Why don't we declare a War on Speeders and Drunk Drivers??

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

[Lars Eighner]

In our last episode, <***@77g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
the lovely and talented Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS broadcast on

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Because Bush is a convicted drunk driver and Cheney is a convicted drunk
driver many times over.

[GoMavs]

Post by Lars Eighner
In our last episode,
the lovely and talented Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS broadcast on

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Because Bush is a convicted drunk driver and Cheney is a convicted drunk
driver many times over.

Yeah Bush was barely over the limit when he was a younger.. but Kennedy
killed a woman and called the cops 10 hours later after making sure she was
dead.

[unknown]

Post by GoMavs
Yeah Bush was barely over the limit when he was a younger.. but Kennedy
killed a woman and called the cops 10 hours later after making sure she was
dead.

And Bush's wife ran over her boyfriend and then, during the 2000
election, claimed she wasn't even the one driving the car.

[GoMavs]

Post by unknown

Post by GoMavs
Yeah Bush was barely over the limit when he was a younger.. but Kennedy
killed a woman and called the cops 10 hours later after making sure she was
dead.

And Bush's wife ran over her boyfriend and then, during the 2000
election, claimed she wasn't even the one driving the car.

Yeah, a traffic accident at the age of 17.... at an intersection in Midland.
Her and her friend ran a stop sign and hit her friend (not boyfriend) and he
died. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm She never said she
wasnt driving. Whats sad is just one of the ridiculous stories the liberal
media broke to cause strife in the election of Bush.

But LOL at comparing her to Kennedy... waiting 10 hours to call the police.

[Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)]

Post by GoMavs

Post by unknown

Post by GoMavs
Yeah Bush was barely over the limit when he was a younger.. but Kennedy
killed a woman and called the cops 10 hours later after making sure she was
dead.

And Bush's wife ran over her boyfriend and then, during the 2000
election, claimed she wasn't even the one driving the car.

Yeah, a traffic accident at the age of 17.... at an intersection in Midland.
Her and her friend ran a stop sign and hit her friend (not boyfriend) and he
died. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm She never said she
wasnt driving. Whats sad is just one of the ridiculous stories the liberal
media broke to cause strife in the election of Bush.
But LOL at comparing her to Kennedy... waiting 10 hours to call the police.

Isn't the smell of hypocricy around democrats amazing?

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by GoMavs
Yeah, a traffic accident at the age of 17.... at an intersection in Midland.
Her and her friend ran a stop sign and hit her friend (not boyfriend) and he
died. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm She never said she
wasnt driving. Whats sad is just one of the ridiculous stories the liberal
media broke to cause strife in the election of Bush.

And not a damn thing was done to her. You run a stop sign and kill an
innocent person and see if your crime is swept under the rug!!!!!

And what do you mean "Her and her friend ran a stop sign"??? Only one
person was driving, you idiot, and it was laura the rammer.

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Speeders & Drunk

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by GoMavs
Yeah, a traffic accident at the age of 17.... at an intersection in Midland.
Her and her friend ran a stop sign and hit her friend (not boyfriend) and he
died. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/e1698.htm She never said she
wasnt driving. Whats sad is just one of the ridiculous stories the liberal
media broke to cause strife in the election of Bush.

And not a damn thing was done to her. You run a stop sign and kill an
innocent person and see if your crime is swept under the rug!!!!!

Sounds like someone did a website on it: www.ytedk.com . Oh, wait,
that's the site for fatass kennedy, a sitting SENATOR who sank his
mistress for political gain and used his office to cover it up.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
And what do you mean "Her and her friend ran a stop sign"??? Only one
person was driving, you idiot, and it was laura the rammer.

They were both in the car, scheisskopf. How could Laura go through the
stop sign and her passenger not? Arschloch!
--
Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend defends a known *DRUNK DRIVER*:

"Teddy went off a single lane bridge with no guard rail at night.
The real killer was the idiot who built the bridge. Next question."
--Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/laura bush - VEHICULAR
HOMICIDE
June 20th, 2006
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/zlnyz
Message ID: ***@4ax.com

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), GoMavs said in

Post by GoMavs
Yeah Bush was barely over the limit when he was a younger.. but Kennedy
killed a woman and called the cops 10 hours later after making sure she was
dead.

And he had sobered up.
--
Aunt Judy defends a known *drunk driver*:

"Almost all vehicle 'accidents' are due to driver
recklessness but the Chappaquidick incident is one
instance where it may really have been no ones
fault except the idiot who built the bridge."
--"Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend," 11/10/2005
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/9jtjt
Msg ID: ***@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com

[Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)]

Post by necromancer
Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), GoMavs said in

Post by GoMavs
Yeah Bush was barely over the limit when he was a younger.. but Kennedy
killed a woman and called the cops 10 hours later after making sure she was
dead.

And he had sobered up.

And tried to coerce his attorney into providing an alibi....

Must be nice to be a senator.

By the way, for the life of me, none of these "Laura Bush" mortards
have ever bothered to tell me what political office she held at the
time of the accident. I wonder why that is?

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Ted Kennedy -
President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers) said in

Post by Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)

Post by necromancer
Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), GoMavs said in

Post by GoMavs
Yeah Bush was barely over the limit when he was a younger.. but Kennedy
killed a woman and called the cops 10 hours later after making sure she was
dead.

And he had sobered up.

And tried to coerce his attorney into providing an alibi....
Must be nice to be a senator.
By the way, for the life of me, none of these "Laura Bush" mortards
have ever bothered to tell me what political office she held at the
time of the accident. I wonder why that is?

