Drinking and Driving vs. Drunk Driving

56
1377
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

It is important to make distinctions. To know exactly what we are talking about before we “do something” about it.bullet headed Hero

For instance, drinking and driving and drunk driving. There is a distinction to be made here.

An important one.

Why on earth should it be illegal – a crime – merely to have been drinking and driving?

Emphasis on merely.

Put another way, why should it be a punishable offense to have been drinking when one’s driving can’t be faulted? Unless of course the object of the exercise is to impose a kind of low-rent Prohibition –  to punish people for drinking – this makes no sense at all.

But it does seem to be the object of the exercise.

Which is why the law increasingly package-deals the consumption of alcohol – any alcohol at all – with “drunk” driving. Those under 21 (who may not legally buy, possess or consume alcohol) can be convicted of “drunk” driving if they are found with even a single empty beer can in the car at a “sobriety checkpoint.” It does not matter whether the driver even drank the single can of beer. The presence of the empty can is sufficient.

For those over 21, the definition of “drunk” is nearly as hysterical.Carrie Nation

In every state, you are automatically presumed to be a “drunk” driver if your blood alcohol content is .08 regardless of your driving. Mark that. Your actual driving is not the issue, as far as the law is concerned. It is not necessary for the arresting officer to even assert that he saw you driving erratically, much less prove that you were.

Even if you got him to concede in open court that he’d been following you for miles as you drove down a curvy mountain road and could not point to anything about your driving that indicated that you were other than in full control of you vehicle before finally pulling you over for a seatbelt violation or because the little light over your license plate was out – and subsequently, you “blew” a .08 in the Breathalyzer – it would not matter.

You are a “drunk” driver.

You could win the Indy 500 – sure proof that no matter what proof your blood might be, you are a damned fine driver but if your BAC is over whatever the arbitrary number is (currently, it is .08; it used to be .10 and before that, it was .12) then legally speaking, you are a dangerous, reckless, irresponsible, out-of-control “drunk.”

Your faultless driving is not admissible evidence that while you may indeed have been drinking, you weren’t “drunk.”

This is crazy. Like Carrie Nation. obey this sign

But the law is lazy.

It does not want to be burdened with the obligation to prove that you – specifically – have had “too much” to drink. That would need to be established on a case-by-case basis, because each individual varies in his driving ability as well as his ability to handle his booze.

A person of low-average ability behind the wheel who has had nothing to drink but nonetheless wanders across the double yellow in every curve is legally acceptable (or at most, if a cop witnesses it, may get cited for a minor traffic offense) while the high-skilled driver who stays in his lane even though he has had a couple of beers gets arrested at a “sobriety checkpoint” solely because his BAC is over the ever-diminishing allowable threshold. The former faces a small fine and gets to drive home, wandering all over the road. The latter faces thousands in fines and goes to jail.

Because the law wants a one-size-fits-all (and thus, necessarily dumbed-down) standard that is based on a bait-and-switch.

Driving is no longer the focus. That would require observation and evidence, which was as it used to be. If you were driving erratically – across the double yellow, for instance – that was the necessary probable cause for pulling you over to investigate further. But if you weren’t driving erratically then a cop had no legal basis to pull you over because he had no probable cause. If your driving could not be faulted, the presumption was you were a competent driver. Whether you’d been drinking was immaterial. As it ought to be.

This reasonable standard has been replaced by shockingly unreasonable random stops without any probable cause whatsoever and the conflation of arbitrarily decreed trace amounts of alcohol in one’s system with drunkenness.

The sell is that more “drunks” are captured this way. In truth, they are merely catching more people who’ve been drinking.

It’s not quite the same thing.asleep at the wheel

If the argument is that people who drink (even a little) and drive are as a general rule “drunk” by definition (no matter their individual driving) and the only criteria necessary to establish a criminal case is the presence of small traces of alcohol in their system (or even just a single empty can of beer on the floorboards) then why shouldn’t people who are over the age of say 65 who – in general – have weaker eyesight and slower reflexes and a higher likelihood of being afflicted with dementia and so on – likewise be presumed dangerous behind the wheel, regardless of their competence behind the wheel?

Arrest them all!

Of course, grokking this point requires a conceptual faculty, the ability to discern principles and apply them to particulars. Most Americans lack this, courtesy of government schooling – which trains them to react emotionally instead. This makes it easy to demonize demon rum without (for the moment) demonizing older people as a class.

Their turn will necessarily come. Because one thing does follow another.

Most people, unfortunately, do not comprehend.

They target fixate on the emotional jihad du jour. Right now it is “drunk” driving. Perhaps tomorrow it will be elder driving. Or some other goat group.

Government schools have done their work, brilliantly.

EPautos.com depends on you to keep the wheels turning! The control freaks (Clovers) hate us. Goo-guhl blackballed us.

Will you help us? 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

EPautos stickers are free to those who sign up for a $5 or more monthly recurring donation to support EPautos, or for a one-time donation of $10 or more. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)EPautoslogo

Share Button

56 COMMENTS

  1. Some NJ towns tried to enact sensible drink driving laws, but Frank Latenburg the now deceased rot in hell politician threaten to withold federal funds if the towns went through with it.

  2. This is pretty much how I was raised, and it didn’t hurt me none. The earlier you’re handed a gun and told to cowboy/cowgirl up, the better.

    Worst Grandpa Explains In Court Why He Left 5-Year-Old In Desert
    http://abc7.com/news/worst-grandpa-explains-in-court-why-he-left-5-year-old-in-desert/1069889/

    I was a year or two older though, and left with a key to the backdoor of the house, so a lot easier to master the art of self-parenting. It was because this time, I was kicked out of daycare for good.

    No bad guy ever did show up, but the neighbor kids and I did manage to shoot just about everything else in the backyard for target practice.

  3. I’d like to see commercial license standards, .03, foisted on the enforcers, even off duty since, as they claim, they’re never technically off duty.

  4. MADD and the National Football League are partnering once again this football season to remind fans to “Play the Most Valuable Position in the NFL—the Designated Driver!”
    http://www.madd.org/blog/2015/september/play-the-most-valuable-position.html

    That would be a great message, and fantastic suggestion, but they left out the other part, the OR ELSE, where they cage you and carry out eugenics research on your defenseless incarcerated ass.

    Undercover at the World’s 2nd Largest Chimpanzee Laboratory (Us 320 Million Citizen Chimps of America inhabit the Largest.)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzbAjTpC1EQ

  5. Sam Kinison and wife Malika Souiri
    http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/comic-sam-kinisonkand-wife-malika-souiri-attend-the-taping-news-photo/156133446

    In 1992, Kinison died at the age of 38 after his white 1989 Pontiac Trans Am was struck head-on 15 miles northwest of Needles, California, by a pickup truck driven by a 17-year-old Las Vegas teen who had been drinking alcohol.

    The kid’s pickup truck crossed the center line of the roadway and went into Kinison’s lane. At the time of the collision, Kinison was traveling to Laughlin, Nevada to perform at a sold-out show.

    As he neared death, his final words were, “Why now? I don’t want to die. Why?”

    The heroes ordered an autopsy, but unfortunately for those ghouls, nothing incriminating was found. He had suffered numerous traumatic injuries—including a dislocated neck, a torn aorta, and torn blood vessels in his abdominal cavity—which caused his death within minutes of the collision.

    Malika Souiri, Kinison’s wife, whom he had married merely six days prior, was rendered unconscious by the collision, but survived the accident with a mild concussion.

    The kid pleaded guilty to one count of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence. He was sentenced to one year of probation and 300 hours of community service, and his driver’s license was suspended for two years.

    Kinison’s grave is at the Memorial Park Cemetery in Tulsa, Oklahoma. His grave marker says: “In another time and place he would have been called prophet.

    Sam very live in 1986
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Px4OYPxhQGk

  6. The entire subject of the temperancers and their idiocy never fails to get me tearing my hair. Shortly after the national standard was lowered to .08, the MADDites pointed to increased DUI arrests as proof that still more action was needed to combat the scourge. of ‘drunken driving. Well, duh, if you lower the bar at which a driver is considered ‘drunk’, then more drivers are going to be arrested, whether they’re actually impaired or not. This does not a crisis make.

    And don’t get me started on people arrested for ‘being in control of a motor vehicle while impaired’ when they are decidedly *not driving* drunk but indeed acting responsibly by sleeping off their inebriation before starting their automobiles.

    • It has been a while since I have been pulled over.

      Many years ago, I was pulled over at a police checkpoint, called RIDE here in Ontario, Canada. I had just spent around two hours in a bar and had drunk two 20oz draft beers. Most Canadians beers are 5% alcohol. I weigh about 210lb.

      I blew 0.014. In Ontario. 0.05 gets you an on-the-spot license suspension for a couple of days. 0.08 is a criminal charge. I could have had six beers in that time. At 0.05, I would have been impaired, especially late in the evening when I am probably tired as well. Is it really that difficult to stay below 0.05 or 0.08?

      At checkpoints here in Ontario, I believe they lean into your window and sniff, then they ask if you have had something to drink. On one evening, I told the cop I had had three beers. He told me to drive carefully.

      This is not your right to travel. This is your right to operate several thousand pounds of potentially lethal machinery.

      I read somewhere that 80% of drivers rate themselves as above average. Please remember this folks!

      • Hi Howard,

        You appear to have missed the point I was trying to make in the article. Which was that BAC levels do not necessarily mean your are “drunk” or even meaningfully impaired. Especially vis-a-vis the hysterical, overwrought BAC thresholds in place today.

        You seem to want to generalize – and criminalize people on that basis. Perhaps you can explain your reasoning. In particular, why the lack of any tangible evidence that a person’s actual driving was an issue ought not to be a very persuasive defense against a charge of “drunk” driving.

        • You have pegged it on the money Eric. Sadly in many jurisdictions due to the great revenue returns law enforcement and their rubber stamp judges have decided on their own authority that ANY amount of alcohol impairs you, therefore ANY drinking is driving under the influence. Blow test doesn’t register, you are screwing with the device by not blowing hard enough. Now it is refusal to blow. Think you are going to get that police camera film showing what really happened, think again. In Mississippi this is a COMMON play. Too many people truly want to bring back prohibition by the back door.

      • IIRC, you can blow a 0.03% from having bread with dinner – no alcohol needed.

        Why do wish to enforce violence against those who have not injured you?
        PreEmptive strike?

        Then maybe those killing police offices are OK, too – it’s just “preemptive” actions, after all.

        Think it over…. the logic is the same.

      • Howard, I don’t have a clue as to Ontario “drunk” but Tx. drunk involves half a really shitty beer like Coors “light” and you’ll blow over the .08% if it’s been within the last 15 minutes. There is a good reason a Bexar county appellate court judge ruled that the blow test can’t be examined for accuracy because it would then then give competitors a leg up on their test, it’s because actually testing the test would reveal it’s made for convictions and has nothing to do with registering alcohol content in the bloodstream(another bullshit reason). It only has to do with convictions since Texans are notorious beer drinkers. You could stop just about every vehicle in west Tx. any day of the week during peak rush hour at the end of the day and find the driver was “over the limit” since that limit is a ridiculous ploy for the “just us” systems as well as all those others who depend on it for a living.

        I knew one DPS trooper who said it was the best thing going for making money, something that had no basis in fact, but he didn’t say he didn’t use it…..like a red-headed step child.

        And the laws are such that it’s caused a huge problem in this and most every other state. The fines and the onus are so great that anyone charged can’t pay it off since they can’t afford the legal fees to get their license re-instated so they can work. I’ve had countless employees that had virtually no rights left and lived below the radar of the law. I’ve bailed them out of jail just for getting stopped and finding they had no license…..and this isn’t just for DWI but for things like late payment on child support. And that’s another bad story since the state takes their money(oh yes, they have a big stake in it)off the top and only when the state gets their money does the spouse owed money get theirs.

