A question about drunk drivers.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-10-2012, 01:36 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 01:26 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  Everyone has their demons, but allowing people to die for a mistake with no supporting evidence is stupid. Not only that but anytime you allow people to be the judge, jury, and executioner with virtually no evidence of their character, intent, and reasons for their predicament you incite to tyranny and a dangerous society full of chaos and havoc. Your way is not the answer. By the way I have nicotine coursing through my veins now Big Grin

Vosur Wrote:Calm down. Inflammatory responses are neither constructive, nor do they help your case.

Quite right. Apologies all around. Me - Nicotine = Angry Asshole.

I would rather have someone who has proven time and time again that no penalty will stop them from getting drunk and getting into a car die off than spend life in prison at the expense of others. As I said, if you feel a need to get shitfaced all the time then walk. If you stagger into the road and get hit, the only one likely to die is you. When you get into a car, the chances are far better for you to kill someone else.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 01:50 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 01:21 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  My inability to empathize probably stems from the years of abuse I suffered in school, all the while I was told I had to own my mistakes. I feel it is only right if it applies to everyone.
Birdguy, this is exactly why we have laws. Laws are independent of your own experiences. As I've said earlier in this thread, in Germany you can get punished for not helping people whose lifes are in danger. I don't know about the legal situation in your country, but I think this is the way it should be everywhere. The ability to empathize with other humans is what distinguishes me and presumably most people on here from psychopaths.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
25-10-2012, 01:58 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 01:50 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(25-10-2012 01:21 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  My inability to empathize probably stems from the years of abuse I suffered in school, all the while I was told I had to own my mistakes. I feel it is only right if it applies to everyone.
Birdguy, this is exactly why we have laws. Laws are independent of your own experiences. As I've said earlier in this thread, in Germany you can get punished for not helping people whose lifes are in danger. I don't know about the legal situation in your country, but I think this is the way it should be everywhere. The ability to empathize with other humans is what distinguishes me and presumably most people on here from psychopaths.

I am sorry, I have no empathy for someone who is clearly a threat to me. I work nights, so I go to work when drunks are out. If you ask the question "What do you think should happen to pedophiles?", most people will say something like they should be shot or locked up for life. Well I don't have kids yet, so this means they are of little concern right now. Drunks are a concern, so my stance on them is the same as most have for the other group I mentioned. Ask yourself the same question and let's see who is the hypocrit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 01:59 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 01:50 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(25-10-2012 01:21 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  My inability to empathize probably stems from the years of abuse I suffered in school, all the while I was told I had to own my mistakes. I feel it is only right if it applies to everyone.
Birdguy, this is exactly why we have laws. Laws are independent of your own experiences. As I've said earlier in this thread, in Germany you can get punished for not helping people whose lifes are in danger. I don't know about the legal situation in your country, but I think this is the way it should be everywhere. The ability to empathize with other humans is what distinguishes me and presumably most people on here from psychopaths.

I would disagree with that being a good law, but agree with your sentiment. The reason why it is a bad law is because people may be forced to risk their life (or commit a crime). If I have reason to believe helping a stranger may end up hurting or killing myself then I have every right to not help. I also risk being sued if my attempt to help does harm. Additionally, I have a big issue with the government forcing anyone to do anything against their will, freedom of choice is the most precious thing we have and must be protected above all else. Now if my freedom is restricted to prevent me from harming others then I would agree, but that is not what we are talking about. That being said I have choose to put myself in harms way to help others of my own accord to help others, luckily I had my firearm handy. While I am willing to help others, I do not wish for others to do it by force.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 02:05 AM (This post was last modified: 25-10-2012 02:09 AM by Vosur.)
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 01:58 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  I am sorry, I have no empathy for someone who is clearly a threat to me. I work nights, so I go to work when drunks are out. If you ask the question "What do you think should happen to pedophiles?", most people will say something like they should be shot or locked up for life. Well I don't have kids yet, so this means they are of little concern right now. Drunks are a concern, so my stance on them is the same as most have for the other group I mentioned. Ask yourself the same question and let's see who is the hypocrit.
Pedophiles should be treated the same way other sex offenders are, as I'm strictly against capital punishment. What makes you think that you can speak for "most people"? Having said that, if you want to let someone die whom you could have helped, that's your decision, but don't expect any sane human to share your views.

(25-10-2012 01:59 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  I would disagree with that being a good law, but agree with your sentiment. The reason why it is a bad law is because people may be forced to risk their life (or commit a crime). If I have reason to believe helping a stranger may end up hurting or killing myself then I have every right to not help. I also risk being sued if my attempt to help does harm. Additionally, I have a big issue with the government forcing anyone to do anything against their will, freedom of choice is the most precious thing we have and must be protected above all else. Now if my freedom is restricted to prevent me from harming others then I would agree, but that is not what we are talking about. That being said I have choose to put myself in harms way to help others of my own accord to help others, luckily I had my firearm handy. While I am willing to help others, I do not wish for others to do it by force.
The law covers your concerns.

