswalk.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - True, Don. Yes it is a 'privlege' as you say. But that same privlidge" is only for the law abiding citizen. I'm amazed here at how many people have lost their license to DUI etc, and have had multiple offenses, yet they still drive. Lately though, the counties have been not just impounding but confiscating vehicles that belong to the offenders, though. I would hope that could be more of a deturant to DUI offenders to think that they might lose more than a slap and a fine. |
For the children's sake...
In article ,
says... Tim wrote: On Dec 10, 7:45 am, wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:34:23 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:54 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:30:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:06 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:39:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:35 pm, Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. Actually, not really. we attend separate churches, however we share close to the same beliefs. if by chance J. had kids the same age as mine who were active in sports, then they probably did compete with each other Uh oh, spilled the beans and feeling like you overstepped? No. He'd have done well as a church official during the crusades. Don't know what he's like live but he sure comes off as the true heir to William F. Buckley, minus the intellect. you're probably right. Yes, I thought so. Lets refresh my origional post, shall we? "in you're eyes you're probably right. But you see only what you wish. " I wouldn't bother, Tim. You're arguing with a sophist. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - A sophist. I'd say that's being complimentary. Right on the money, I'd say "a captious or fallacious reasoner" It fits Harry, JPS, and Plume to a T. I'm much more educated, reasonable, and sophisticated than anyone here, or anywhere for that matter. So, do not lump me with others. I have a degree from Yale. -- Imagine being such a worthless p.o.s. that you post on usenet using someone else's ID |
For the children's sake...
wrote in message
... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 22:07:19 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:45:43 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:06:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:01:16 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...y.aspx?ref=rss NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... Not that you asked, but my opinion is that anybody driving DUI with a passenger should be prosecuted as a felon. I realize that many share that view, and it may be a consensus view. I don't. IMHO, persons who injure another out of their own irresponsible actions should be subject to equitable and severe penalties meted out by the justice system. I think that legislated behavioral controls are Orwellian and rob the individual of his or her personal autonomy. Ummm... laws are not a form of behavioral control? To state the case generically does not do the topic justice. There is a distinction here between retributive justice and preventive sanctions. The question is which application respects an individual's personal autonomy and responsibility. Preventive sanctions presume that the individual must be compelled by legislation to be civically, morally, and ethically responsible. In this sense, the individual's autonomy must necessarily be reduced for what is considered the social good. IMO, this stands in contrast to the deference given to personal autonomy and liberty by the earliest lawmakers in this country. We've become to conditioned over time, as a society, to accept the utility of preventive sanctions at the cost of personal liberty, and this to the point that a perspective such as mine is considered savagely extreme. I don't think my perspective would have seemed extreme in this country's youth. Retributive justice does not presuppose that the individual must be necessarily be constrained for the good of society. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access Hate to break it to you, but we live in this century, not the 1700s. Get with the program. The conditions and situations are vastly different. That is a specious argument. We're talking about legal philosophies that transcend technologicial and sociological advances (if there is such a thing). Your same argument is used to deprecate the Constitution. The document necessarily transcends the passage of time. No it isn't. You're the one who claimed that your philosophy would fit in an early time but not today. That's called living in the past. The Constitution is a living document and grows and changes over time. Two diff. things. -- Nom=de=Plume |
For the children's sake...
"Tim" wrote in message
... On Dec 10, 9:00 am, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 22:07:19 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message .. . On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:45:43 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:06:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:01:16 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... Not that you asked, but my opinion is that anybody driving DUI with a passenger should be prosecuted as a felon. I realize that many share that view, and it may be a consensus view. I don't. IMHO, persons who injure another out of their own irresponsible actions should be subject to equitable and severe penalties meted out by the justice system. I think that legislated behavioral controls are Orwellian and rob the individual of his or her personal autonomy. Ummm... laws are not a form of behavioral control? To state the case generically does not do the topic justice. There is a distinction here between retributive justice and preventive sanctions. The question is which application respects an individual's personal autonomy and responsibility. Preventive sanctions presume that the individual must be compelled by legislation to be civically, morally, and ethically responsible. In this sense, the individual's autonomy must necessarily be reduced for what is considered the social good. IMO, this stands in contrast to the deference given to personal autonomy and liberty by the earliest lawmakers in this country. We've become to conditioned over time, as a society, to accept the utility of preventive sanctions at the cost of personal liberty, and this to the point that a perspective such as mine is considered savagely extreme. I don't think my perspective would have seemed extreme in this country's youth. Retributive justice does not presuppose that the individual must be necessarily be constrained for the good of society. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access Hate to break it to you, but we live in this century, not the 1700s. Get with the program. The conditions and situations are vastly different. He's into old testament justice. Stoning and crucifixions.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Really? I've seen no implication of hat. Can you point out where you get such an idea? I'll see your hat and raise you a haircut. -- Nom=de=Plume |
For the children's sake...
"H the K (I post with a Mac)" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: This comes up every time someone in their '80s kills a younger person in a traffic 'accident'. Here in the city that usually means a vehicle/pedestrian encounter as often as not with the victim in a crosswalk. Don't you have any laws up there that prohibit such activities? -- Yeah but...them old folks won't listen. They can be ornery & stubborn... just look at JohnnyPrepH and his legions. |
For the children's sake...
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 10, 10:09 am, "Don White" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 10, 8:28 am, "Don White" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. ********************************** He may be a buddy, but I sense that you are a reasonably sensible , well adjusted person. Would you want this character running the roads drunk when your kids are driving back from a social or sporting event? The Mounties and city cops hold random traffic stops here..especially at this time of year, to try and weed out the drunks, the unlicensed & uninsured and those driving unsafe vehicles. I say the more they catch, the safer it is for my family.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I try to be a person of reason, Don. but well, it's been a proven point that you don't need a license to be able to drive a car. I'll try to convey my views but theres a chance I'll be misconstrued. but I believe there should be stiff penalties for DUI/DWI, and I believe there should be insurance on the vehicle, And it is proper to have current tags on the auto's plates. But really what good is a "drivers license?" except of ID purposes?Does a drivers license prove you are able to drive a car? Not really. I know of people who have a license in good standing and are horrible behind the wheel. And there's a lot of people with revoked or suspended licenses who continually drive. So, really, what good does a drivers license do? ************************************************** ********** Around here, they still call driving a 'privlege', and I would hope that the license showes that the driver had the skill/knowledge to pass the requirements at one time. Maybe there should be re-tests every 5-10 years...at least for those 60 & over. This comes up every time someone in their '80s kills a younger person in a traffic 'accident'. Here in the city that usually means a vehicle/pedestrian encounter as often as not with the victim in a crosswalk.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - True, Don. Yes it is a 'privlege' as you say. But that same privlidge" is only for the law abiding citizen. I'm amazed here at how many people have lost their license to DUI etc, and have had multiple offenses, yet they still drive. Lately though, the counties have been not just impounding but confiscating vehicles that belong to the offenders, though. I would hope that could be more of a deturant to DUI offenders to think that they might lose more than a slap and a fine. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx This guy was in the news quite a bit over the spring/summer season. He seems to be a lost cause. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia...e-charges.html |
For the children's sake...
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:25:26 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: On Dec 10, 7:45*am, wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:34:23 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:54 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:30:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:06 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:39:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:35 pm, Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. Actually, not really. we attend separate churches, however we share close to the same beliefs. if by chance J. had kids the same age as mine who were active in sports, then they probably did compete with each other Uh oh, spilled the beans and feeling like you overstepped? No. He'd have done well as a church official during the crusades. Don't know what he's like live but he sure comes off as the true heir to William F. Buckley, minus the intellect. you're probably right. Yes, I thought so. Lets refresh my origional post, shall we? "in you're eyes you're probably right. But you see only what you wish. " I wouldn't bother, Tim. *You're arguing with a sophist. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service * * * * * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - A sophist. I'd say that's being complimentary. Ooooo, a sophist. That's so demeaning and sub-Christian of you!!! You're on the side of a serial manipulator who's only concern is wiggling his way to a semantic victory, irrespective of the point at hand. A slipperly Christian. |
For the children's sake...