        Pleased, don’t try to make it sound as if the govt. gets hurt in any way. No one has to get hurt. It’s a very crooked system, one established by those crooks YOU elect. I don’t elect them since I don’t vote. I see not a great deal of difference in Minnie or Mickey Mouse, both of which want to do their worst to all their “constituents”.

    • Prohibitionism, whether of alcohol or other ingestable substances, is one of the undesirable holdovers from Yankee Puritanism.

  7. Remember the AARP commands a lot of political clout. No politician is going to deny a 90 year old geezer the right to drift from lane to lane in his Land yacht.

    • I hope I am not like that when I geeze out. I am determined to not be like that. My theory is that it’s not getting old that makes people bad drivers. It’s just bad drivers who got old.

      • My guess is that they are that way because they drove things like ’62 Falcons and such and stayed well within the limits of those cars and they stay within those limits plus their age related decay today. Those of us who find the limits of our cars and ourselves and then calibrate won’t be like that.

        • I drove a ’62 Falcon, no, it was a Fairlane and only took a couple acres to turn around. It was my grandparent’s car. Thankfully it didn’t last long and my grandfather got a Rocket 88. He didn’t drive it a great deal faster than the Fairlane but at least it didn’t have that “stick dragging in gravel” wound to it.

          The band director who always drove Mercury’s for some reason(Okie? maybe that was it)drove my 3 of us to state music contest in a ’64 Fairlane “school” car, brand new. It was a blowing blizzard and we were headed south but that didn’t stop the snow from coming around the front passenger door where it built up on the coat I had to keep on.
          I and the other two guys were accustomed to “Body by Fisher” but we were all glad to get out of that thing.

          BTW, I just got into a new Fusion. Out of all the new cars I’ve been in, it was the only one that made me hit my head on the door sill as my butt hit the seat. That’s perverted. The opening should accommodate the driver’s body. Once in, it was fine. It made me long for the Elco. Open the door, back into the swivel bucket, spin around and be ready to cruise. It probably doesn’t weight any more than the Fusion, a really tall car.

  8. This is the Federal Government nannies, mandating to that states via their highway funds, to set the alcohol rate at .08.. and why so low? Because the Temperance movement… never went away. They just moved from no drinking to exaggerating DUI and then using the Government to mandate compliance/political correctness. I have made the arguments of this post in conversation in polite company and you’d think I was advocating the return of slavery.

    I hope someday a movement will take hold in our government that will allow folks to live their lives and only dish out punishment to those that commit crime or cause problems… not ensnare everyone they can because it’s easy and it pays the bills.

    • I hope someday a movement will take hold in our government
      Well, I hope some day a movement will take hold OF our gunvermin, and shake it like a dog shakes a rat.

      • We’ve always had a coon problem, going for cat food on the breezeway table. We had a dog, Buck, the most stone cold killer I have ever seen. He’d whine at the back door and I’d let him out. He’d be so fast getting to the table the coon didn’t have time to react. He’d snatch the coon(some were huge, probably 40 lbs.)and the coon would be limp by the time he got 5 feet away and out the breezeway door. He’d run around holding it in the air and shaking it occasionally, just a victory dance for himself. We need the equivalent of Buck for govt. In the blink of an eye, the govt. is dead dead dead.

        • My Uncle had a little dog that was part Border Collie and part miniature Collie. Not sure she would have been able to handle a 40# coon, but she was death on rats. Only time she ever had a problem was when she went in underneath a shelf and couldn’t toss him up over her head. He nipped her on the nose before she got him out of there and broke his back, but that was the last thing he ever did. When she was young all the other dogs in the neighborhood would follow her around to eat the rabbits she caught. Yes, she was fast.

    • “I have made the arguments of this post in conversation in polite company and you’d think I was advocating the return of slavery. ”

      Rob,
      Given what’s going on, perhaps you should also voice abolition?
      We is all house niggas now… (I.E., Slaves under the Fed system.)

      Be interesting to see what happens. (I’ve been laughed at and you can tell people think I’m nuts. They NEVER can refute it, they just think they’re “Free” and so never question it. To question it is painful, they’ve been brainwashed.)

      Big Brother lives. For reference… I was reading this on the commute this morning.
      http://www.returnofkings.com/72889/groveling-confession-of-asheville-coffee-shop-puas-shows-why-you-should-never-apologize-to-sjws

      It’s omnipresent, we need to stop pontificating and start DOING, forcefully (not necessarily violently) ASAP….

  9. I despise the DUI roadblocks.
    And I really despise the .08 BAL limit.
    But “legal presumptions” are not at all unique to DUI enforcement.

    I’m fine with a presumption of impairment for those with a BAL “over” .1%. It’s a biological reality that most people will have significant impairment of their judgement and motor skills when over .1%.

    I agree with your premise that some people can drive better with a significant BAL than others can drive at 0%.

    But I’ll bet you that Bob Bondurant doesn’t slam down a couple of beers before he goes to drive well over triple digits on the track….not even one beer. I’ll bet even James Hunt didn’t do that.

    • But we are supposedly (on paper) presumed innocent until proven guilty. Why is ‘impaired’ driving even an allowable concept? Is it reckless? OK, there are rules for that. If not, then MYOB!

    • Hi Mike,

      As I see it, the basic problem is the whole “might cause a problem” standard. A person who has “x” BAC might be (and these days, is presumed to be) dangerous behind the wheel. But it’s arbitrary (the BAC threshold) and there are people who are outstanding drivers even when technically “drunk” (legally).

      I agree Bondurant would not drive on the track at triple digits after drinking. That is a competitive and extreme environment. But is he able to safely drive home from the bar? I have driven with the dude and I would say, hell yes.

      Very good drivers start out at a higher level, so even when their reactions and so on are dulled by booze, they are still better than most people are sober. Add to this good judgment – taking it easy rather than balls to the wall – and (again) the guy is not a threat.

      I’ve written previously that (in my opinion) a better (because objective) standard is the harm caused standard. You lose control, you wreck, you damage someone else’s property or you hurt them… you’ve caused harm. Whether you were drunk or just inattentive or sloppy is largely if not entirely irrelevant and in any case, the bottom line is you actually did cause harm.

      I’d rather hold them accountable for what they did as opposed to punishing people for things that caused no actual harm to anyone.

      • Well, you’ve just described a major tenet of Common Law. That there must be an injured party and the court could order just compensation to the injured party for the real damage incurred.

        Unfortunately, we do not presently live under a regime of Common Law.
        We live under Equity law, and “regulations”. It’s on the Driver’s License.

        The US Constitution is like holy water to the Equity Law vampires. They freak out if you mention that it even exists.

      • I’m sure Bob wouldn’t want to speak of it but I’d bet he’s been on the track with a fair load on and had a ball and no problems. Not saying he’s been out there like that with other people there too. And what of it? It’s his life and as long as he hurts no one else, like everyone, he should be able to do whatever he likes in any condition he chooses.

    • Impaired compared to what? That is the question. Our each individual best day behind the wheel? Certainly. Our individual average day behind the wheel? Maybe. Impaired compared to the garden variety north american driver? Impaired compared to the legally minimally competent driver?

      Where one starts and where one is impaired to is what really matters.

      For the average north american driver 0.1 BAC is likely where things start to degrade significantly. But that’s just averages. Statistics.

      What if someone can pass the state driving test at say .09 BAC? We know there are a good number of people who probably can. What then? There is the problem. The state says that level of driving skill is good enough. Then it adds to it, only if that’s the best you can do. So what about that minimum driver at 0.079 BAC? Who do you fear more, the guy who can pass the state test at 0.09 BAC driving around at 0.085 or the guy who can barely pass it sober driving around at a legal 0.07 BAC?

      • I’m more relaxed drinking and driving, hence more alert. Ever notice how nervousness can mess up your driving? As a Scot, I can and have drunk enough to be way over .1% and been not only an ok driver but well above average.

