Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:11 PM Sep 2012

I drove drunk today and nobody was hurt by it!

That proves we don't need drunk driving laws! Yay NDDA talking points!


(for the record, this is )



ETA: I didn't actually drive drunk today people. That's what the means.
ETA2: The reason this is relevant to the gun debate is that gun nuts often claim that the fact that they manage to walk around with a loaded gun without killing anyone demonstrates how safe it is. The point I'm making is that the same argument could be made about driving drunk, since only a small fraction of drunk drivers actually end up hurting anyone. I was hoping that all this was clear from the OP...

46 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I drove drunk today and nobody was hurt by it! (Original Post) DanTex Sep 2012 OP
This message was self-deleted by its author 1GirlieGirl Sep 2012 #1
Meh. Jpak's was funnier and he beat you by almost 48 hours petronius Sep 2012 #2
His thread tomorrow: Union Scribe Sep 2012 #31
I quit drinking today and tripped, fell down the stairs into the basement, racked myself against 2on2u Sep 2012 #3
While stalking your faithful Oriental manservant Cato? n/t brewens Sep 2012 #4
:rofl: discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #12
Cato, Cato, Cato...... Aha, Green Hornet, Cato also known as Bruce Lee. There was little or 2on2u Sep 2012 #13
Pink Panther Cato. brewens Sep 2012 #25
Unlike you I never drive or carry my concealed handgun if I have had more than two beers. ... spin Sep 2012 #5
I was being sarcastic. DanTex Sep 2012 #8
Not sure this is sarcasm holdencaufield Sep 2012 #10
Maybe you just didn't get it. But most DUers are Democrats, so I think I'm OK. DanTex Sep 2012 #11
Oh! Now I'm wounded... holdencaufield Sep 2012 #16
I must have missed the sarcasm tag ... spin Sep 2012 #33
First hoyt & mike, then Jpak now you. ileus Sep 2012 #6
This thread needs to be locked like jpak's was glacierbay Sep 2012 #7
It's relevant. DanTex Sep 2012 #9
It's not relevant to the mission of this group. glacierbay Sep 2012 #15
The legality isn't the issue. It's the risk. DanTex Sep 2012 #17
neither is the risk gejohnston Sep 2012 #18
I have yet to roll on a CC permitted citizen glacierbay Sep 2012 #19
That's a different argument. DanTex Sep 2012 #20
DDing is horribly dangerous glacierbay Sep 2012 #21
I agree. DanTex Sep 2012 #23
How many of those gun deaths ... holdencaufield Sep 2012 #24
A small fraction, though I don't know of solid numbers on that. DanTex Sep 2012 #27
So... by a large margin ... holdencaufield Sep 2012 #28
Some solid numbers. Straw Man Sep 2012 #40
LOL!!!! jpak Sep 2012 #45
I'm glad I was able to amuse ya. glacierbay Sep 2012 #46
Are you unaware ... holdencaufield Sep 2012 #14
The AA forum is Two Doors Down. Please turn off the coffee pot and shut out the lights. Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #22
THANKS! elleng Sep 2012 #26
this is NOT relevant and it is OFF TOPIC. Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #29
Hahahahaha Union Scribe Sep 2012 #30
Any post that requires two edits is simply a FAIL. cherokeeprogressive Sep 2012 #32
Post removed Post removed Sep 2012 #34
When you can't enlighten ... holdencaufield Sep 2012 #35
You sound jealous.... Clames Sep 2012 #39
THAT'S how you talk to adults? cherokeeprogressive Sep 2012 #41
Give em an A. Remmah2 Sep 2012 #38
So if you didn't drive drunk while carrying.... ileus Sep 2012 #36
Actually what it proves is anti-2A people are dangerous. Remmah2 Sep 2012 #37
Thread Winner, Now Krispos, please lock this thread. It has run its course. Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #42
Only cops should be able to drink and drive. Dr. Strange Sep 2012 #43
Great minds think alike! jpak Sep 2012 #44

Response to DanTex (Original post)

 

2on2u

(1,843 posts)
3. I quit drinking today and tripped, fell down the stairs into the basement, racked myself against
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:17 PM
Sep 2012

the water heater, sprung a leak, shorted some wires, got a nasty electrical burn, went to the emergency room, waited for 6 hours to be treated. I think I'm gonna start drinking again.

 

2on2u

(1,843 posts)
13. Cato, Cato, Cato...... Aha, Green Hornet, Cato also known as Bruce Lee. There was little or
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:47 PM
Sep 2012

no stalking involved during this mishap.

spin

(17,493 posts)
5. Unlike you I never drive or carry my concealed handgun if I have had more than two beers. ...
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:30 PM
Sep 2012

It's just not worth the risk and I have respect for the law.

I could easily make a very insulting comment but I will merely choose to say that if you actually did drive drunk it reflects poorly on your character. You endangered a number of people because of your irresponsible actions.

I have legally carried a concealed handgun for over 15 years and I have never endangered anyone. I have drove a car for over 50 years and never caused an accident. Other people have run into the rear end of my car and in all cases I was stopped in a traffic jam.

 

holdencaufield

(2,927 posts)
10. Not sure this is sarcasm
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:44 PM
Sep 2012
Sarcasm -- A mocking, often ironic or satirical remark, usually intended to wound as well as amuse.


It fails to either wound or amuse.
 

holdencaufield

(2,927 posts)
16. Oh! Now I'm wounded...
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:51 PM
Sep 2012

... having failed to pass your "Who gets to call themselves a Democrat" Litmus Test by straying from your true ideology.

I don't believe I will have the strength to go on living -- thank goodness I have a firearm.

