Driving ban for life after DUI? Drunk driving - from it is OK to execution, ect....

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
You can consider it my argument if you want to ignore the first 200 plus posts of this thread.
It was a smartass retort to your smartass comment. Had nothing to do with the rest of the conversation.

Don't know. That's one of my questions.
Well, then do some of your own research because it appears to me you want a black and white answer to a question with multiple grey areas.

How many modicums are there in a million?
Depends on how much it costs for the total DWI program in comparison to the portion of that spent on just the part spent on drivers below 0.10

About the same number as killed in all of Canada by 0.0 - 0.1 drivers if your statistics can be extrapolated.
House fires are still irrelevant to DWI.
 
Last edited:

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
BTW, the sprinkler issue is irrelevant to DWI because for the most part fires are limited to one building not an entire road full of buildings. DWI affects other people on the road.
Besides that, we have insurance companies who inadvertently regulate costs of fire prevention by giving lower premium rates to those people who add things like sprinklers to their homes. Insurance companies simply will not cover drunk drivers.

Some of us have been given special privileges. One per day I'm allowed to hand out an extra red for one of those post that just beg for it.
lol Reds are just your way of admitting you haven't got much for argument.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
It was a smartass retort

Yes, I know. I have come to expect those from you.

Well, then do some of your own research because it appears to me you want a black and white answer to a question with multiple grey areas.

BWHAHAHAHAH!!! It is exactly the opposite. While so many here are of the belief that drinking and driving is bad and we need to do whatever we can to stop it, I'm one of those that sees the grey. I don't want to spend big money on little risk. While I have admitted that I don't know the money and the risks, I'm interested in finding out what they are. There is just so little data out there on accident fatality rates by BAC level. I think that I mentioned on another thread a while back that making impaired drivers with a BAC below 0.10 drive at reduced speeds with a flashing amber light on their vehicle. I think that would do more to reduce accidents (in that BAC range) and would cost a hell of a lot less out of the taxpayers pockets. It will never happen though because it's just too emotional an issue for many people.


House fires are still irrelevant to DWI.

They are relevant to cost/benefit comparisons.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
And that would have what to do with drunk driving?

Because people like you always use the argument that lives are more important than money. I'm just wondering if you feel that way towards everything else or just impaired driving.

Do you have a sprinkler system in your house?

I'm all for ZERO alcohol and ignition keys

Me to. The question here is what to do with others who don't see it that way.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
That was their initial goal. I'm not so sure that's their purpose today.



Not really. The point in bringing up MADD is that there is alot of emotional. arguments at play. That's why JLM started regurgitating MADD stats and catch phrases.

With the death rate from Drunk Drivers higher than the murder rate- with thousands left with permanent injuries-billions in costs - Your comment on emotional is crap-
Seems you like to protect Drunk Drivers- Almost like a personal emotional experience is being posted.

Have you ever had an emotional experience as described.

Nothing I can see that this post deserved a Red- Karma Man will address the imbalance.

Oh Cannuck - Another Red.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
With the death rate from Drunk Drivers higher than the murder rate- with thousands left with permanent injuries-billions in costs - Your comment on emotional is crap-
Seems you like to protect Drunk Drivers- Almost like a personal emotional experience is being posted.


What's the death rate from drunk drivers with a BAC under 0.10?

Have you ever had an emotional experience as described.

If you are asking me whether I've lost anybody to a drunk driver, the answer is yes.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Yes, I know. I have come to expect those from you.



BWHAHAHAHAH!!! It is exactly the opposite.
Load of BS.
While so many here are of the belief that drinking and driving is bad
Well, isn't it?
and we need to do whatever we can to stop it,
I haven't seen anyone say that.
I'm one of those that sees the grey.
Is that why you insist on stressing deaths of drunk drivers and avoiding their injuries as well as the deaths and injuries of other people affected? Yeah, keep shoveling the dung. It's funny.
I don't want to spend big money on little risk.
You haven't come up with anything to show either how much is spent or how much risk there is. In spite of that, you still insist the risk is too small and the amount spent is too much. That is reaching a conclusion before having enough data to reach a rational conclusion.
UnfortuinatelyWhile I have admitted that I don't know the money and the risks, I'm interested in finding out what they are. There is just so little data out there on accident fatality rates by BAC level.
And yet you keep insisting the risk is too small and the amount spent is too much.
I think that I mentioned on another thread a while back that making impaired drivers with a BAC below 0.10 drive at reduced speeds with a flashing amber light on their vehicle.
Like road crews, wide load vehicles, tow trucks, etc. private contractors, private snow plows, ad nauseum. roflmao How about a flashing light on the vehicles of all those people gabbing on their phones, thinking about their toothaches on the way to the dentist instead of thinking about their driving, people looking for address numbers, and whatever else that people are distracted from their driving? F'n laughable.
I think that would do more to reduce accidents (in that BAC range) and would cost a hell of a lot less out of the taxpayers pockets. It will never happen though because it's just too emotional an issue for many people.
Personally, I like the idea that some vehicle manufacturers use; putting a breathalyzer unit in vehicles that kick out the ignition if you blow more than a certain amount.