On Dec 10, 1:31*pm, jps wrote:
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:25:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 10, 7:45*am, wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:34:23 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:54 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:30:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:06 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:39:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:35 pm, Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. Actually, not really. we attend separate churches, however we share close to the same beliefs. if by chance J. had kids the same age as mine who were active in sports, then they probably did compete with each other Uh oh, spilled the beans and feeling like you overstepped? No. He'd have done well as a church official during the crusades. Don't know what he's like live but he sure comes off as the true heir to William F. Buckley, minus the intellect. you're probably right. Yes, I thought so. Lets refresh my origional post, shall we? "in you're eyes you're probably right. But you see only what you wish.. " I wouldn't bother, Tim. *You're arguing with a sophist. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service * * * * * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - A sophist. I'd say that's being complimentary. Ooooo, a sophist. *That's so demeaning and sub-Christian of you!!! not really. You're on the side of a serial manipulator who's only concern is wiggling his way to a semantic victory, irrespective of the point at hand. *A slipperly Christian.- Hide quoted text - Really? That's some accusation, now. and where do you find evidence of that? - Show quoted text - |
For the children's sake...
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:23:00 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: On Dec 10, 1:31*pm, jps wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:25:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 10, 7:45*am, wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:34:23 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:54 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:30:10 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 10:06 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:39:26 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:35 pm, Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. Actually, not really. we attend separate churches, however we share close to the same beliefs. if by chance J. had kids the same age as mine who were active in sports, then they probably did compete with each other Uh oh, spilled the beans and feeling like you overstepped? No. He'd have done well as a church official during the crusades. Don't know what he's like live but he sure comes off as the true heir to William F. Buckley, minus the intellect. you're probably right. Yes, I thought so. Lets refresh my origional post, shall we? "in you're eyes you're probably right. But you see only what you wish. " I wouldn't bother, Tim. *You're arguing with a sophist. -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service * * * * * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - A sophist. I'd say that's being complimentary. Ooooo, a sophist. *That's so demeaning and sub-Christian of you!!! not really. You're on the side of a serial manipulator who's only concern is wiggling his way to a semantic victory, irrespective of the point at hand. *A slipperly Christian.- Hide quoted text - Really? That's some accusation, now. and where do you find evidence of that? In the vast majority of the arguments he makes. It's called sidestepping. He's an apprentice so it's easily detected and no, I'm not going to cite examples. I'm not into arguing to prove my point. It's just my opinion and, as far as I'm concerned, that means it's fact. I learned that from Bills McKee and O'Reilly. |
For the children's sake...
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 22:08:16 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:30:43 -0600, wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...y.aspx?ref=rss NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. Why? Good question!! Crickets... |
For the children's sake...
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:23:00 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: Really? That's some accusation, now. and where do you find evidence of that? Tim, I'm sure you've probably heard Robert Heinlein's quote about what happens when you try to teach a pig to sing ?? http://www.quotesdaddy.com/quote/754263/robert-heinlein/never-try-to-teach-a-pig-to-sing-it-wastes-your-time The kill file is your friend, and as a bonus the rest of us get a break also. |
For the children's sake...
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:14:48 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:23:00 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: Really? That's some accusation, now. and where do you find evidence of that? Tim, I'm sure you've probably heard Robert Heinlein's quote about what happens when you try to teach a pig to sing ?? http://www.quotesdaddy.com/quote/754263/robert-heinlein/never-try-to-teach-a-pig-to-sing-it-wastes-your-time The kill file is your friend, and as a bonus the rest of us get a break also. Tim obviously has a broader palette than some. I'm guessing he could find a fine echo chamber at church if that was his preference. |
For the children's sake...
Don White wrote:
Around here, they still call driving a 'privlege', and I would hope that the license showes that the driver had the skill/knowledge to pass the requirements at one time. Maybe there should be re-tests every 5-10 years...at least for those 60& over. This comes up every time someone in their '80s kills a younger person in a traffic 'accident'. Here in the city that usually means a vehicle/pedestrian encounter as often as not with the victim in a crosswalk. If they all drove Rav4's no one could be injured. Rob |
For the children's sake...
On Dec 10, 5:14*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:23:00 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: Really? That's some accusation, now. and *where do you find evidence of that? Tim, I'm sure you've probably heard Robert Heinlein's quote about what happens when you try to teach a pig to sing ?? http://www.quotesdaddy.com/quote/754263/robert-heinlein/never-try-to-... The kill file is your friend, and as a bonus the rest of us get a break also. Good one, Wayne. Thanks! |
For the children's sake...
|
For the children's sake...
