| Dec 25, 2007 @ 2:38 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 7,784
|
Natalie Halloway disappeared...public outcry is...there ought to be a law..
against traveling to the Caribbean?? well it certainly would have kept her safe..
against 18 year olds traveling on their own?? yeah..that would do it.. 
against murder..??
 oh yeah ..there already is one ...
there ought to be a law..
a child gets crippled by a car that did not stop for the flashing red lights while getting off the school bus...public outcry is...there ought to be a law
making drivers stop when a bus flashes yellow too?? yes, that would help..
making drivers stop when ever a child is getting on and off a school bus?? yes, that would help too
stating that when school bus lights are flashing yellow, this means drive with caution as children are getting off the bus but not crossing the street but if it is flashing red..every one should stop..and the driver shall get out of the bus and escort the child across the street
wait ..there already is one .. .
I could go on and on..but ..to the point..
someone you knew in passing is involved in an accident with a habitual, 2+ over the legal limit, drunk driver .....public outcry is...there ought to be a law
so they come up with zero tolerance ideas..like
..if you have one drink...don't drive... or..if you are having one drink..leave your car in a parking lot and call a cab to take you home..
because.. If you are a first offender and your BAL is at a set limit of .08 you should be put in a tent city and fed baloney sandwiches, have your license taken away, lose your job, and ,,, any other laws that you want to see on the books here?
or how about if you drive "under the influence. " no set limit is needed, and all of the above should apply... as.. public out cry is...there ought to be a law
..wait..there was one...it was called...prohibition... and we all know how well that worked...
.. or how about..If you are driving erratically..you will be stopped and cited and the arresting officer will use common sense and good judgement to determine just what his actions are.. and you will have your day in court to face the piper.. innocent til proven guilty..
thinking that there already is a law stating this...
now on to the ridiculous...
if you are tired..don't drive...
hey..I am tired..I can call in sick today from work..as I have to drive to get there..
I have worked all day..and I am tired..well I will just sleep in the car in the parking lot and wait til morning to go back to work.. my co workers will understand why I am a mess and my clothes are crumpled..and i need a shower..cause I was tired...
I need to pick up my kids from school..but i am tired because I did not get a good nights sleep..so I will leave them on their own and they will figure out how to get home..because I am tired...
a law stating that if you are tired...don't drive???
oookkkaaayyyyy.....  ..
because....public out cry is...there ought to be a law
an offshoot from this thread...
|
|
  |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 8:43 AM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
Heaveninawildflower
Posts: 15,203
|
Ah GH...if you're tired, don't drive...well, there really IS a law there, a law of nature. If your body's exhausted, it's already depleted the resources that were available and started generating toxins, which are the things that make us sleepy. Your example in that thread was someone who got into an accident because he was so tired he wasn't functioning properly. Well, that law of nature kicked in - my point wasn't that being tired should be illegal, my point was that if you're not functioning properly, DON'T DRIVE! I don't care if it's legal or illegal medications, fatigue, alcohol or even a raging migraine. As far as drinking and driving are concerned, if you're functioning well enough not to be stopped it's pretty much a moot point. The thing with drinking and driving is that it's a choice you can make before the problem's gotten that bad, and it's also why I have no problem with strict laws on the subject. This isn't a victimless crime - that website we have in AZ for DUI offenders lists the number of people who were killed by people who felt that indulging their 'freedom to drink and drive' was more important than the rights of others to just live their lives.
And as I pointed out before, my problem's not with drinking...if you want to drink, take a cab, hitch a ride, call a volunteer service who'll give you a ride home or call a friend...just don't jeopardize lives...if something bad DOES happen and you kill someone, I'd think that would be a hangover that would never go away.
|
| |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 10:01 AM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
eastham
Posts: 6,317
|
Many states and several Canadian provinces have already incorporated changes in their criminal codes to include driving while fatigued under their list of impairments such as drugs and alcohol.
|
|
| |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 12:17 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 7,784
|
hi heaven..(hoping your dec 25th was good!) just to clear the air a bit.. the above rant was not directed towards you,,(never was) )
Thinking that eastham figured it out though..
with power..there is always the chance of corruption.. the constitution protected all of us from "over zealous law enforcement". These "new laws" are sounding very good at face value..but the reality is..it just makes it easier for "people in power" to abuse their power..
How does someone prove they are not too tired to drive if they have been charged with it?.. there are no tests..no standards except for the word of the arresting officer..and yes..it means arrest, and car impounded with a 2.000 dollar impound fee if it is for 30 days, 250 dollar fee if it is for 3.... not citing with a ticket.
Everyone should practice common sense..and be aware of how impaired they are before ever getting behind the wheel. and there are laws already on the books to cover it.. but this new faze of.."too tired to drive" is nothing more than a catch all law that gives the police Gestapo powers..
I have dealt with the ..I have pulled you over because you were driving too close to the limit line ..