NOTE: This IS a valid example of sarcasm.

 

glacierbay

(2,477 posts)
7. This thread needs to be locked like jpak's was
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:37 PM
Sep 2012

has nothing to do with firearms or firearm policy.
Host, lock this thread please.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
9. It's relevant.
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:38 PM
Sep 2012

It addresses the stupidity of the argument that if one person manages to not kill someone, then it proves we don't need to restrict a given activity.

 

glacierbay

(2,477 posts)
15. It's not relevant to the mission of this group.
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:51 PM
Sep 2012

Trying to equate an illegal activity to a legal activity is ridiculous beyond belief.
Krispos needs to lock this thread like jpak's was.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
17. The legality isn't the issue. It's the risk.
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:54 PM
Sep 2012

The argument made by many gun fanatics is that they managed to carry a gun without hurting anyone. Anyone who drives drunk and makes it home alive can make the same argument about drunk driving.

The legality doesn't change the logical flaw in the anecdotal pro-gun argument. Instead of calling it "ridiculous", try to challenge the logic. Both are activities that potentially carry risks, but in most cases don't end up hurting anyone.

I wouldn't be surprised of krispos locks the thread -- he's demonstrated that he is not able to separate his politics from his hosting duties, but in truth this is a relevant thread.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
18. neither is the risk
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:58 PM
Sep 2012

the odds of a legal CCW, or cop for that matter, accidently harming someone is almost non existent. Drunk driving, not so much. There is also a matter of degree. A drunk driver can kill or maim several people and cause thousands of dollars worth of damage before being stopped. An ND, not even close.

 

glacierbay

(2,477 posts)
19. I have yet to roll on a CC permitted citizen
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 09:06 PM
Sep 2012

accidentally shooting someone or, for that, matter, shooting anyone period, however, I have rolled on dozens of drunk driving accidents where the victims where either injured or killed.
You can't even come close to equating legal concealed carry or even open carry to drunk driving, that's just ridiculous.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
20. That's a different argument.
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 09:10 PM
Sep 2012

It's still anecdotal, but it's not as dumb as "I CCed today and didn't kill anyone". BTW, I don't think that CCing and driving drunk are equally dangerous. In fact, I think DDing is horribly dangerous. That's why the fact that the "I did ________ today and didn't kill anyone" argument can be made with both CCing and DDing proves that it's a silly argument.

 

glacierbay

(2,477 posts)
21. DDing is horribly dangerous
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 09:17 PM
Sep 2012

and that's why I give no quarter to ANYONE I stop for suspicion of DDing, I don't give a flying fuck who it is, I am equally hard on Joe Citizen as I am on Govt. Officials.

I've seen the carnage, physical and psychological damage it does, that's why I am like I am.

BTW, I like the DDing, I'll use it more often, easier than spelling it out. Thx.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
23. I agree.
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 09:27 PM
Sep 2012

Of course, there are about 30,000 gun deaths a year, and only about 10,000 DD deaths. Then again, about 20,000 of those gun deaths are suicides, but on the other hand, about 7,000 of the DD deaths are the drunk drivers versus only about 3,000 innocent victims. And of those 3,000, about half were passengers in a car with a DDer. Which leaves only about 1,500 people killed by drunk driver who neither drove drunk or made the choice to get into a car with a drunk driver.

See how easy it is to whittle down statistics?

 

holdencaufield

(2,927 posts)
24. How many of those gun deaths ...
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 09:31 PM
Sep 2012

... were caused by legally licensed concealed carriers (drunk or sober)?

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
27. A small fraction, though I don't know of solid numbers on that.
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 09:45 PM
Sep 2012

Of course, in some states everyone who could pass a background check is a legal concealed carrier, so, for example, Loughner was carrying his gun legally.

 

holdencaufield

(2,927 posts)
28. So... by a large margin ...
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 10:17 PM
Sep 2012

... non-suicide gun deaths are caused by persons ILLEGALLY possessing or carrying firearms. We ought to pass a law against ILLEGAL handguns ... oh ... wait ...

Straw Man

(6,613 posts)
40. Some solid numbers.
Wed Sep 19, 2012, 02:14 PM
Sep 2012

According to VPC, in the period 2007-2009, 151 people were killed by CCW permit holders.

According the the Century Council, in the same period 35,511 people were killed by drunk drivers.

Keep the ludicrous analogies coming. We expect nothing less.

 

glacierbay

(2,477 posts)
46. I'm glad I was able to amuse ya.
Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:22 AM
Sep 2012

Meanwhile, those that equate drunk driving with the legal carrying of a concealed gun have never, IMO, had to deal with the carnage of ruined lives that drunk drivers cause far more than legal CC citizens. I have dealt with more than I care to remember, accidents caused by an impaired driver while I have never yet had to deal with a irresponsible citizen with a CC permit, so laugh all you want, I'm happy you find it funny.

 

holdencaufield

(2,927 posts)
14. Are you unaware ...
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 08:48 PM
Sep 2012

... that driving while intoxicated is illegal in every city and state in the US (even in most countries)? While carrying a firearm in accordance with local laws isn't?

So, while you might BELIEVE there is a moral equivalency between carrying a firearm sober and operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated -- the law says you're wrong.

Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #32)

 

Remmah2

(3,291 posts)
37. Actually what it proves is anti-2A people are dangerous.
Wed Sep 19, 2012, 09:10 AM
Sep 2012

Consider, the risky behavior of drinking then operating machinery.

Alternatly it adds to the case that anti2A people often time resort to lies in their propaganda efforts.

No sarcasm intented.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»I drove drunk today and n...