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:49:52 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: If you do get the time, I'll be very interested in what you have to say. Hello? |
For the children's sake...
On Dec 10, 11:09*am, "Don White" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 10, 8:28 am, "Don White" wrote: "Tim" wrote in message .... On Dec 9, 9:28 pm, jps wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 18:59:57 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 9, 8:53 pm, "Don White" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:18:45 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:44:43 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/11...wi-bill-compou... NY just passed a new law to protect kids. Now it is a felon, to drive DWI/DUI with children 15 years of age or less on board. That ought to help save lives! George Orwell just wasn't too far off... -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access You object to having a legal requirement to drive sober?? Yes. -- Boy..if this is you Waylon...you're really out to lunch here. Maybe you should volunteer some time in a major trauma center in Atlanta. Don. I'll vouch for him, II know this guy. he lives in an adjacent county of mine. only about 40 mi. away. I guarantee you, he's not Waylon. I think I know what his point is, but I won't go into it. it's no biggie. Uh oh. You belong to a church group together or do your kids play baseball against one another? Both. ********************************** He may be a buddy, but I sense that you are a reasonably sensible , well adjusted person. Would you want this character running the roads drunk when your kids are driving back from a social or sporting event? The Mounties and city cops hold random traffic stops here..especially at this time of year, to try and weed out the drunks, the unlicensed & uninsured and those driving unsafe vehicles. I say the more they catch, the safer it is for my family.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I try to be a person of reason, Don. but well, it's been a proven point that you don't need a license to be able to drive a car. *I'll try to convey my views but theres a chance I'll be misconstrued. *but *I believe there should be stiff penalties for DUI/DWI, and I believe there should be insurance on the vehicle, And it is proper to have current tags on the auto's plates. But really what good is a "drivers license?" except of ID purposes?Does a drivers license prove you are able to drive a car? Not really. I know of people who have a license in good standing and are horrible behind the wheel. And there's a lot of people with revoked or suspended licenses who continually drive. So, really, what good does a drivers license do? ************************************************** ********** Around here, they still call driving a 'privlege', and I would hope that the license showes that the driver had the skill/knowledge to pass the requirements at one time. Maybe there should be re-tests every 5-10 years...at least for those 60 & over. This comes up every time someone in their '80s kills a younger person in a traffic 'accident'. Here in the city that usually means a vehicle/pedestrian encounter as often as not with the victim in a crosswalk.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Seeing how you love to correct others, what in hell is a "showes" dummy? |
For the children's sake...
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 05:56:43 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:49:52 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: If you do get the time, I'll be very interested in what you have to say. Hello? You'll have to forgive me, Tom. I hope to get back to this sometime soon. I'm in the Medicare Advantage open enrollment period, and I'm overwhelmed with appointments. I may have time tomorrow if I can finish up at a local mall early enough. A thousand pardons, Effendi. :) -- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service -------http://www.NewsDemon.com------ Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access |
For the children's sake...
|
For the children's sake...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:11:09 -0600, wrote: On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 05:56:43 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:49:52 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: If you do get the time, I'll be very interested in what you have to say. Hello? You'll have to forgive me, Tom. I hope to get back to this sometime soon. I'm in the Medicare Advantage open enrollment period, and I'm overwhelmed with appointments. I may have time tomorrow if I can finish up at a local mall early enough. A thousand pardons, Effendi. :) 10-4. No problem. Gosh, kinda' pushy there Tom? Big meaney! Spaceman... |
For the children's sake...
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 09:17:02 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:11:09 -0600, wrote: On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 05:56:43 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:49:52 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: If you do get the time, I'll be very interested in what you have to say. Hello? You'll have to forgive me, Tom. I hope to get back to this sometime soon. I'm in the Medicare Advantage open enrollment period, and I'm overwhelmed with appointments. I may have time tomorrow if I can finish up at a local mall early enough. A thousand pardons, Effendi. :) 10-4. No problem. If the argument was working in his direction, I'm sure he'd find the time. Since it's not, he'll find a way to duck out. I wouldn't hold your breath, Mr J has a way of sidestepping sticky wickets. Like I said, he's into stoning and crucifixions. A born again libertarian. |
For the children's sake...
