On Mon, 14 May 2007, Brian Loe wrote: > On 5/14/07, Drsolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Solly - you have a prick? Should we arrest you now or wait to see if > > > you actually rape someone? > > > > You really fail to understand, I guess, that when somoene recklessly > > endangers other people then he's crossed the line into *my* rights. And I > > think you might be uneducable. > > > > The law says .08 is "drunk". > > The only way a cop has to know of most drunk drivers is to pull them > over for something else. By then they've committed a crime of some > sort
Rubbish. Someone might drive into a tree. That's not a crime. But then if you test them for alcohol and find they're drunk, then they've been recklessly endangering everyone around them. > (I won't go into DUI check points as I find them extremely > offensive to liberty and justice, as are NARC check points and > prostitution stings). Could be reckless driving (crossing the center > line, weaving, speeding, etc.), could be manslaughter. Whichever, > that's when a crime has been committed. > > You've often stated that you enjoy visiting the pub, and having good > beer. Do you walk? Does England not have a public intoxication law? Or > public nuisance law? It's very simple. If I drink, then I don't drive. If I'm driving, I don't drink. It's very simple, and very easy to do. > Once again, having the potential to do harm does not mean you are > going to do harm. Once again, there's such a thing as recklessly endangering other people. Getting tanked up and trying to control a ton of hurtling vehicle is just that. I suppose you'd be cool about someone firing a gun ionto a crowd of people, provided he was lucky enough to not actually hit anyone. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
