Drinking a beer while driving?

Abortion is a completely different issue. Abortion doesn't infringe on the immediate safety of others, drinking and driving while intoxicated does. "The right to swing my fist ends at the point of another person's nose" - Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. This is a topic where, in my view, the safety of others is more important than some individual rights.

That cuts both ways, though. The liberty of responsible people is unnecessarily curtailed when overly broad measures are taken to punish the irresponsible.

In the case of open container laws, most people accept this modest loss of freedom in exchange for the convenience it offers police, the belief that one drink equals drunk driving, or the emotional satisfaction they derive from the legal enforcement of anti-drinking sentiment.

However, the more of these things we accept, the less free we become, and eventually, really important freedoms, even those guaranteed in the Constitution, begin to be looked at with suspicion.

Patrick Henry said:
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.
 
That cuts both ways, though. The liberty of responsible people is unnecessarily curtailed when overly broad measures are taken to punish the irresponsible.

In the case of open container laws, most people accept this modest loss of freedom in exchange for the convenience it offers police, the belief that one drink equals drunk driving, or the emotional satisfaction they derive from the legal enforcement of anti-drinking sentiment.

However, the more of these things we accept, the less free we become, and eventually, really important freedoms, even those guaranteed in the Constitution, begin to be looked at with suspicion.

Preventing someone from having a beer while operating heavy machinery is not the tip of a slippery slope down to eliminating personal freedoms. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Don't believe me? Try driving without a license.

Would you be ok flying on a commercial plane while the pilot had just one cocktail? If the answer is no, you shouldn't be ok with another driver on the interstate having just a couple of beers.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
The abortion debate centers around whether the fetus is protected by the constitution. I think we can agree that all of the drivers on the roadway are protected...
Posted via Mobile Device
No - the question is whether or not there is danger. In the one case, one can say that there is no danger to life because life does not yet exist. In the other, one can say that drinking a can of beer is no more danger to life than drinking a can of Pepsi. It doesn't become a risk until a certain threshold is surpassed.

So, do we ban abortion because some would take no risk that life might be in danger. and, do we ban drinking a single beer while driving because someone might drink three - or ten?
 
Preventing someone from having a beer while operating heavy machinery is not the tip of a slippery slope down to eliminating personal freedoms. Driving is a privilege, not a right. Don't believe me? Try driving without a license....
Driving is not a right, but drinking is.
 
No - the question is whether or not there is danger. In the one case, one can say that there is no danger to life because life does not yet exist. In the other, one can say that drinking a can of beer is no more danger to life than drinking a can of Pepsi. It doesn't become a risk until a certain threshold is surpassed.

So, do we ban abortion because some would take no risk that life might be in danger. and, do we ban drinking a single beer while driving because someone might drink three - or ten?


I get what you are saying here, but Pepsi does not make someone drunk. I have never drank a day in my life, but if I were to try, I bet one would cause me to feel it, and you don't know if that person in the car drinking that one can of beer can tolerate it or not or if that is the only one they have been drinking. Just my .02.
 
I get what you are saying here, but Pepsi does not make someone drunk. I have never drank a day in my life, but if I were to try, I bet one would cause me to feel it, and you don't know if that person in the car drinking that one can of beer can tolerate it or not.

To me, that is a reason to go after impaired driving itself rather than the things only indirectly associated with it.
 
I don't personally feel unsafe knowing that some folks stop and grab a 'road sody' on the way home. If they're banging a 12 pack, that's a different story.
 
So me not having drank a day in my life, I would not feel the affects of one beer?
Do we write laws to protect ourselves from the lowest possible risk? If so, the DUI level should be .002%, because some people are really that sensitive to alcohol.
 
So, do we ban abortion because some would take no risk that life might be in danger. and, do we ban drinking a single beer while driving because someone might drink three - or ten?

On the question of alcohol, yes we do and have banned consuming it while driving - imo rightfully so.

No one is advocating banning the consumption of alcohol, just the consumption of alcohol while you're operating a motor vehicle. The risks associated with someone abusing alcohol while driving are too great of a risk to allow those that can, even while driving, consume it responsibly. If one person dies because of this issue, it's one too many. To suggest otherwise is to callously disregard the value of human life.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
This is a stupid argument. If the open container laws were abolished, that would lead to more casual drinking on the roads, logically followed by more DUIs, more DWIs, more deaths of innocent drivers, more deaths of innocent pedestrians, more for cops to look after, in some cases increased abuse of alcohol, etc, etc, etc. How is that EVER a good thing?
 
To me, that is a reason to go after impaired driving itself rather than the things only indirectly associated with it.
Exactly - that night that I was driving home exhausted, I was every bit as big a risk to my fellow drivers as any drunk. Of course, back then it wasn't viewed that way, but it is the truth. When the police pulled me over, they told me that I was swerving in the road. I had no idea. I thought that I was driving perfectly.
 
On the question of alcohol, yes we do and have banned consuming it while driving - imo rightfully so.

No one is advocating banning the consumption of alcohol, just the consumption of alcohol while you're operating a motor vehicle. The risks associated with someone abusing alcohol while driving are too great of a risk to allow those that can, even while driving, consume it responsibly. If one person dies because of this issue, it's one too many. To suggest otherwise is to callously disregard the value of human life.
Posted via Mobile Device

I agree. That guy who killed that Angels pitcher and his friends was warned numerous times, and I think even put in jail before this incident. Well lets just say he didn't learn his lesson, and he will probably spend the rest of his life in jail (thankfully).
 
This is a stupid argument. If the open container laws were abolished, that would lead to more casual drinking on the roads, logically followed by more DUIs, more DWIs, more deaths of innocent drivers, more deaths of innocent pedestrians, more for cops to look after, in some cases increased abuse of alcohol, etc, etc, etc. How is that EVER a good thing?

This.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads