I think you might have miss-read my post..............I have no arguement with what has been posted I agree completely..............I was asking if the police targeted previously convicted DWI's under the same circumstances would be acceptable??atlvolunteer wrote:
The problem with your argument lowing is that they weren't targeting people with previous drunk driving arrests (which I still feel is wrong, BTW), they are just going up to people who they think are drunk, pulling them aside, and giving them a drunk test. If they fail, they go to jail.
If police targeted Previously convicted DWI's it would not be acceptable, there just looking for easy targets then. Even the existing DWI laws are rediculas(spl) and pushing people to other drugs like Herion ,crack and the such. Drinking has been around almost as long as man has. Now because a minority of people disagree with it or have lost a loved one because of it, there is a call and a push for modern day prohibition.
Care to provide some evidence for this?cpt.fass2 wrote:
Even the existing DWI laws are rediculas(spl) and pushing people to other drugs like Herion ,crack and the such.
The evidence is common sense, where are you from Wannabe? Well around here the use of heaver drugs in minors has gone up signifacantly, and my belife it's because Alchol charges have become so ludicriss and most illegal drugs are easier to hide.
With teh existing DWI laws, the limit in New Jersey is .08 as it is in most other states, now that's just two beers. Most people don't feel the effects of two beers you might but most don't. Now here there is a lvl lower DWI which is from .03-.08 which isn't even half a beer for most people.. it's rediculas.
With teh existing DWI laws, the limit in New Jersey is .08 as it is in most other states, now that's just two beers. Most people don't feel the effects of two beers you might but most don't. Now here there is a lvl lower DWI which is from .03-.08 which isn't even half a beer for most people.. it's rediculas.
I still think it would be unacceptable. If someone is convicted of robbing a bank, should they be arrested for walking into a bank after doing their time?lowing wrote:
I think you might have miss-read my post..............I have no arguement with what has been posted I agree completely..............I was asking if the police targeted previously convicted DWI's under the same circumstances would be acceptable??atlvolunteer wrote:
The problem with your argument lowing is that they weren't targeting people with previous drunk driving arrests (which I still feel is wrong, BTW), they are just going up to people who they think are drunk, pulling them aside, and giving them a drunk test. If they fail, they go to jail.
well yeah alt this is america, also remember that all people from the middle east are terrorist because it's in there books. Problem is you give people who have lost a loved one the power to decide laws and get them put in power. Now pain really only breeds pain instead of solution, so the problems that come out of it is laws that just don't make sense.
It's like in I Robot(which was a horrible movie) but when all the robots want to put the humans in there house so they don't harm themsleves. Life is full of pain and grief and to a certain point sucks, that's why laws like this which limit someone's choices for fun need to be brought to peoples attention and stoped. It freaks me out one of the quotes where "being drunk in public is againt the law and it's about time we start enforcing it". Now alot of these laws that have been writen are Just assumed to be within reason, but not really stated as such so they can be enforced at any time and nobody can do shit about it.
It's like in I Robot(which was a horrible movie) but when all the robots want to put the humans in there house so they don't harm themsleves. Life is full of pain and grief and to a certain point sucks, that's why laws like this which limit someone's choices for fun need to be brought to peoples attention and stoped. It freaks me out one of the quotes where "being drunk in public is againt the law and it's about time we start enforcing it". Now alot of these laws that have been writen are Just assumed to be within reason, but not really stated as such so they can be enforced at any time and nobody can do shit about it.
Right, generally, these laws were put in place to arrest people who are being asses, not for staggering a little bit!
Yeah, I see what ya mean and it is a good point........so...(and here is an interesting twist) based on your arguement.......A convicted child molester shoud NOT be monitored or register as a sex offender and SHOULD be allowed to live near a school because he already DID his time......I also don't think using a child molester as an example is unfair because DWI CAN BE just as serious as an offense if it results in death or dismemberment.atlvolunteer wrote:
I still think it would be unacceptable. If someone is convicted of robbing a bank, should they be arrested for walking into a bank after doing their time?lowing wrote:
I think you might have miss-read my post..............I have no arguement with what has been posted I agree completely..............I was asking if the police targeted previously convicted DWI's under the same circumstances would be acceptable??atlvolunteer wrote:
The problem with your argument lowing is that they weren't targeting people with previous drunk driving arrests (which I still feel is wrong, BTW), they are just going up to people who they think are drunk, pulling them aside, and giving them a drunk test. If they fail, they go to jail.
I am leaning toward thinking preemptive action might have to allowed ( not in the case described in the first post) in some cases such as what I have described.......ABSOLUTISM is a tough standard to live by, and I think life is too chaotic and random to live by black and white absolute rules. each case is different and our laws should be allowed to bend to allow for this.
Lowing as you said some things are not black and white, it goes to common sense and in this case the one we're talking about is going well beyond that. In the case of the child molester as of right now in some cases a DWI is just as bad, and ones that don't result in death and dismemberment.
Have you ever lost someone to DWI accident? or are you even of age to drink?
Have you ever lost someone to DWI accident? or are you even of age to drink?
Well, first of all the "Sex Offender" laws go too far anyway. Did you know that you can become a registered sex offender in some states for mooning someone? Secondly, I am actually very torn on the way child molesters are treated in this country. On the one hand, what they do is dispicable and they are extremely likely to repeat their crimes. On the other hand, once you have done your time in this country, you are supposed to become a free man and aren't supposed to be further penalized for it. Maybe we should just lock them up for life... Third, if you want to go that route, there are a lot of worse crimes out there than DUIs. But let me reiterate: once you have done your time in this country, you are supposed to become a free man and aren't supposed to be further penalized for it.
hahaha Alt that made me laugh not a funny laugh but a "yeah right" laugh. Once your in the court system for anything your in there for life. ANd there's no way out of it, even a speeding ticket. You have to live your life perfectly to the very word of the law that says Ducks have to wear pants in Georgia.
Yeah, I guess you're right on that....cpt.fass2 wrote:
hahaha Alt that made me laugh not a funny laugh but a "yeah right" laugh. Once your in the court system for anything your in there for life. ANd there's no way out of it, even a speeding ticket. You have to live your life perfectly to the very word of the law that says Ducks have to wear pants in Georgia.
ATL, I have no mercy for child molesters. Perhaps make the definition of a sex offender a little more clear-cut. As far as life in prison, I am all for it. The recitivism rate is too high for rehabilitation. I would even go so far to suggest execution for the more hardcore types. You get more time for drug related offenses than for molesting a child? Doesn't seem right to me.
Don't we all know someone that has been lost to a DWI?.........cpt.fass2 wrote:
Lowing as you said some things are not black and white, it goes to common sense and in this case the one we're talking about is going well beyond that. In the case of the child molester as of right now in some cases a DWI is just as bad, and ones that don't result in death and dismemberment.
Have you ever lost someone to DWI accident? or are you even of age to drink?
I am 40 yrs old ( probably older than you are ) and yes I think I am allowed to drink........
Like I said.......I can not argue about the case that this thread was started over. I don't know how anyone could argue FOR it. Please re-read my post and you clearly see I have said this. I was meerly offering a counter perspective to altvolunteer who said "I still think it would be unacceptable. If someone is convicted of robbing a bank, should they be arrested for walking into a bank after doing their time?".
Also......in the question that I posed to this forum I asked if we should monitor cronic repeat offenders in a preemptive measure for public safety................LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR.........I TOTAL AGREE WITH EVERYONE ON THE ORGINAL POST.
I agree with you on this.....that is why I said "child molester" and not sex offender.atlvolunteer wrote:
Well, first of all the "Sex Offender" laws go too far anyway. Did you know that you can become a registered sex offender in some states for mooning someone? Secondly, I am actually very torn on the way child molesters are treated in this country. On the one hand, what they do is dispicable and they are extremely likely to repeat their crimes. On the other hand, once you have done your time in this country, you are supposed to become a free man and aren't supposed to be further penalized for it. Maybe we should just lock them up for life... Third, if you want to go that route, there are a lot of worse crimes out there than DUIs. But let me reiterate: once you have done your time in this country, you are supposed to become a free man and aren't supposed to be further penalized for it.
It has been shown they will repeat their crimes......So yup........maybe a life sentence would be best........sounds like you agree with me after all since a life sentence would be a form of preemptive action don't ya think??
It has also been shown that DWI's are repeat offenders as well in allot of cases
Last edited by lowing (2006-03-27 13:32:19)
I wasn't saying that you were, but no we shouldn't moniter repeat offenders expecially in the case of a DWI, expecially now. The laws are just getting too out there and the money that is generated from the DWI money is not put in place for preventative measures, it's put back out there for enforcement of the same laws.
Reason I was asking about age (I reread it and didn't mean it to come out like that sorry if you took offense) because I was wondering what generation you were from. Now you being in your 40's (I am in my 20's) you had a lot more freedoms out there am I correct? Now by freedom I mean if you made a mistake in the past it was a lighter penility and once time was served usually that was it(or you could more to an other state where it wouldn't follow). Now a days we live under the computer age where everything is easier tracked and even petty criminal acts will follow you for the rest of your days.
Reason I was asking about age (I reread it and didn't mean it to come out like that sorry if you took offense) because I was wondering what generation you were from. Now you being in your 40's (I am in my 20's) you had a lot more freedoms out there am I correct? Now by freedom I mean if you made a mistake in the past it was a lighter penility and once time was served usually that was it(or you could more to an other state where it wouldn't follow). Now a days we live under the computer age where everything is easier tracked and even petty criminal acts will follow you for the rest of your days.
Well, in the case of child molesters, we do agree. Because they are so likely to repeat their crimes, I believe they are enough of a threat to society for a life sentence to be justified.
But I can't use this same logic when it comes to targeting people who are doing something that is legal just because they have gotten a DUI in the past. I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this one.
But I can't use this same logic when it comes to targeting people who are doing something that is legal just because they have gotten a DUI in the past. I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this one.