..OJ dealt with the..we needed to do an illegal search of a house because his vehicle was parked funny..
it sounds ridiculous until it happens to you..
now..driving while drunk is a crime..and anyone who does it should be prosecuted..but I am hearing more and more horror stories of lives ruined by the system ..because of over zealous prosecutors and judges who are wanting to throw the book at miscreants..all the while that the real offenders are set free because they are indeed the dregs of society.. and there is no profit in it...
put a bum in jail for 30 days..he will stay in jail..
but put a citizen in jail for 30 days..her will hire a lawyer post bail and be around to pay the fine... think about it...
..I challenge anyone to show me where a person driving at .08 killed someone as a direct result of their drinking..and request that they look at the BAL of those who did..
I challenge anyone to justify why a first time offender should be made to do mandatory jail time.. lose their job..and have their life ruined..
and request that they look at the life of a habitual offender..who's life is in the toilet already..
my solution is..fix the real problem and leave the easy targets alone...
Cited for driving over the limit or .08 but not over .12 the first time should be a slap on the hand..no harm no foul.. pay a fine and go to school and learn..
..but the second time with no limits , or the fist time for anyone over .12 should be a restricted license..a heavy fine and community service in a morgue.
the thrid time? or anyone who has been cited previously for driving over .12
the chain gang by day ..working off their issues with schooling and counseling at night for a year.. then integrate them back into society,..in a place where they do not need a drivers license period..not a place where they will just drive without one..
|
| |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 1:37 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
eastham
Posts: 6,317
|
How does someone prove they are not too tired to drive if they have been charged with it?..
Most of the laws, at least the proposed one in NY and the ones that have been adopted in NJ and CT, require an accident to have taken place. In otherwords, if you fall asleep at the wheel of your car and get into an accident, you can also be charged under the "driving while impaired" statute.
This is, of course, for non-commercial drivers, commercial drivers may be held to a different standard, as they are expected to have a certain measure of downtime built into their driving schedules.
|
|
| |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 2:22 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
Heaveninawildflower
Posts: 15,203
|
Hi GH - yes it was a great day, hope yours was too!
Anyway, I think you know that I fully agree about laws and limitation of power, and yes, I thought you were ranting at me, and I should have known better and thought it through - sorry. Just one comment about Tent City here though - for first offenses it's just one day, pretty much just a warning shot to let people know what they can run into if they don't pay attention. It seems to be helping here too...
|
| |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 2:52 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
SunBabe
Posts: 12,242
|
Might as well just yank my driver's license now.  Although I've driven cross country alone a number of times and have never had a ticket and only one minor slip-off-the-road on sudden black ice "accident" that was no big deal...because the cop almost lost control in the same spot, too (plus one rear-ended at a traffic light, but that doesn't count, lol), I'm ALWAYS fatigued and could technically be called "impaired". Apparently a 40-year history of good driving and good judgment wouldn't count IF or WHEN I ever get into an accident ~sigh~
But the LAW'S the LAW and "zero tolerance"/black&white should outweigh common sense, right?
there ought to be a law..
against traveling to the Caribbean??
I was actually shocked when I saw discussion about that!  Get shitfaced drunk and blame an island or region for a disappearance? Heck, just BAN RUM! 
|
|
| |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 5:08 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
vicryder
Posts: 831
|
If a person has the flu, or something else, and has a fever of 102, wouldn't they be impaired if they were driving a car? Attention and reaction time are certainly reduced.
|
| |
|
| Dec 26, 2007 @ 10:45 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
lefthandedluckie
Posts: 5,023
|
The next thing to driving drunk or DUI....is driving with a "Cell Phone" growed to the ear of the driver! I made somewhat of a joke with the growed to the ear part but, that should be against the law nationwide!
Anyone using a cell phone while driving should be fined! I have seen wrecks from their use and have heard of fatalities! I have come close to being hit on several occasions from men and women using those.
With todays traffic and in my area there is begining to be many animals Deer, Fox, Coyotes and people with cell phones growed to their ear! You need all your awareness applied to your driving!
|
|
| |
|
| Dec 27, 2007 @ 6:54 AM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
Paralegal_at_Law
Posts: 5,066
|
I would like to see the laws being enforced that we already have on the books.
For instance, whent he NY Times printed state secrets. And there is also the immigration laws, plus the violations of law whenever some idiot Congressman leaks classified information, and also the federal sedition laws to consider.
|
| |
|
| Dec 27, 2007 @ 12:06 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 7,784
|
and also the federal sedition laws to consider.
is being an ~anarchist~
considered sedition???
 ............ 
|
|
| |
|
| Dec 30, 2007 @ 3:39 AM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
uluulu
Posts: 64
|
I would like to see a law against intentionally harassing/taunting wild animals in zoos.
|
| |
|
| Dec 30, 2007 @ 7:21 AM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
MusicMonster
Posts: 2,954
|
The next thing to driving drunk or DUI....is driving with a "Cell Phone" growed to the ear of the driver! I made somewhat of a joke with the growed to the ear part but, that should be against the law nationwide!
