Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Even if all people who were anti-gun were drink drivers, how does that invalidate their opinion on guns? The two are completely unrelated. People can be stupid in one area, and not in another. At the end of the day, everyone's a hypocrite.

Just be glad you don't live in Ireland.

The Government here shot down a bill to raise the penalties for Drink Driving, as it might hurt pubs apparently and at one point a minister suggested having a different blood alcohol limit for rural areas to urban areas.

Wow. They're really doing their bit to combat cultural stereotypes - nice work!

Albatross wrote:

Just be glad you don't live in Ireland.

The Government here shot down a bill to raise the penalties for Drink Driving, as it might hurt pubs apparently and at one point a minister suggested having a different blood alcohol limit for rural areas to urban areas.

Wow. They're really doing their bit to combat cultural stereotypes - nice work!

What would be funny is if that were a jab at Irish stereotypes, but it isn't.

Relapse wrote: I saw yet another Columbine mention and the debate over fire arms, yet I don't believe one poster in 10 here knows about the Carrolton crash.

Why should they? The fact that people are apprehensive about firearms isn't really news. If anything, to an anti-gun person, you're simply saying that we should be as cautious with alcohol as we are with guns.

Relapse wrote:Close, but I don't think everyone who complains about guns should shut up. I saw yet another Columbine mention and the debate over fire arms, yet I don't believe one poster in 10 here knows about the Carrolton crash.

There's about 30,000 gun deaths in the US each year, if the media reported on a fatality whenever a gun was involved we'd know a lot more about each one of those deaths.

Instead, the media is drawn to single, spectacular incidents, and mass shootings like Columbine certainly fit the bill. Every single airplane crash anywhere in the world is reported on despite airplanes totalling very deaths in the world.

I think there's probably a point to be made about not relying on the news for your opinions on policy, as news will by its nature focus on sensational stories like Columbine or Carrollton.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Illeix wrote:Oh, I get it.

People who blame inanimate objects for shootings driving drunk and possibly killing others themselves.

I would bet that they would blame the alchohol, as it certainly couldn't have been their fault! THEY are the victims of the breweries!

I don't see hipocrisy, just a continuation of dangerous utopian ideals.

Umm, no. We identify that certain objects can be misused, causing harm to others. So we place controls on the use of those items to limit misuse, while trying to leave people as much freedom as possible to use the item in a way that doesn't endanger others. We use this idea to regulate the use of cars, alcohol and firearms. It is not utopian at all, and has nothing to do with any kind of utopian dream, it is just that balancing of personal freedom against public safety.

Drunk drivers should be shot in the public square as warning to other would be drinkers. Enough meelee mouthed nonsense. You can drink, no problem. You can drive, no problem. If you do both you're committing attempted homicide so its the rope for you.

You can drink, no problem. You can drink, no problem. If you do both you're committing attempted homicide so its the rope for you.

I trust myself to drink and drink at the same time - I am a regular 'Drink-drinker'. Now drinking and DRIVING, on the other hand - that IS dangerous.

Albatross wrote:

You can drink, no problem. You can drink, no problem. If you do both you're committing attempted homicide so its the rope for you.

I trust myself to drink and drink at the same time - I am a regular 'Drink-drinker'. Now drinking and DRIVING, on the other hand - that IS dangerous.

See if you can't drink and post you REALLY can't drink and drive.