How so? So someone is driving in the wrong lane 30 miles over the speed limit on a road with lots of sharp turns and aburptly stopping and starting again and people should just allow that person to continue to drive? Okaaaaay. Here's an idea... if you don't wanna get arrested for a dui, don't drink and drive. No sympathy from me.
If the guy was driving drunk sure call the cops, otherwise If they guy was just trying to get from point A to point B in the shortest possible time, then your fiancé is a rat-fink hotwater
Hey Saddam, if you don't want to get your head stuck in a rope, don't be a dictator! Nah, you're free to think what you will and do what you will. I'm not really that concerned with people that feel the need to rule the lives of others. Ultimately, though, the poor guy may just be a bad driver. Perhaps he dropped a cigarette in his lap. Gotta give people the benefit of the doubt.
Not when I followed the guy for ten miles and for ten miles he was off the road... in the other lane- almost hit two or three people coming the opposite direction... like I said, speeding at least 30 over then stopping... off the road again... in the other lane.... stop.... so unless he was dropping cigarettes on his lap for ten miles. With someone like that you can tell they are WASTED-probably in a black out state. This was the first and only person I've even considered reporting- if that goes to show you how scary he was driving... sometimes, in my opinion, safety comes first. He WAS going to cause an accident and I didn't want that on MY conscience.
So he didn't actually kill anyone whilst driving drunk? And I know, I know, just because this one person didn't happen to kill anyone this time doesn't mean he won't next time and he ought to be taught a lesson because you, and me, and most people, wouldn't make the choices he happened to make that particular night. But only because in all probability there is a small chance that he could hit someone next time. If only the world were as it was 30 years ago where this was concerned.
Okay... I'll try to explain what confused me- first, of course he didn't kill anyone or I obviously would have mentioned that but he got pulled over about five mins. later so who knows if he would have or not. As for your middle paragraph- I'm assuming it is but I couldn't really tell....sarcasm? And what was your point there? (not being bitchy...just truly wondering).... And what was diff. 30 years ago? Was drunk driving allowed or something??? Just general confusion over that post.
Generally speaking, finding an ethical wrong doing is very different than finding a legal wrong doing. Driving over the speed limit, drifting into a different lane, and stopping suddenly, have very few ethical implications. Those that do exist are certainly nothing to be concerned about. The middle paragraph was meant to show the futility of talking about whether or not he would have done anything that he did. The probability that he could have killed someone is not something that we can talk about. Probability ceases to exist in passing experiences. 'Coulds' should only exist in the realm of ideas, which have neither a place in the past, future, or present. Talk to old cops. They'll tell you what it was like 30 years ago. It was acceptable to drink and drive. They'd give you an escort home. Mostly because they realized that they were no better than the drunk drivers. They refused to take the moral high ground.
Okay, thanks for the clarification. Ummmm... all I really have to say is drunk drivers kill lots of people all the time. Nothing to be concerned about? And you don't think driving when you are wasted in the wrong lane, above the speed limit and stopping in the wrong lane around curves where oncoming traffic would not be able to see you is ethically wrong? I suppose that is where we disagree because plenty of times things like that turn into something called murder.
Hahaha..... I thought maybe he was trying to make some stupid joke but I couldnt figure out what said joke would be....