What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Status
Not open for further replies.
dxmnkd316 said:
Also, are you in favor of asset forfeiture for people convicted of drug crimes?
Click to expand...

That doesn't seem analogous to me, but I don't know about it so can't form an opinion.

What I do know is, it's pretty easy if you have a drink to not drive. If you can't make good decisions you should lose the privilege.

ETA. Considering I didn't have a drivers license for 38 years, its obvious i don't place any importance on driving. So changing my mind on that topic is impossible.
 
Last edited:
Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

unofan said:
And gee, we highly regulate both driving (what is most people's standard ID called again? I forget) and alcohol sales.
Click to expand...

Yes, we do.

And we already regulate who can buy a gun. (Go and try to buy one for yourself.)

We seem to be much more tolerant and forgiving on "death by drunk". Just ask the 10,076 killed by drunk drivers in 2013.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
Also, are you in favor of asset forfeiture for people convicted of drug crimes?
Click to expand...

Drug crimes where you imbibed while in your house shouldn't be a crime

Drug crimes where you killed or robbed with a gun are covered by gun and theft laws.
 
JF_Gophers said:
If the .09 got pulled over there was some thing that caused that.

Also, buy a bike, get a friend, move. Whatever you gotta do. Driving is not a basic right.
Click to expand...

Being tough on crime always sounds so good. But how is the 22 year old rancher in Wyoming who you just barred from driving for life going to afford to move, now that he has no realistic way of ever holding a job. And how many friends are going to stick by a drunk driver, which is apparently like being the devil incarnate in your eyes. Your posts sure don't make it sound like you'd be helping him at all. You'd rather lock him up in prison for life.

As for the .09 crack, maybe or maybe not. Not when things like OWI checkpoints exist, let alone the obviously pretextial (though apparently still legal) ways of pulling people over are allowed.
 
Last edited:
unofan said:
Being tough on crime always sounds so good. But how is the 22 year old rancher in Wyoming who you just barred from driving for life going to afford to move, now that he has no realistic way of ever holding a job. And how many friends are going to stick by a drunk driver, which is apparently like being the devil incarnate in your eyes. Your posts sure don't make it sound like you'd be helping him at all. You'd rather lock him up in prison for life.
Click to expand...
I don't feel bad for hypothetical sob story when it comes to privileges.

How many times are you willing to forgive his innocent little mistake before you are willing to do something. Even if they never harm anyone. Not much of a law if there is no tangible penalty.
 
Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

JF_Gophers said:
I don't feel bad for hypothetical sob story when it comes to privileges.

How many times are you willing to forgive his innocent little mistake before you are willing to do something. Even if they never harm anyone. Not much of a law if there is no tangible penalty.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we should probably just execute him. /s
 
Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

I like how you think not driving = execution.

That's showing me how unreasonable I am for sure!
 
JF_Gophers said:
I don't feel bad for hypothetical sob story when it comes to privileges.

How many times are you willing to forgive his innocent little mistake before you are willing to do something. Even if they never harm anyone. Not much of a law if there is no tangible penalty.
Click to expand...

Ladies and gentlemen, this is your Grade A example why being tough on crime has never once cost a politician his job.
 
unofan said:
Ladies and gentlemen, this is your Grade A example why being tough on crime has never once cost a politician his job.
Click to expand...

So no offer of a solution or how you'd handle it, just a generalization about my opinion. That's much more like a politician than anything I've said.
 
Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Drunk driving should be viewed much more harshly as an offense.
It's like ... wait for it ... waiving a loaded gun around in a room full of people.

A drunk driver who kills someone should face the death penalty.
 
Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

The Sicatoka said:
10,076 people were killed in 2013.

10,076 people.

Yet, we're not talking about banning cars or alcohol.

Source: http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html


Yes, the 10,076 people killed in 2013 were killed by drunk drivers.


That is roughly 20% more "death by drunk" than total firearms homicides in the US for the year 2013.
Click to expand...

The CDC managed to find a few thousand more firearm homicides than the FBI, but why use the same source for all your data? http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

Also of note is firearms are the weapon of choice for about 70% of homicides, wonder why something that doesn't kill people is so popular with the people who kill people. :rolleyes:
 
The Sicatoka said:
Drunk driving should be viewed much more harshly as an offense.
It's like ... wait for it ... waiving a loaded gun around in a room full of people.

A drunk driver who kills someone should face the death penalty.
Click to expand...
what if they're legally drunk but didn't show any signs of it. They get in an accident that kills someone, but they promise it wasn't related to the 2 beers they had. Their cousin would vouch for them but they are scrapping him off the highway.
 
Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

jerphisch said:
The CDC managed to find a few thousand more firearm homicides than the FBI, but why use the same source for all your data? http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

Also of note is firearms are the weapon of choice for about 70% of homicides, wonder why something that doesn't kill people is so popular with the people who kill people. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No misdirection intended. I used a Google search for each.

The reality is that drunk behind the wheel is just as deadly as a lunatic behind a trigger.

But you probably own a car ...
 
Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

JF_Gophers said:
what if they're legally drunk but didn't show any signs of it. They get in an accident that kills someone, but they promise it wasn't related to the 2 beers they had. Their cousin would vouch for them but they are scrapping him off the highway.
Click to expand...

Isn't that why we have BAL tests?
 
JF_Gophers said:
I don't feel bad for hypothetical sob story when it comes to privileges.

How many times are you willing to forgive his innocent little mistake before you are willing to do something. Even if they never harm anyone. Not much of a law if there is no tangible penalty.
Click to expand...

Ladies and gentlemen, this is your Grade A example why being tough on crime has never once cost a politician his job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top