43
   

I just don’t understand drinking and driving

 
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  2  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 02:41 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
Whoa, Nelly! Now that's chutzpah, Firefly.


Not to mention, after it has been pointed out just what a huge hypocrite you are, time after time after time, also highly delusional.


I suggest you seek professional psychiatric help, JTT. Your calling Firefly delusional reminds me of Geo. W. Bush accusing Saddam Hussein of being a war criminal.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 02:51 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Quote:
I suggest you seek professional psychiatric help, JTT. Your calling Firefly delusional reminds me of Geo. W. Bush accusing Saddam Hussein of being a war criminal.


I have concluded that Firefly is an opportunistic liar, but we are probably talking about the same thing here.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 02:52 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Isn't that just like you, Merry. I'd address this, but that would just lead to you running off and hiding until you think another inane idea crosses your mind.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  5  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 02:58 pm
All we need now is for JGoldman10 to join JTT and Hawkeye in this thread to complete the preaching troll brigade.
OmSigDAVID
 
  5  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 02:58 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
I have concluded that Firefly is an opportunistic liar
I wanna dissent from that point of vu.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:00 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Lustig Andrei wrote:
I suggest you seek professional psychiatric help, JTT.
Capt. Obvious strikes again ?
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:04 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

All we need now is for JGoldman10 to join JTT and Hawkeye in this thread to complete the preaching troll brigade.


You have I take it redefined "troll" to mean "one who objects to the state's use of power".
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:17 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
You have I take it redefined "troll" to mean "one who objects to the state's use of power".

Try using this definition--- one who rigidly, and obsessively, chants the same mantra regardless of the specific topic being discussed, and who tries to deflect the topic discussion into their personal area of obsession.
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:20 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
is anyone at all interested in the guy
who died and what his rights might have been?
hawkeye10 wrote:
There is not much to talk about, his fate is sealed.
I don 't agree; not necessarily.




hawkeye10 wrote:
I would like to know however is the state was negligent by allowing
U allege that the State has jurisdiction to STOP him from using the public road????
Really?
What jurisdiction is THAT??



hawkeye10 wrote:
a known menace to society
How was he "known" to be a menace?
What jd does Florida have qua menaces??





hawkeye10 wrote:
to roll around the streets at night with an unsafe bicycle,
What was unsafe about it??
Does Florida have different jd by day than by nite?




hawkeye10 wrote:
if he was not properly sanctioned [??]
for an unnecessary introduction of risk on account of pity for his position in society.
HOW ?





David
jcboy
 
  3  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:22 pm
We took Antonio to his auntie Isabel’s today then Marco and I went to a pool party at the Gay St. Pete house. They were having what they call a New Years Day recovery party. About 85 people showed up.

DJ was there. His real name is Duffy. He’s the bartender that served Thom that night. The police questioned him but he was told by the bar owners not to talk about it to anyone so we just left it at that.

We did talk to another friend who was there and said Thom didn’t appear to be drunk when he left the bar, perhaps over the legal limit but not drunk.

Either way, over the legal limit and killing someone then leaving the scene. He’s still facing prison time.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:26 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

Quote:
You have I take it redefined "troll" to mean "one who objects to the state's use of power".

Try using this definition--- one who rigidly, and obsessively, chants the same mantra regardless of the specific topic being discussed, and tries to deflect the discussion into their personal area of obsession.


I tend to use specific threads and events to highlight how the US Government abuses its power, and grabs for power....the opposite of ignoring the specific topic. So far I have been unsuccessful in getting a good conversation going about what is the proper amount of power for the state to hold and what are the proper uses for that power, but I shall keep trying, as these are important questions.
Lustig Andrei
 
  3  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:27 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
is anyone at all interested in the guy who died and what his rights might have been?


There is not much to talk about, his fate is sealed. I would like to know however is the state was negligent by allowing a known menace to society to roll around the streets at night with an unsafe bicycle, if he was not properly sanctioned for an unnecessary introduction of risk on account of pity for his position in society.


You just never tire of demonstrating your idiocy to the world, do you, hawk?
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:28 pm
@firefly,
I knew it would come. Right after the "hey, that's off thread".

Why not just try honesty, FF? Why not just explain these glaring inconsistencies?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:29 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
I tend to use specific threads and events to highlight how the US Government abuses its power, and grabs for power....the opposite of ignoring the specific topic. So far I have been unsuccessful in getting a good conversation going about what is the proper amount of power for the state to hold and what are the proper uses for that power, but I shall keep trying, as these are important questions.
That 's a good way to express it.
Y not dedicate a thread to it?
I 'll post to it, if u do.
I imagine that others will.





David
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:30 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Equipment requirements and carriage of passengers
(Section 316.2065(2), (3), (7), (8), and (14), F.S.)

A bicycle operated between sunset and sunrise must be equipped with a lamp on the front exhibiting a white light visible from 500 feet to the front and both a red reflector and a lamp on the rear exhibiting a red light visible from 600 feet to the rear.


http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/laws/ped_bike_bikeLaws1.shtm

Did this bike comply with the law? If not did any police officer ever notice this guy riding at night on an illegal and unsafe bike?
BillRM
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:33 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
When a law says you are to stop your vehicle at the scene and to offer or get immediate aid for the victim, it means exactly what it says--it does not mean that you drive home and call the police some time later (and you do not know the time interval that elapsed before Thom made that call).


An it that mean the the man died because no one knew the need for paramedicals that is just too bad.

After all it is far more important to obey the letter of the law and watch someone died then to go to a phone to call for help.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:39 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
is anyone at all interested in the guy who died and what his rights might have been?


There is not much to talk about, his fate is sealed. I would like to know however is the state was negligent by allowing a known menace to society to roll around the streets at night with an unsafe bicycle, if he was not properly sanctioned for an unnecessary introduction of risk on account of pity for his position in society.
Lustig Andrei wrote:
You just never tire of demonstrating your idiocy to the world, do you, hawk?
Y not just address your objection with specificity, identifying flaws in his reasoning,
contributing your unique n explicit wisdom,
instead of being satisfied to personally insult someone.
What good does THAT do??

If u succeeded in convincing someone that he is stupid,
will he then become more intelligent??





David
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:39 pm
@jcboy,
Quote:
Thom didn’t appear to be drunk when he left the bar, perhaps over the legal limit but not drunk.

But, over the legal limit is "drunk".

Someone who is habitually a heavy drinker might not display the outward behavior of a falling-down drunk, but they'd be just as intoxicated. When they say someone can "hold his liquor" that's what they mean--he can drink a lot but seemingly mask the signs of intoxication in a social situation.

Don't know whether that's true of Thom or not.

Unfortunately, an intoxicated person can't hide their degree of impairment when it comes to driving a car--the alcohol will still affect their perception, reaction time, night vision, coordination, concentration, and judgment, because it is a central nervous system depressant.

Quote:
Either way, over the legal limit and killing someone then leaving the scene. He’s still facing prison time.

True.


0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:40 pm
@hawkeye10,
Do you talk note Hawkeye of how must of a hipocrite Firefly is willing to be as a man on a bike is not worthless but if I am using a bike for long distance travel the reason must be that I do not had a valid driver license due to DUIs convictions.
Rockhead
 
  3  
Reply Sun 1 Jan, 2012 03:41 pm
@BillRM,
Bill, I wish you some better verbs for the New Year.

really...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Can a thread be removed or locked? - Question by BeachBoy
dui - Question by sylvia chomas
Drinking and Driving Tip.... - Discussion by Slappy Doo Hoo
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 11:14:01