"John H" wrote in message ... On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:27:21 -0600, Richard Casady wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:58:43 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: Why do you s'pose they didn't just make it a felony to drive with any passenger in the car? Many bad ideas are sold as ' for the children ' Casady I agree with Tim. The children not in the car deserve protection also. -- John H Guy blows 0.08 and a kid in the car. He goes to jail for more than a year, felony, and the kid ends up in foster care, or the mom and kid end up sleeping in a shelter. Just like a lot of other mandatory sentencing laws. unintended consequenses rule. |
For the children's sake...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m... "John H" wrote in message ... On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:27:21 -0600, Richard Casady wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:58:43 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: Why do you s'pose they didn't just make it a felony to drive with any passenger in the car? Many bad ideas are sold as ' for the children ' Casady I agree with Tim. The children not in the car deserve protection also. -- John H Guy blows 0.08 and a kid in the car. He goes to jail for more than a year, felony, and the kid ends up in foster care, or the mom and kid end up sleeping in a shelter. Just like a lot of other mandatory sentencing laws. unintended consequenses rule. So, by your philosophy we should not try to do the right thing. That's a pretty low standard. -- Nom=de=Plume |
For the children's sake...
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:27:42 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:27:21 -0600, Richard Casady wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:58:43 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: Why do you s'pose they didn't just make it a felony to drive with any passenger in the car? Many bad ideas are sold as ' for the children ' Casady I agree with Tim. The children not in the car deserve protection also. -- John H Guy blows 0.08 and a kid in the car. He goes to jail for more than a year, felony, and the kid ends up in foster care, or the mom and kid end up sleeping in a shelter. Just like a lot of other mandatory sentencing laws. unintended consequenses rule. Black woman, drives a Cadillac, lives on welfare and pops kids out every year so she can increase her welfare payments. |
For the children's sake...
jps wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:27:42 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:27:21 -0600, Richard Casady wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:58:43 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: Why do you s'pose they didn't just make it a felony to drive with any passenger in the car? Many bad ideas are sold as ' for the children ' Casady I agree with Tim. The children not in the car deserve protection also. -- John H Guy blows 0.08 and a kid in the car. He goes to jail for more than a year, felony, and the kid ends up in foster care, or the mom and kid end up sleeping in a shelter. Just like a lot of other mandatory sentencing laws. unintended consequenses rule. Black woman, drives a Cadillac, lives on welfare and pops kids out every year so she can increase her welfare payments. Gee, I never would have thought of that as a comeback. I'm sure Miss La Plume will high five you again. -- Imagine being such a worthless p.o.s. that you post on usenet using someone else's ID |
For the children's sake...
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:27:42 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:27:21 -0600, Richard Casady wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:58:43 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: Why do you s'pose they didn't just make it a felony to drive with any passenger in the car? Many bad ideas are sold as ' for the children ' Casady I agree with Tim. The children not in the car deserve protection also. -- John H Guy blows 0.08 and a kid in the car. He goes to jail for more than a year, felony, and the kid ends up in foster care, or the mom and kid end up sleeping in a shelter. Just like a lot of other mandatory sentencing laws. unintended consequenses rule. Yes, but the same can be true for the person sticking up the local 7-11. I don't necessarily agree with the mandatory sentencing laws, but I didn't see that in the original post. Does the conviction on a felony carry a mandatory jail term? -- John H |
For the children's sake...
"John H" wrote in message
... On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:27:42 -0800, "Bill McKee" wrote: "John H" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:27:21 -0600, Richard Casady wrote: On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:58:43 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: Why do you s'pose they didn't just make it a felony to drive with any passenger in the car? Many bad ideas are sold as ' for the children ' Casady I agree with Tim. The children not in the car deserve protection also. -- John H Guy blows 0.08 and a kid in the car. He goes to jail for more than a year, felony, and the kid ends up in foster care, or the mom and kid end up sleeping in a shelter. Just like a lot of other mandatory sentencing laws. unintended consequenses rule. Yes, but the same can be true for the person sticking up the local 7-11. I don't necessarily agree with the mandatory sentencing laws, but I didn't see that in the original post. Does the conviction on a felony carry a mandatory jail term? -- John H No. -- Nom=de=Plume |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com