"Whosoever does not render assistance during accidents or a common danger or emergency although it is necessary and can be expected of him under the circumstances, particularly if it is possible without substantial danger to himself and without violation of other important duties shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine." Section 323c; Omission to effect an easy rescue

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 02:13 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
Vosur Wrote:
(25-10-2012 01:59 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  I would disagree with that being a good law, but agree with your sentiment. The reason why it is a bad law is because people may be forced to risk their life (or commit a crime). If I have reason to believe helping a stranger may end up hurting or killing myself then I have every right to not help. I also risk being sued if my attempt to help does harm. Additionally, I have a big issue with the government forcing anyone to do anything against their will, freedom of choice is the most precious thing we have and must be protected above all else. Now if my freedom is restricted to prevent me from harming others then I would agree, but that is not what we are talking about. That being said I have choose to put myself in harms way to help others of my own accord to help others, luckily I had my firearm handy. While I am willing to help others, I do not wish for others to do it by force.
The law covers your concerns.

"Whosoever does not render assistance during accidents or a common danger or emergency although it is necessary and can be expected of him under the circumstances, particularly if it is possible without substantial danger to himself and without violation of other important duties shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine." Section 323c; Omission to effect an easy rescue

The law covers some of my concerns, not all of them...

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 02:13 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 02:13 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  The law covers some of my concerns, not all of them...
Such as?

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 02:20 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 02:13 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(25-10-2012 02:13 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  The law covers some of my concerns, not all of them...
Such as?

Quote:I have a big issue with the government forcing anyone to do anything against their will, freedom of choice is the most precious thing we have and must be protected above all else. Now if my freedom is restricted to prevent me from harming others then I would agree, but that is not what we are talking about. That being said I have choose to put myself in harms way to help others of my own accord to help others, luckily I had my firearm handy. While I am willing to help others, I do not wish for others to do it by force.

Additionally in your country the law gets to decide what substantial danger to me is. My judgment should be used since I am the one risking my life. What they consider substantial danger vs. what I consider substantial danger may not jive. A good example my be the integrity of a building, or blood contamination, or suspected unknown poisons that may not exist, any number of things.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 02:47 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
(25-10-2012 02:20 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  I have a big issue with the government forcing anyone to do anything against their will, freedom of choice is the most precious thing we have and must be protected above all else. Now if my freedom is restricted to prevent me from harming others then I would agree, but that is not what we are talking about.
Do you think that the government forcing people to, let's say, paying taxes is wrong? I don't see how you can have that position without invoking a double standard.

(25-10-2012 02:20 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  That being said I have choose to put myself in harms way to help others of my own accord to help others, luckily I had my firearm handy. While I am willing to help others, I do not wish for others to do it by force.
Covered by the law.

(25-10-2012 02:20 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  Additionally in your country the law gets to decide what substantial danger to me is. My judgment should be used since I am the one risking my life. What they consider substantial danger vs. what I consider substantial danger may not jive. A good example my be the integrity of a building, or blood contamination, or suspected unknown poisons that may not exist, any number of things.
You somehow seem to think that defending lawyers are unable to make use of situations in which you're the only witness. Guess what, laws are up for interpretation.

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2012, 02:56 AM
RE: A question about drunk drivers.
I have engaged in a very lengthy debate about taxes elsewhere, I won't bring it up here but feel free to search for it in the politics section. The second quote was just to show you I agree with helping others even at risk. The third quote you replied to didn't address the issue I was making. Witnesses are irrelevant to what I was saying. Please re-read it. Anyhow lets not derail any further. You are just going to have to accept that I do not like that law, and you aren't going to change my opinion on the matter, and I'm not interested in changing yours, whether I could or not.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Question about logic le_bard 15 437 22-02-2014 09:28 AM
Last Post: le_bard
  Is this begging the question? parsonf 28 731 18-01-2014 08:52 PM
Last Post: womendezuguo
  The impossible question about evolution? slimlover360 17 567 04-01-2014 09:26 AM
Last Post: houseofcantor
  My questioning of the question "What is the meaning of life" bemore 61 2,632 22-09-2013 03:56 PM
Last Post: Philosoraptor
  Question Regarding a Fallacy Misanthropik 8 308 09-11-2012 12:43 PM
Last Post: Misanthropik
  The Deepist Philosophical Question... Julius 4 524 26-10-2012 03:18 AM
Last Post: Birdguy1979
Question What is the ultimate Philosophy question? Dark Light 74 3,347 01-10-2012 10:05 PM
Last Post: Vorlon
Forum Jump: