Drinking and Driving. - Page 2

On November 01 2009 08:39 ShoCkeyy wrote:


start at 6:00

On November 01 2009 21:45 Kwark wrote:
My take on this is that if you drink and drive and nothing bad happens you're no better than someone who drinks and drives and kills a kid, just luckier. Ultimately you have the same statistical blame because you consciously chose to take the same risk. Poker does weird things to the way you see stuff.

On November 01 2009 21:52 biomedical wrote:


well thats retarded. you dont have the same "statistical blame" if you are tipsy and mature and driving in a controlled manner compared to an american lunatic.

the way i look at it (as you should do as a poker player) is:

theres a certainty that a 0.001% chance will occur eventually


ive got 2 DUIs
the 2nd one was for sleeping in my car in the passenger seat with the heater turned on in the middle of a freezing winter (instead of driving it home / instead of dying in the night). they woke me up, dragged me out and handcuffed me and i spent 12 hours in a cell

this shit has cost me an INSANE amount of money in bus tickets, time lost, fines etc. i wouldnt recommend it if you value your life. working 12 hour shifts for nothing = fml

On November 01 2009 08:39 ShoCkeyy wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeBRG4UZWiQ&feature=PlayList&p=21DAF77032C9AB08&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=26

start at 6:00

On November 01 2009 21:52 biomedical wrote:


well thats retarded. you dont have the same "statistical blame" if you are tipsy and mature and driving in a controlled manner compared to an american lunatic.

the way i look at it (as you should do as a poker player) is:

theres a certainty that a 0.001% chance will occur eventually


ive got 2 DUIs
the 2nd one was for sleeping in my car in the passenger seat with the heater turned on in the middle of a freezing winter (instead of driving it home / instead of dying in the night). they woke me up, dragged me out and handcuffed me and i spent 12 hours in a cell

this shit has cost me an INSANE amount of money in bus tickets, time lost, fines etc. i wouldnt recommend it if you value your life. working 12 hour shifts for nothing = fml

On November 01 2009 21:52 biomedical wrote:


well thats retarded. you dont have the same "statistical blame" if you are tipsy and mature and driving in a controlled manner compared to an american lunatic.

the way i look at it (as you should do as a poker player) is:

theres a certainty that a 0.001% chance will occur eventually


ive got 2 DUIs
the 2nd one was for sleeping in my car in the passenger seat with the heater turned on in the middle of a freezing winter (instead of driving it home / instead of dying in the night). they woke me up, dragged me out and handcuffed me and i spent 12 hours in a cell

this shit has cost me an INSANE amount of money in bus tickets, time lost, fines etc. i wouldnt recommend it if you value your life. working 12 hour shifts for nothing = fml

On November 01 2009 22:33 Kwark wrote:

People like you shouldn't be allowed to drive. You're obviously incapable of understanding the responsibility that goes with control of a potentially lethal bit of engineering. Society takes a risk when it lets you operate a vehicle capable of killing others easily. You should accept that risk and abide by the rules they set down.
Don't fucking drink and drive. Everyone is happy to condemn the guy who is drunk and kills someone. He's no different to the guy who is drunk and gets home incident free, he just runs worse.
Also it takes two peoples mistakes to cause an accident. Those times when you're driving along and a guy pulls out in front of you and you have to slam on the breaks because he's a fucking retard. Yeah, he's a crap driver and if you hadn't been a good driver he'd have caused an accident. When that happens and your reaction time is slowed because you're tipsy, he's still a crap driver, you're the drunk guy who killed him.
It's not about whether you can still drive 'sensibly' while drunk. Your reactions are slowed, fact. You're risking other peoples' lives without their consent against the rules by which society allows you to drive.

On November 01 2009 21:52 biomedical wrote:


well thats retarded. you dont have the same "statistical blame" if you are tipsy and mature and driving in a controlled manner compared to an american lunatic.

the way i look at it (as you should do as a poker player) is:

theres a certainty that a 0.001% chance will occur eventually


ive got 2 DUIs
the 2nd one was for sleeping in my car in the passenger seat with the heater turned on in the middle of a freezing winter (instead of driving it home / instead of dying in the night). they woke me up, dragged me out and handcuffed me and i spent 12 hours in a cell

this shit has cost me an INSANE amount of money in bus tickets, time lost, fines etc. i wouldnt recommend it if you value your life. working 12 hour shifts for nothing = fml

On November 01 2009 22:42 biomedical wrote:



yeah....try reading my post next time
+ Show Spoiler +

On November 02 2009 01:30 Kwark wrote:

Nowhere in your post did you say that. I said that someone who is drunk and doesn't kill anyone is as responsible as someone who is drunk and does. Ie not two different levels of drunkenness. To which you replied that someone who is tipsy is not as responsible as an American lunatic. American lunacy is not a byword for extremely drunk. So you attempted to disagree with my post despite the fact that you now say you agree with it. But fucked up your agreeing of it by accidentally typing the wrong words.

I didn't misread your post. You appear to have mistyped your post by making a basic error of using a set of words that give a meaning completely different to the one you meant. You might want to work on that to avoid future confusion.

On November 02 2009 02:10 biomedical wrote:


i did say that.
+ Show Spoiler +
but it feels like you didn't understand. no harm done

my distaste of your original post remains, because (as i said) it doesnt address the actual issue: the reality that some people decide to drive drunk.

if you tell someone that they're just as responsible as a killer, it means NOTHING to them. they will simply reason that "i'm not so drunk that it would have a significant impact on my skills - besides ill drive slower and more carefully. ive done it before and was fine".

he fact that you arbitrarily class them as responsible as a killer MEANS NOTHING in the real world. nobody gives a shit. if they're a drink driver then OBVIOUSLY they dont see eye to eye with you, and you haven't done anything to convince them that they can't somehow refute/ignore.

that's why i prefer to tell people: a 1 in 1000 chance WILL HAPPEN FOR SURE. (whether its a chance that they get in an accident, or a chance that they simply get caught by the cops!!!)

you're very simply proving to them that whatever "unlikely circumstance" they think is "terribly unlikely" , is actually a certainty just waiting to occur

i dont see a more profound/high impact way of dealing with the problem than this