Thursday, January 22, 2015

Drunk Driving Argument Twisted and Mangled by Idiot

This is normally a pretty good site, but the author fumbles this one, pretty badly.

He sets up a strawman, and its a horrible strawman to boot.

He claims libertarians want drunk driving to be legal. First off, that's wrong, libertarians simply think its possible to drive safely after having a few glasses of wine and that the state-mandated .08 standard of "legally drunk," is a total joke that gets people thrown in jail who have HURT NO ONE and demonstrated NO reckless behavior of any kind. Secondly, he claims that "drunk driving" is horrible and "this video of a drunk driver slamming into a pedestrian is one of the million reason why," followed up by a horribly drunked driver (probably 1.6 intoxicated, not .08).
Who the Hell would defend a driver slamming into a pedestrian DRUNK OR NOT?!?!!?!?! 


Secondly, RECKLESS driving is what the author MEANS must be outlawed, not drunk driving. He gives examples of reckless driving and then tells you that not only is that drunk driving, that is the driving of everyone who has taken a sip of alcohol and gotten behind the wheel. Its a slick move but its logical shit and he knows it; if he doesn't, he's an idiot.

There are simply bad drivers out there. We don't know who they are until they do something to reveal themselves. I'm sad this is the case, but I'm not outlawing cars for everyone or demanding everyone retake their driver's test every year to smoke out the potential accidents waiting to happen.

How about falling asleep at the wheel (and killing people) - is that EXTRA bad because sleeping is horrible and puts others at risk!?!?! Let's make it illegal to drive on less than 7 hours sleep. Cuz, hey - this is about safety; no, even better - its about the safety of children! Innocent children riding in cards demand you get 8 hours sleep or else not drive, you selfish prick. Bang. On the books. Do it.

Reckless driving is the problem. Consuming alcohol doesn't help, certainly, and I don't advise you do it, but consuming alcohol affects everyone differently (I tended bar for years), and they need to exercise judgement before driving, regardless of their alcohol consumption. Period.

The problem is that you can have a few drinks AND NOT DRIVE RECKLESSLY. You can go home perfectly safe.

Now we get on to measuring risk:  "’s the problem with the argument that all drunk driving which doesn’t inflict harm should be legal. It doesn’t take into the factor of aggression by risk taking. It’s akin to firing a gun up in the air, which my father taught me NEVER EVER to do. Why? Because sure, even if there’s an almost zero chance that you will hurt someone, what happens when you do? It’s one thing to take risks with your own life. It’s quite another to take risks with other people’s lives."

Bullshit. The cop with a gun puts my life at risk, but he needs it to do his job, so I live with that risk. People need their cars to travel, so you live with the risk of bad drivers and those who have a beer or two; even with those that are sleepy. Texting while driving is just as dangerous as drinking and driving (more so) and so is being sleepy at the wheel. So what do you want to do Mr. Wrap-everything-in-bubblewrap!?!?!?  Outlaw less than 8 hours sleep before driving? Make it a felony to possess a text message device while driving? No. Neither lack of sleep nor cell phones matter UNTIL YOUR ABUSE OF THEM CAUSE YOU TO DRIVE RECKLESSLY.

ITS THE RECKLESS DRIVING that's the problem, THE CAUSE IS IRRELEVANT. Further AGAINST his point is the fact that millions of people have a few drinks at night (and yes, blow a .08 - legally "under the influence" - oh, the state is careful not to say drunk, cuz you know, odds are you're not and they want to arrest you anyway) - and then safely drive home, making sure to swerve out of the way of text'ers and sleep-deprived college kids and truckers. They are in full control of their vehicle and their reflexes have not taken a decline or else a significant enough decline to prevent them from operating the motor vehicle safely. And no, I don't drive drunk and do not advocate anyone else do either. I also don't advocate driving sleepy or texting while driving, in case you care.

And lastly this blithering fool does not ask where his suggestions lead - as he is advocating OUTLAWING BEHAVIOR and NOT end results. It leads to the Nanny-state, the Police-infested, spying, communist nation I find myself in today. Where my own small opinions on this small little blog are most likely monitored by the FBI as "subversive" or "potentially gorilla/anarchist/anti-federal" in nature.

So pat yourself on the back Mr. "Liberty Viral," you just advocated anything but Liberty.



No comments:

Post a Comment