        I know I’ve told of this before but once Car and Driver decided to do real world testing with some of the best race drivers to grace the sport. They assembled about half a dozen, put them in a race car and took an average of several runs through a course to establish a baseline.

        Then each one was given either a shot or a beer(everyone simply took a shot of common 86 proof alcohol, waited 10 or 15 minutes and ran the course. This was repeated until what the law at that time said they should be legally drunk. All but one of them kept improving their time to the point of being embarrassing(to the state and the top dogs((excuse me dogs, I meant bitches)) on hand from MADD, the group wanting to prove to the world even race car drivers couldn’t drink and drive). The results were buried for about a year since MADD got so madd.

        Letters to the editor weren’t kind for them not immediately publishing the results.

        Of course the tests administered for drunk driving now are a sham since one beer will show anyone and everyone to be DRUNK.

        • So you’re Scot? Is that why you asked me about Robert the Bruce? And do you like Scotch? Or do you prefer a Texan beverage like Shiner?

          • The family name on my maternal side came from Robert the Bruce when a many times removed grandfather saved him from a bull. He gave us our name, Turnbull, land and money.

            I never developed a taste for Scotch preferring a very Scotch-like bourbon, Wild Turkey. I do mostly drink Shiner Bohemian Black Lager.

            • the fellow that taught me to throw darts always drank Wild Turkey Liquer when throwing (except at work,LOL). A relaxation theory similar to yours about driving.
              I like Braveheart, even though I know it’s not historically accurate.

              • WT is good for dart throwing. Good for singing too. I intend to use it for pain relief tonight. I broke a jaw tooth Sunday right in the middle of a backhoe chore, had it removed this am. Not bad right now. Found a way around not drinking to save having a dry socket. Turkey baster full of Shiner Black in my throat opposite side of former tooth. I’m inventive when it comes to some things.

  10. I think you present the big reason why the system is “rigged” (I probably do not need the quotes) the way it is currently.

    But the law is lazy.

    It does not want to be burdened with the obligation to prove that you – specifically – have had “too much” to drink. That would need to be established on a case-by-case basis, because each individual varies in his driving ability as well as his ability to handle his booze.

    (Emphasis mine)

    If one stops enough people at random at certain locations, one is bound to find enough people with a BAC higher than some arbitrary number.

    I am sure that in addition to looking for $10,000 trout, they will also look for other smaller fish to fry (damaged equipment, papers out of order, etc.) while they are looking.

    Of course those in control of enforcing the laws would never violate any of the myriad of rules.

    http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2015/10/state_trooper_charged_with_dui_after_on-duty_crash.html

    http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/08/state_police_trooper_accused_o.html

    • When I was working in News/Talk radio I always got the Charlotte/Mecklenburg Police press releases regarding their Check Point Chickies. They listed the citations/arrests and the DUI citations never exceeded about 7% of the total.

      It’s Scam-O-Rific. And the sheeple bleated in unison.

    • Have you ever BEEN to NJ?

      Drinking is essential to sanity (what little there is) in NJ… I was born there and grew up there, I should know… 😛

      • I went to elementary school in Jersey, but I differentiate that from Joisey. There is an imaginary line, east to west, somewhere around the latitude of Trenton dividing the 2.

        • Phillip the Bruce,

          I tend to think of the dividing line as roughly the two area codes (201 and 609) when there were only two area codes in the state.
          On the map below, it is roughly (SW NJ 609&856) and (NE NJ the rest)
          http://www.whitepages.com/maps/NJ

          Most of the Joisey is from transplanted New Yorkers that left NYC for (I assume) better living conditions in northern NJ. Unfortunately many of them (over time) changed their new home to be just as bad as the place they left. Many of the things (higher taxes, more regulations, higher population densities, etc.) that caused them to leave NYC were brought to their homes in NJ.