They are relevant to cost/benefit comparisons.
Except you don't consider the entire package of cost and benefits of either.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
What's the death rate from drunk drivers with a BAC under 0.10?



If you are asking me whether I've lost anybody to a drunk driver, the answer is yes.

No I was not
Find your own Stats -
Do you have a sprinkler in your house.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
No I was not
Find your own Stats -

So, in other words, you don't know. It's interesting that I would like to know that information before I decide on a tactic to fight the problem and so many others here don't.

Do you have a sprinkler in your house.

Nope. I think lots of smoke detectors reduce the risk sufficiently and costs significantly less than retrofitting my house. If I were to build a house, I'd probably put a system in.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
So, in other words, you don't know. It's interesting that I would like to know that information before I decide on a tactic to fight the problem and so many others here don't.
There ya go again jumping to conclusions- I stated find your own stats. Do your own research- why should anyone here run around for the likes of you


Nope. I think lots of smoke detectors reduce the risk sufficiently and costs significantly less than retrofitting my house. If I were to build a house, I'd probably put a system in.

So does good planning and proper storage of materials that go boom-Monoxide detectors- fire escape plan-
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
So does good planning and proper storage of materials that go boom-Monoxide detectors- fire escape plan-

But they don't reduce the risk to zero. A working sprinkler systems does. If you actually believe (as JLM claims) that money is not important when it comes to saving lives, a sprinkler system is a no-brainer. That's why I'm wondering if he has one.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
But they don't reduce the risk to zero. A working sprinkler systems does.
Take it from a firefighter, sprinklers DO NOT reduce risk to zero. For instance, you have a grease fire or a heating fuel fire, the water will spread the fire. Your best bet in grease fires is drychem, foam, or straight CO2. Another instance, sprinkler water cannot reach fires inside walls ceilings, etc.
If you actually believe (as JLM claims) that money is not important when it comes to saving lives, a sprinkler system is a no-brainer.
They can help an awful lot minimizing effects of fire and lowering insurance premiums. So yeah, they are a no-brainer, IMO.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
But they don't reduce the risk to zero. A working sprinkler systems does. If you actually believe (as JLM claims) that money is not important when it comes to saving lives, a sprinkler system is a no-brainer. That's why I'm wondering if he has one.

How many homeowners do you know have a sprinkler system in their house. And how many do not.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
Yet you've stated that the cost is too much. Like I said, reached a conclusion before having all the pertinent data.

I don't think I have. What I have said is that If the risks from drivers with a BAC are minimal, is it worth spending the money chasing and punishing them. Nobody on this thread (me included) has provided a cost estimate for chasing and punishing these drivers. I don't know what it is and I don't know the accident and fatality stats of drivers with BAC <0.10.

I'm simply stating that we have limited resources and we need to target them where they are needed. I have no idea why that is such a difficult concept for some people to grasp.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
I don't think I have. What I have said is that If the risks from drivers with a BAC are minimal, is it worth spending the money chasing and punishing them. Nobody on this thread (me included) has provided a cost estimate for chasing and punishing these drivers. I don't know what it is and I don't know the accident and fatality stats of drivers with BAC <0.10.

I'm simply stating that we have limited resources and we need to target them where they are needed. I have no idea why that is such a difficult concept for some people to grasp.

I have no idea why you cannot grasp that more people are killed by Drunk Drivers than are murdered in Canada- Then add the 10's of billions in other costs.
What about the above can you not grasp.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
I don't think I have. What I have said is that If the risks from drivers with a BAC are minimal, is it worth spending the money chasing and punishing them.
Nope. That was just your original comment. After that you started "extrapolating" based upon a stat that I dug up about deaths of drunk drivers between 0.05 and 0.08. And totally ignored the fact that that stat was ONLY about drivers' deaths, not their injuries and the deaths and injuries of other people involved. How you can "extrapolate all those factors is beyond me, but that's what you were doing, according to you.
Nobody on this thread (me included) has provided a cost estimate for chasing and punishing these drivers. I don't know what it is and I don't know the accident and fatality stats of drivers with BAC <0.10.
Right, and you haven't provided much of anything except baseless argument.

I'm simply stating that we have limited resources and we need to target them where they are needed. I have no idea why that is such a difficult concept for some people to grasp.
Nah. You've been doing more than that.