Couldn't agree more!! Cell Phones while driving are a major driving hazard, and it should certainly be outlawed everywhere!
I've been involved in a very serious accident that was caused by cell phone use while driving. That along with a number of near-misses! The fleet-truck driver was so engrossed in his phone call that he was oblivious to his entire surroundings. Totalled my car and caused personal injury. But ultimately, other than fault, he was never even charged with anything. Grrrrr! 
Oddly enough, I think just about everybody realizes how distracting it is, but they do it anyway!! After all, things like that only happen to the OTHER guy.
-MM 
|
|
| |
|
| Dec 30, 2007 @ 11:48 AM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 7,784
|
I would like to see a law against intentionally harassing/taunting wild animals in zoos. why?? all the zoo has to do is sue in small claims court (for the animals) that the animals right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness has been violated.... 
oh wait... come to think of it...there already is a law against animal cruelty on the books...google it...
as for cell phones...
http://hr.blr.com/news.aspx?id=19173September 28, 2006 California Passes Cell Phone Law California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed legislation that prohibits the use of handheld mobile phones while driving in the state. Effective July 1, 2008, the legislation prohibits drivers from using a wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle unless the driver uses a hands-free device. Drivers who violate the law will face a base fine of $20 for a first offense and $50 for each subsequent offense. The law allows drivers to use a wireless telephone for emergency purposes, drivers of commercial vehicles to use push-to-talk phones until July 1, 2011, and allow drivers of emergency response vehicles to use a cell phone without a hands-free device. California joins Connecticut, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, New York, and some local jurisdictions in prohibiting the use of handheld mobile phones while driving.
|
| |
|
| Dec 30, 2007 @ 3:07 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
uluulu
Posts: 64
|
"wait... come to think of it...there already is a law against animal cruelty on the books..."
Unfortunately taunting/harassing is not considered cruelty by the law.
|
|
| |
|
| Dec 30, 2007 @ 3:40 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
ToucherinSparks
Posts: 6,701
|
Since I was almost run over by some idiot woman talking in a cell phone with one hand and waving the other in the air (one of those "hand talkers") leaving no hands on the steering wheel, I agree that something needs to be done about that. Maybe a lockout device on the phone so that it won't work in a moving vehicle?
|
| |
|
| Dec 30, 2007 @ 4:22 PM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here..
|
|
Gallows_Humor
Posts: 7,784
|
thinking that in the broader sense..that the existing laws could work for prosecuting anyone for taunting and harassing an animal to the point where said animal snaps...up to and including negligent manslaughter if anyone should be killed in the commission of said taunting and harrassing
. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter...Involuntary manslaughter, sometimes called criminally negligent homicide in the United States, gross negligence manslaughter in the UK or culpable homicide in Scotland or culpable homicide, not amounting to murder in India; occurs where there is no intention to kill or cause serious injury but death is due to recklessness or criminal negligence. .
.. a defense of... well it's just an animal and I was having fun would not hold up with most juries..but remember that it is up to the prosecutor to bring charges..
..on the other hand..in a civil suit..only the preponderance of the evidence is weighed for guilt or innocence.. there are no hung juries there...
(ok painter...waiting with baited breath for your next "dig" here.... )
|
|
| |
|
| Jan 1 @ 12:37 AM |
there ought to be a law... insert ~ rolling eyes~ here.. |
|
MrAman
Posts: 6
|
Dare I say that society is legislating itself to death? Are we on the verge of outlawing every conceivable danger or inconvenience?
Non smokers are really going bananas in some places. I heard one the other day in Texas where it's now a crime to smoke within 25 feet of a FREEWAY? Within 25 feet of any public building? Hey, I'm OK with no smoking in public lobbies or even buildings and other places where people can be put in real danger of having to breath in a wiff of smoke, but within 25 feet of a freeway is taking it just to far now.
Some will have it that if I open my own shop where the public is not even welcomed I can't smoke in there even if I'm the only one who works there. Who is being protected? Did you know you can't smoke in a tobacco shop where the ONLY product sold is a substance whose only purpose is to smoke it? Silly? Nah, of course we have to protect smokers from second hand smoke. What was I thinking?
Oh, sorry.. that smoke shop also sells lottery tickets, soda pop, ash trays and others all have the right to purchase products without having to be exposed to... come on now folks.. where do we draw the line or will the people writing these laws come up with one soon outlawing people who complain about these laws? How are these people getting elected? Oh, that's right... the same people who fund their political pet projects...smokers, with those super high taxes on our cigarettes. Well, soon nobody will smoke or the tobacco companies will just go out of business. Who will fund things then? Cigarette taxes will only fund things so far and then you're on your own folks.
By the way, I really do want to quit, but I will never for the life of me understand this nonsense.
|
| |
|
|
|
|