          About 40% of the NJ population lives in ~8% of the land area. (5 closest counties to NYC: Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Passaic, and Union)

              • Mithrandir:
                “Some people from Princeton have an inflated ego. ”

                Only SOME? Wow… News to me (Lived in Trenton, around the corner, for about 5 years…)

                • Jean,

                  I am guessing that some egos are not inflated. With some of those egos, I did not wish to verify all the details. 😉
                  (Since you spent time near Trenton you probably can understand.)

                  Have you been to ‘Halo Farms’ or ‘Thomas Sweets’?

                  • Halo farms I passed daily for two years. Stopped in once, got delayed many times.
                    don’t recall Thomas Sweets, though. I didn’t go exploring much at that time, as I’d already lost the important woman…
                    The replacement who won’t leave sucked up every second and every dime… Not much has changed.

    • It’s funny, I’m currently doing corporate training (Fraud at the moment, a few others on code of ethics and information security…)
      If I read it rightly (I know I do, I’m an arrogant SOB who understands words) – we’re usually in VIOLATION of our own policies, because otherwise the job doesn’t get done.
      Outsourced the labor and called it a benefit. Things take three times longer now, and the quality is… Questionable.
      But that means we’re doing less – so they’re also cutting staff.

      Further obvious problems are ignored:
      – Need to share passwords and accounts at times
      – Fraud controls? Are you joking? In the financial sector? Seriously? They commit fraud BY THEIR OWN DEFINITION (E.G., LIBOR, which was one we caught) – and define it as LEGAL for the Institution, but ILlegal for the workers to do.

      I could go on, but it’s one of those, “Everybody knows” stories, I don’t need the rant (or have the time, training is due ASAP and takes FOR-Effing-EVER!!!!)

      The rules apply to the Little People. Not to those who MAKE the rules, or those who ENFORCE the rules – to the workers, the “Proletariat,” I think it’s called?
      And it’s absolute, and generally, statutory….
      You’ll be told afterwards there was a fraud committed, or a law broken, and held liable – but the corporation? It gets a pass, or perhaps a fine (A $20 Billion a year industry pays a few million…. Sort of the reverse of VW right now, right? VW fooled the tests… they’re being punished for Contempt of Big Brother. But Hitlery, running her own email server, NOT encrypted, NOT properly secured, SHE gets a pass…? While General Petraeus got a misdemeanor? (Egregious in and of itself, but at least he was prosecuted… Eventually.) Whistleblowers are being prosecuted more than any other administration in history, but this is the “open and transparent” government? )

      I digress and will stop ranting.
      The tyranny is here, we’re just not yet facing the boot heel in our face.
      But it’s descending already, and gaining momentum. As others have noted, Trump is the right personality (and timing of the sheeple) to establish dictatorship (Q.V. Rome’s transition to Empire, Hitler’s rise to power. And I LIKE Trump and think he’s better than most of the rest, though it’s good to see Carson taking the lead – if it’s not a fraud against the electorate, anyway.)

      • Of note, this is also what Ann Raynd included in “Atlas Shrugged.” They make the laws so you can neither clearly obey, nor explicitly break them… Then they just pursue everyone as a “law breaker” (Criminal.)

    • “If one stops enough people at random at certain locations, one is bound to find enough people with a BAC higher than some arbitrary number.”

      Of course they are.
      Most people do not learn the vital bits of math and science that will prevent them from being conned. Most of the ones do that do learn it are conditioned not to apply it. When we get to the tiny percentage of the population that learns it and applies it there isn’t enough to stop the con.

    • Some years back, I spent a couple of days with Bon Bondurant, the ex racer who runs a high-performance driving school (pass the course and qualify for an SCCA road racing license). Bob is a drinker. But the fucker is also one hell of a driver. I’d feel much more at ease in a car with him even with four or five drinks in him than I would in a car with my sober mother-in-law.

      I can’t wait for Clover to eruct…

    • It’s a perfect example of my rule of government. If there is a control freak agenda that can be sold to the public emotionally that profits those in and close to government it will be done. If there is something sensible based on our natural rights and does not profit government and/or those close to it nothing will happen.

LEAVE A REPLY