What would you do?
- Thread starter "Red"
- Start date
dieseldad97
New member
Hmm. I would have called the cops myself. I guess he can kill someone while driving drunk another night. Hope it's not anyone you know. You did what you felt was right and I understand, but most guys that drive drunk do it over and over. Can you maybe pop by their house one day to see how their doing maybe..kind of like a follow-up? Just a thought.
Rapid HotClean
New member
There's an old saying that goes "if you can't remember your last drunk it wasen't your last drunk". I really doubt that this guy remembers what happened and he'll do it again and again.
Greg Rentschler
New member
Would have called the cops as well. I have 3 kids, a wife and other friends and family to worry more about than some guy who can't control his liquor. Either way you got him off the street - good deed! Sadly those I know with DUI's usually don't stop at one but the lesson has to start somewhere. I know of a guy who has 5 or 6 now and STILL HAS HIS LICENSE. Another guy I know got 2 DUI's within a week of one another.
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
This is what I just can't understand.
Over and over we hear about this guy and that guy on his 6th or more dui. Everybody complains about it, but nobody wants to lock up a guy for 25 years on his first.
The fact is, the legal system has not and will not work.
Continuing to try to make it work is like trying to clean up an oil spot with cold water, failing, then going back day after day trying it again and again.
It's never going to work.
The fact is, with drunk driving NOTHING is ever going to work. People get drunk and become irresponsible. That's just a fact.
I'd like to know why, in this day and age, a car can't be built with sensors that sense alchohol presence and will not start until somebody tests clean to drive it?
Manufacturers are already required to make 5 mph bumpers, air bags, stability control and a whole bunch of other junk that just raises prices. I'd give up all those things for a simple alcohol sensor.
I'm totally against a mandatory breath test just to make a car start. But I'd be for a non-intrusive sensing system with a blow tester should the sensor detect the presence of alcohol.
It seems like that should be a no brainer now.
Why do you think that hasn't already been done? Could it be that the DUI business is too profitable for municipalities and lawyers? What other reason could there be for this big hole in technology?
Over and over we hear about this guy and that guy on his 6th or more dui. Everybody complains about it, but nobody wants to lock up a guy for 25 years on his first.
The fact is, the legal system has not and will not work.
Continuing to try to make it work is like trying to clean up an oil spot with cold water, failing, then going back day after day trying it again and again.
It's never going to work.
The fact is, with drunk driving NOTHING is ever going to work. People get drunk and become irresponsible. That's just a fact.
I'd like to know why, in this day and age, a car can't be built with sensors that sense alchohol presence and will not start until somebody tests clean to drive it?
Manufacturers are already required to make 5 mph bumpers, air bags, stability control and a whole bunch of other junk that just raises prices. I'd give up all those things for a simple alcohol sensor.
I'm totally against a mandatory breath test just to make a car start. But I'd be for a non-intrusive sensing system with a blow tester should the sensor detect the presence of alcohol.
It seems like that should be a no brainer now.
Why do you think that hasn't already been done? Could it be that the DUI business is too profitable for municipalities and lawyers? What other reason could there be for this big hole in technology?