And let's hear it for Mississippi for allowing folks to use the good sense God gave them!
Be careful, I believe it's Mississippi that won't sell you cold beer, but you can buy warm beer, a styrofoam cooler, and a bag of ice.
And let's hear it for Mississippi for allowing folks to use the good sense God gave them!
No, you are pointing out that a single buddy felt that one affected him. If I apply my personal experience, I come to a different conclusion.
I say we stick to the scientific studies that have led to the current limits in blood alcohol rather than make something up based on subjective criteria.
And, if the scientific evidence changes, I would be more than happy to revisit the legal blood alcohol level.
Yes, I do see the logical gap, but I don't think it's where you intended...
The removal of open container laws doesn't make DUI legal. It's legal for me to wear a crimson hat in public if I wish. if someone robs a bank wearing a similar hat and I'm nearby, I might be detained for questioning due to my crimson hat. The same is true with alcohol. Right now, in most states it's perfectly legal to drive after drinking, as long as your BAC is below the legal limit - there's zero reason that would change. Whether the driver had two beers at Chili's or sucked two down on the way home make zero difference - either his BAC is legal or it's not.
Be careful, I believe it's Mississippi that won't sell you cold beer, but you can buy warm beer, a styrofoam cooler, and a bag of ice.
So, your buddy regularily sits on the floor with his toddlers drinking beer and playing pong?This person has a masters in an scientific field and is well aware of the scientific method. If he consistantly noted a difference after one beer, then it's actually possible there is a cause and effect there...
No where in this thread has anyone condoned drunk driving.
It is far more likely that a person who is driving drunk got drunk at home or at a bar than while cruising down the street with a beer in his hand.
Allowing people to drink a beer while driving is a whole lot less risky than letting people drive to bars to drink. Are we ready to shut down bars? I mean, if this is really about safety, that is a much, much greater risk - right?
And what about restaurants that serve alcohol? Ever seen the amount of alcohol that some people consume at dinner and then get behind the wheel? Crazy stuff. We need to pass laws that no longer allow the sale of alcohol at a venue from which a person might have to drive home, right?
How far are we willing to take this to be safe? Because venues that serve alcohol are much more dangerous than laws that allow a person to drink a can of beer on his way home from work.
I have never been moved by the "if it would save just one life" arguments. I would not even choose to save my own life, much less the life of a random person, if it meant a tyranny of laws for everyone else.
Zero tolerance attitudes are most definitely tyranny.Oh, it's tyranny I'm proposing! Tyranny, I Say!
And I'm sure if your life or the lives of loved ones, through death or maiming, were altered by a reckless individual, that your opinion would stay the same.
:cheers2:Only in some counties like LaFayette (where Ole Miss is). Interestingly, the beer just can't be refrigerated. There's a Barn, with a beer permit, that isn't insulated, so you can get cold beer from Oct - April.
Posted via Mobile Device
I've been wondering for about 6 pages if Jessica is as sorry as I am that she started this thread.
And let's hear it for Mississippi for allowing folks to use the good sense God gave them!
So, your buddy regularily sits on the floor with his toddlers drinking beer and playing pong?:biggrin2:
Just kidding - some people get too up tight. This is just a web discussion.
![]()
Zero tolerance attitudes are most definitely tyranny.
My commitment to liberty is strong enough to withstand the slings and arrows of unfortunate events. My mother has been shot. I am a staunch opponent of gun control. It is no virtue to willingly discard a belief system just because something makes it personal. It just makes you a hypocrite.
Be careful, I believe it's Mississippi that won't sell you cold beer, but you can buy warm beer, a styrofoam cooler, and a bag of ice.
I remember watching my father-in-law, on hands and knees, making his way to the door on the front porch of his home. I was sitting with my future wife (we were dating) on the couch. He commenced to crawl to the edge of the porch and puke. He then staggered in and went to bed. The only thing I could think was why was he driving, how on earth did he make it home, and was he drinking on the way home? This goes on in America every day and night, and shouldn't. You guys can argue semantics, I'm just saying how it should be. You should not drive after drinking. Period.
Err, no, those aren't government created foundations, are they? You're free to support them or not, etc.There goes to write that hit song "Alone in My Principles". Obviously, you're not alone. But there has been a lot of good done through people taking death personally. Whether it be foundations toward finding causes and cures to debilitating diseases, to folks organizing against drunk driving, to the hideous "meth" hearse I saw at a football game a couple of weeks ago. I guess if folks want to stop senseless death, it's hypocrisy.
Err, no, those aren't government created foundations, are they? You're free to support them or not, etc.
Equating MADD with laws that don't appear to have any impact whatsoever on the result of drinking and driving is truly comparing apples with oranges.
And the people said AMEN! :tongue:
I appreciate your passion for this issue. I won't drive if I have had more than one drink. That is my rule, so that I don't have to guess whether or not I have had too much. But you seem insistent that eliminating open container laws will lead to greater incidents of drunken driving. Well, the statistics do not support your argument. States with open container laws fall into the same range as states without open container laws when it comes to drunken driving offenses....Deciding whether you're a big enough boy to handle your alochol consumption, your decision. So what we're doing is we're taking something perfectly legal, and for no other good reason but because we want to, we are walking the dangerously thin line between sobriety and drunkenness, trying to decide whether we should drive or not. Having the right to have an open container would only exacerbate things. That has been my point. Let's take a bad situation and make it worse...
My business partner told me he used to feel this way. Then (ealry 80's) he noticed how quickly his score fell on the Atari Pong game after just one beer. He said it dramatically changed how he viewed driving after just one beer. After 1, you're not conscious of the effects, but they're there. As a PS, the person telling me this is 6'-6" and probably 230#, so no, having a low bodyweight didn't enhance the result.