There’s no such thing as “drunk driving”
-
MagneticMonopole — 3 years ago(August 14, 2022 12:09 PM)
Lmao, the burden of proof is not on me faget.
Actually, the burden of proof is on you.
What is apparent is that the results of those studies are distorted and abused by frauds to push “drunk driving” propaganda that ruins people lives for having a beer.
If this were actually "apparent", you would be able to articulate the details of those studies and show exactly how they have been dishonestly manipulated. You can't. You are just making **** up.
And let's be clear, here: no one's life has been ruined for "having a beer".
my point is that in reality, 99.999% of drunk drivers do not crash or kill someone else. Go ahead, prove me wrong. Why do both of us know for a fact you’ll never do this?
We both know you pulled this information out of your dumb, ignorant, alcoholic ass. When you are ready to grow up and deal with reality, find me real, objective, verifiable statistics from reliable sources and then we can talk.
I do not have to follow the scientific method to prove to you that I will not crash into a building and explode after having a beer.
No one is talking about anecdotal examples involving a single beer. What we are talking about is the objective reality that high blood alcohol levels lead to impairment which endangers lives.
It is a social good that idiots who drive drunk can get arrested and punished. End of story. -
BlablaBlackSheep — 3 years ago(August 14, 2022 04:12 PM)
Actually the burden of proof is on you. I gave you a fact and you’re unable to refute it. I’m not doing your homework for you, just so you can have more ammo to further obfuscate and keep dodging the question. Google is at your disposal. Research it yourself.
I already explained how the results of those studies are used as propaganda by organizations like MADD and the department of transportation, as well as the auto industry. If you can’t see that the
real cause
of driving deaths is having
a billion cars on the road
instead of “drunk driving” then you are refusing to see the forest for the trees.
this is what happens when you defund public transportation
and instead blame deaths on “drunk driving” rather than an out of control industry that is killing people and destroying the Earth.
So I’m going to repeat this fact again:
99.999% of drunk drivers do not kill anyone
. If you can DISPROVE this then go ahead, THE BURDEN IS ON YOU. Again, you’re just proving me right that you’ll never ever be able do this.
Also the fact that you refuse to believe that people’s lives have been ruined by fake DWI accusations just means you’re a potential bootlicker. who is supporting these unconstitutional and terrible laws. -
MagneticMonopole — 3 years ago(August 14, 2022 05:26 PM)
Actually the burden of proof is on you. I gave you a fact and you’re unable to refute it.
You gave me no facts, ****wit. You just pulled an assertion out of your ass and expected everyone to simply accept it.
I already explained how the results of those studies are used as propaganda by organizations like MADD and the department of transportation, as well as the auto industry.
You didn't explain ****, you dumb ass clown. You simply made an assertion with absolutely no evidence to back it up. None. Zip. Zero. -
BlablaBlackSheep — 3 years ago(August 14, 2022 08:47 PM)
If it’s an “assertion” then prove it wrong ****head. That’s how the scientific method works. You disprove a theory with more evidence to the contrary. That is, unless you’re afraid to.
Go on, I’m waiting…. -
MagneticMonopole — 3 years ago(August 15, 2022 10:38 AM)
If it’s an “assertion” then prove it wrong ****head. That’s how the scientific method works.
You have a five year old's understanding of how scholarship and the scientific method work.
YOU are the one making claims that pretend to be facts. YOU are therefore the one to back up what you say with evidence. That's how these things work in the world of educated adults.
You can't do any of this because you pulled everything you say out of your ignorant, deluded alcoholic ass. End of story.
So until you become serious and actually meet your obligation to provide evidence to back up your numbers and other claims, as far as I've concerned you have conceded the argument, lost completely, and I have nothing more to say here. -
BlablaBlackSheep — 3 years ago(August 15, 2022 06:25 PM)
Do you have any evidence I “pulled this out of my ass”? You’re a hypocrite, you keep asking for proof without providing any of yours to the contrary.
I have done the research. 99.9999% of drunk drivers never kill anyone. Maybe you should look it up for yourself, I’m not doing your homework for you. -
Rocketman — 3 years ago(August 12, 2022 09:12 PM)
I don't think subjective is the right word for it. I think maybe relative would be better.
Yeah, there are some people who drive drunk and are perfectly capable of operating a motor vehicle. But there's still more of a chance that they'd be involved in a major accident while drunk since alcohol does impair your cognitive and motor functions to a degree no matter what. I mean, there's definitely a difference between when I drive completely sober and when I drive with a few drinks in me.
And that's why it's called drunk driving.
Throughout Heaven and Earth, I alone am the honored one. -
BlablaBlackSheep — 3 years ago(August 12, 2022 09:15 PM)
Yes, relative is a good word for it.
I could see drinking increasing your chances of having an accident maybe by .0001% or something, but that’s almost impossible to quantify. There are so many other variables.
If anything, people would be more inclined to drive carefully after drinking because they’re aware their reaction times could be dulled, so this would offset any effect of the alcohol increasing the chances of an accident.
At the end of the day there’s always a chance that anything and everything will go wrong. You could be driving sober and your tire could blow out and kill someone, at the end of the day it’s not worth worrying about what might happen or not.
Obviously an exception to this would be someone drinking so much they start passing out and vomiting, but that would be alcohol poisoning. I wouldn’t expect them to drive the way I wouldn’t expect someone who had suffered a traumatic brain injury to try getting behind the wheel. At that point it becomes something else. -
BlablaBlackSheep — 3 years ago(August 14, 2022 04:03 PM)
Lots of stuff “hinders reaction time.” Being tired, or rubbing your eyes, adjusting the radio, texting, or not having your hands at 10 & 2 literally every second of the drive. If you do any of those things then you’re also guilty of bad driving.
Doesn’t change the fact that everyone does those things and
99.9999% of drunk drivers never hurt anyone
.
That’s why there’s no such thing as “drunk driving,” just ****ty driving or good driving. Which one are you? -
jaylenoh — 1 year ago(September 15, 2024 05:36 PM)
Good stuff, man. Outstanding read. Humor, data, bootlicking, and lack thereof lol. Perspective's a sonofabuiscuiteater to some folks. Your arguements and theirs aren't mutually exclusive. Everything I read is true lol. Kudos