To be honest, I have no idea. I have never been in the justice system...Not that I am a saint, I just never got caught. But I think it might seem to come across as less freedoms is bacause......People in our country are at an all time moral low. Our outdated laws can't keep up with the twisted imaginations of some of our criminals. Allot of this I think is out of a notion that "we gotta do something even if it ain't right".cpt.fass2 wrote:
I wasn't saying that you were, but no we shouldn't moniter repeat offenders expecially in the case of a DWI, expecially now. The laws are just getting too out there and the money that is generated from the DWI money is not put in place for preventative measures, it's put back out there for enforcement of the same laws.
Reason I was asking about age (I reread it and didn't mean it to come out like that sorry if you took offense) because I was wondering what generation you were from. Now you being in your 40's (I am in my 20's) you had a lot more freedoms out there am I correct? Now by freedom I mean if you made a mistake in the past it was a lighter penility and once time was served usually that was it(or you could more to an other state where it wouldn't follow). Now a days we live under the computer age where everything is easier tracked and even petty criminal acts will follow you for the rest of your days.
I am in aviation so I will use my industry as an example.......the FAA gets all kinds of heat for not taking action against someone or something until there is a problem it is called "tombstone engineering," or "tombstone theory".
Basically the govt. is damned if they try and stop something before it happens and they are damned if they "allow" it to happen......All depends on weather or not you are the victim or the accused lol...
no offense taken by the way
Also on the repeat DWI offender thing, it's somethings that cops look for. It's one of the biggest revenue makers in this state and I"m sure it's the same all over. Now repeat offenders of DWI get jail time and larger fines, but this isn't even targeting them(which it shouldn't because you can't prove they were going to drive the car intill they get into it). It's just one more way the country and state governments are bringing in Money. 2200 x 500= 1,100,000 That's one weekend in Millions of innocent peoples money.
Lowing do you go to bars? and where do you live? I know your against the original post I'm just looking for a background just interested.
Lowing do you go to bars? and where do you live? I know your against the original post I'm just looking for a background just interested.
The heavier use is not due to to laws. Especially when, like you mentioned, they are minors. It is against the law to drink alcohol under the age of 21 where I'm from. So, how can cracking down on minors cause them to turn to drugs when "they are easier to hide"? More so when drug tests will show illegal substances in your blood/urine for months after you use them. Why don't you try blaming bad parenting or the person consuming the substances?cpt.fass2 wrote:
The evidence is common sense, where are you from Wannabe? Well around here the use of heaver drugs in minors has gone up signifacantly, and my belife it's because Alchol charges have become so ludicriss and most illegal drugs are easier to hide.
With teh existing DWI laws, the limit in New Jersey is .08 as it is in most other states, now that's just two beers. Most people don't feel the effects of two beers you might but most don't. Now here there is a lvl lower DWI which is from .03-.08 which isn't even half a beer for most people.. it's rediculas.
If you are complaining about the legal limit then I suggest you find a 'DD'. How old are you cpt.fass2? Are you even old enough to drink?
well like I said we do agree on DWI even........but I was wondering your thoughts about proven cronic repeat offenders, hell, with any crime for that matter.atlvolunteer wrote:
Well, in the case of child molesters, we do agree. Because they are so likely to repeat their crimes, I believe they are enough of a threat to society for a life sentence to be justified.
But I can't use this same logic when it comes to targeting people who are doing something that is legal just because they have gotten a DUI in the past. I guess we're just going to have to disagree on this one.
I am married now with 2 young sons....my bar hoppin days are long over ( weather I like it or not hehehe) Actually I live in GA same as you I guess.cpt.fass2 wrote:
Also on the repeat DWI offender thing, it's somethings that cops look for. It's one of the biggest revenue makers in this state and I"m sure it's the same all over. Now repeat offenders of DWI get jail time and larger fines, but this isn't even targeting them(which it shouldn't because you can't prove they were going to drive the car intill they get into it). It's just one more way the country and state governments are bringing in Money. 2200 x 500= 1,100,000 That's one weekend in Millions of innocent peoples money.
Lowing do you go to bars? and where do you live? I know your against the original post I'm just looking for a background just interested.
So I guess ATTEMPTED murder is out huh??
or INTENT to distribute is also out??
basically I agree with all of ya........I am just trying to throw in some realistic "what ifs" to bring this thread some dialog and debunk all of the "absolute" posts.
Only if the sentence mandated time and time alone. For sex offenders, the sentence involves time and then the rest after they get out.atlvolunteer wrote:
Well, first of all the "Sex Offender" laws go too far anyway. Did you know that you can become a registered sex offender in some states for mooning someone? Secondly, I am actually very torn on the way child molesters are treated in this country. On the one hand, what they do is dispicable and they are extremely likely to repeat their crimes. On the other hand, once you have done your time in this country, you are supposed to become a free man and aren't supposed to be further penalized for it. Maybe we should just lock them up for life... Third, if you want to go that route, there are a lot of worse crimes out there than DUIs. But let me reiterate: once you have done your time in this country, you are supposed to become a free man and aren't supposed to be further penalized for it.