Export thread

Since over 10,000 people dies each year in the US due to drunk drivers, why are people not up in arms about banning alcohol? Are we just willing to accept these deaths as the cost we have to pay for our freedom to drink?

What about common sense restrictions, perhaps based on percentage of alcohol, ie, prohibiting very high alcoholic drinks, restricting high alcoholic content drinks to people who haven't had any DUIs in the past 5 years, and making sure that every other commonly available alcoholic drink has such a low content that the ratio of water to alcohol prevents then from attaining a high BAC?

We have a lot of people here in favor of applying more restrictions to guns which result in under 9,000 homocides a year (I'm ignoring suicides because I'm not comparing alcohol suicides), so I imagine that since drunk drivers commit more murder each year these same people would be in favor of applying common sense alcohol restrictions to society.

Thoughts?

I was actually going to make a more explicit comparison between the two than the one I did, but figured it would get too political.

I suppose the comparison is harder to make, since two disparate elements are required, alcohol and a vehicle aren't considered parts of a whole like guns and ammo are, and even vehicles that are designed to run on alcohol generally aren't fueled by the same kind of alcohol that causes people to think they can sing.

--Patrick

stienman said:

Since over 10,000 people dies each year in the US due to drunk drivers, why are people not up in arms about banning alcohol?

Click to expand...

Well, we did do that once. It didn't work out so well.

Personally, I'm in favor of far more severe consequences for people that drink and get behind the wheel. What you do at home is your own business, but once you get behind the wheel you're a threat to others.

Alcohol has a purpose beyond killing people.

With the future of self driving cars around the corner...

Should drunks be arrested if behind the wheel of a self driving car?[DOUBLEPOST=1507918610,1507918576][/DOUBLEPOST]

blotsfan said:

Alcohol has a purpose beyond killing people.

Click to expand...

Alcohol makes people too.

Celt Z said:

Well, we did do that once. It didn't work out so well.

Personally, I'm in favor of far more severe consequences for people that drink and get behind the wheel. What you do at home is your own business, but once you get behind the wheel you're a threat to others.

Click to expand...

If not outright capital punishment, put some actual teeth into the law. DUI with death automatic life in prison. We'll talk about the possibility of parole, but I'm not feeling generous right now.

Second offense? Ten years. Third? Thirty. Fourth or more? We're putting the needle in your arm, asshole.

blotsfan said:

Alcohol has a purpose beyond killing people.

Click to expand...

Aye. Killing livers.

Funny that you should mention driving... something you need a license for...


Also, Prohibition actually really helped with cirrhosis and wife beating apparently.

What would be the gun equivalent of a car with a breathalyzer switch?

HCGLNS said:

What would be the gun equivalent of a car with a breathalyzer switch?

Click to expand...

A broomhandle mauser.

those guns were a bit finicky to load and shoot. so a drunk would have a hard time getting more than a couple of shots off.

I'd say the regulations are more on cars than drinking. If you're arrested for drunk driving, you're arrested, fined, might serve jail time, and may lose your license. You also need to be a certain age to legally drive a car, require tests to get your license, and must renew it every few years.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect owning a gun should have regulations and consequences like owning a car.

ThatNickGuy said:

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect owning a gun should have regulations and consequences like owning a car.

Click to expand...

They already do. Worse consequences too - kill someone with that gun you own and you'll likely get life.

. . . hey maybe this is why cops get away with murder - they don't own the guns they shoot!

Gruebeard said:

They already do. Worse consequences too - kill someone with that gun you own and you'll likely get life.

. . . hey maybe this is why cops get away with murder - they don't own the guns they shoot!

Click to expand...

I didn't mean killing. I meant even getting a gun, being allowed to keep it, consquences for being irresponsible with it, etc. Not necessarily just killing.

blotsfan said:

Alcohol has a purpose beyond killing people.

Click to expand...

So do cars.
So do guns, for that matter.

sixpackshaker said:

With the future of self driving cars around the corner...
Should drunks be arrested if behind the wheel of a self driving car?

Click to expand...

Funny you should ask.

--Patrick

That's why I asked.

I know at least two people that were sitting in immobile cars with the engine running and got DUI's.

sixpackshaker said:

That's why I asked.

I know at least two people that were sitting in immobile cars with the engine running and got DUI's.

Click to expand...

Shit, 10 or 15 years or so back here, DPS officers went into a hotel bar and started arresting people because they MIGHT drive home - even the ones who had reserved rooms for that night. There was quite an uproar. The lead officer on the raid was 100% unapologetic for "doing what needed to be done to keep people safe."

GasBandit said:

Shit, 10 or 15 years or so back here, DPS officers went into a hotel bar and started arresting people because they MIGHT drive home - even the ones who had reserved rooms for that night. There was quite an uproar. The lead officer on the raid was 100% unapologetic for "doing what needed to be done to keep people safe."

Click to expand...

ThatNickGuy said:

I'd say the regulations are more on cars than drinking. If you're arrested for drunk driving, you're arrested, fined, might serve jail time, and may lose your license. You also need to be a certain age to legally drive a car, require tests to get your license, and must renew it every few years.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect owning a gun should have regulations and consequences like owning a car.

Click to expand...

Somewhat relevant
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/10/14/longmont-woman-pulls-gun-on-squirrel/

The severity of DUI punishment seems to vary by region.

ThatNickGuy said:

I'd say the regulations are more on cars than drinking. If you're arrested for drunk driving, you're arrested, fined, might serve jail time, and may lose your license. You also need to be a certain age to legally drive a car, require tests to get your license, and must renew it every few years.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect owning a gun should have regulations and consequences like owning a car.

Click to expand...

There are no regulations on the ownership of a car (in fact, you only need a license and insurance if you drive on public streets - you can do donuts in an unregistered truck without a license all day on private property). There are, however, regulations and consequences for the use (and more pertinently, misuse) of a car. And there are for guns, as well, already. Any crime committed becomes a more serious charge when that crime is committed with a firearm (assault becomes assault with a deadly weapon, robbery becomes armed robbery, etc).

ThatNickGuy said:

I didn't mean killing. I meant even getting a gun, being allowed to keep it, consquences for being irresponsible with it, etc. Not necessarily just killing.

Click to expand...

Well, I didn't just mean killing, either. I was trying to jokingly (through exaggeration) point out that there are indeed consequences for being irresponsible with firearms. Even things like properly storing and transporting them are regulated - certainly so here, and even in many places in the US.[DOUBLEPOST=1508086556,1508086413][/DOUBLEPOST]IOW, what Gas said

GasBandit said:

There are no regulations on the ownership of a car (in fact, you only need a license and insurance if you drive on public streets - you can do donuts in an unregistered truck without a license all day on private property).

Click to expand...

Still a better love story then Twilight.

And that would actually work well for the whole "defending your property" argument for guns... you're home is protected either way, but you need to prove your'e responsible to take them out in public.

@Li3n said:

Still a better love story then Twilight.

And that would actually work well for the whole "defending your property" argument for guns... you're home is protected either way, but you need to prove your'e responsible to take them out in public.

Click to expand...

There's also rules about that, if by "take them out" you mean brandish them. You can *carry* them in a non-ready state all you like (shoulder straps, holsters, etc), but carrying them "at the ready," as in, ready to fire, is a no-no in most circumstances.