Or what political office she ever held, before or after the accident.
--
Aunt Judy defends a known *drunk driver*:

"Almost all vehicle 'accidents' are due to driver
recklessness but the Chappaquidick incident is one
instance where it may really have been no ones
fault except the idiot who built the bridge."
--"Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend," 11/10/2005
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/9jtjt
Msg ID: ***@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com

[Scott en Aztlán]

Discuss.

[Sandmonkey]

Already been done years ago. Just coming out of a coma idiot?
--
For two years, Democrats have demanded more troops on the ground in Iraq.
Since liberals will lie and say that Democrats do not want more troops, I

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

[GoMavs]

I was under the impression the states set laws for DUI.... Am I wrong?

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

[Nate Nagel]

Post by GoMavs
I was under the impression the states set laws for DUI.... Am I wrong?

Actually yes. the states set laws but federal highway money is tied to
compliance of state law with a federal standard so in effect the states
are bribed into complying with the federal standards.

nate

Post by GoMavs

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

[unknown]

On 9 Jan 2007 10:31:32 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Penalties for drunk driving have doubled and doubled again in the last
20 years. The acceptable blood alcohol limit has been lowered. Just
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.

Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

[Brent P]

Post by unknown
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.

The war on drugs, the war on terrorism, the ever increasing number of
things defined as criminal or violation, and the war on poverty, are all
parts of the law is the war on the people.

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), said in

Post by unknown
On 9 Jan 2007 10:31:32 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Penalties for drunk driving have doubled and doubled again in the last
20 years. The acceptable blood alcohol limit has been lowered. Just
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.

Call them all what they are: a War on Freedom and Liberty.

Post by unknown
Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

Actually, the War of Freedom and Liberty has been quite successful. Look
at all the Rights and Freedoms that we have had taken away in the name
of "drugs," "terrorism," "poverty," "drunk driving," etc.....
--
Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend defends a known *DRUNK DRIVER*:

"Teddy went off a single lane bridge with no guard rail at night.
The real killer was the idiot who built the bridge. Next question."
--Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/laura bush - VEHICULAR
HOMICIDE
June 20th, 2006
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/zlnyz
Message ID: ***@4ax.com

[unknown]

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:38:31 -0500, necromancer

Post by necromancer
Call them all what they are: a War on Freedom and Liberty.

BONG! Direct hit! Give that man a cigar!

The war on drugs was conceived by Pres. Nixon as a pretense to give
poilce more power. It allowed them to knock down doors, it loosened
the rules of gathering evidence, it allowed 'selective enforcement'
against minorities, etc. etc. etc. A lot of people saw it as a
slippery slope, and they've been proven right. The war on terror is
the war on drugs on steroids.

[Brent P]

Post by unknown
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:38:31 -0500, necromancer

Post by necromancer
Call them all what they are: a War on Freedom and Liberty.

The war on drugs was conceived by Pres. Nixon as a pretense to give
poilce more power. It allowed them to knock down doors, it loosened
the rules of gathering evidence, it allowed 'selective enforcement'
against minorities, etc. etc. etc. A lot of people saw it as a
slippery slope, and they've been proven right. The war on terror is
the war on drugs on steroids.

Not to mention it was Nixon that gave us the 55mph NMSL which turned
every driver into either a violator of law or someone who was actively
trying to avoid interaction with law enforcement by driving unusually
slow and therefore suspicious.

With the bogus stats from the NMSL, the safety advocates aka control
freaks blossomed. Now we have safety checkpoints where we need to produce
our papers for inspection by authority.

[unknown]

Post by Brent P
Not to mention it was Nixon that gave us the 55mph NMSL which turned
every driver into either a violator of law or someone who was actively
trying to avoid interaction with law enforcement by driving unusually
slow and therefore suspicious.

Especially since a national speed limit was not constitutional. The
Fed. Govt. didn't just pass a speed limit because it knew it couldnt.
Instead it threatened states with the loss of their federal highway
money if they didn't each pass their own law.

In some western states (Wyoming, Arizona, I think) if you got caught
between 55 and 65 it was not the same as speeding, you just got a $5
ticket for wasting gas.

Post by Brent P
With the bogus stats from the NMSL, the safety advocates aka control
freaks blossomed. Now we have safety checkpoints where we need to produce
our papers for inspection by authority.

Yes Nixon was a very strong 'law and order' president. But it's
funny--Law and Order presidents like Nixon, Reagan and GW Bush never
seem to believe the law applies to -them-.

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by unknown
Especially since a national speed limit was not constitutional. The
Fed. Govt. didn't just pass a speed limit because it knew it couldnt.
Instead it threatened states with the loss of their federal highway
money if they didn't each pass their own law.

It worked didn't it? Saved gas and 9,000 lives a year.

[unknown]

On 10 Jan 2007 18:01:16 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by unknown
Especially since a national speed limit was not constitutional. The
Fed. Govt. didn't just pass a speed limit because it knew it couldnt.
Instead it threatened states with the loss of their federal highway
money if they didn't each pass their own law.

It worked didn't it? Saved gas and 9,000 lives a year.

Actually that's debatable. It could be just that the price of gas
rose sharply so people used less of it (for a while).

Also, you probably know lots of 'experts' were predicting a sharp rise
in traffic deaths after the speed limit was raised back to 65. But it
didn't happen. In the meanwhile both cars and highways had been
completely redesigned with all kinds of safety features . . . . most
mandated by the Fed. Govt. BTW.

It is true, though, that lower average speeds will save some gas.
But I bet it's nothing compared to the gas we could have saved if we'd
stuck with CAFE standards.

[Nate Nagel]

Post by unknown
On 10 Jan 2007 18:01:16 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by unknown
Especially since a national speed limit was not constitutional. The
Fed. Govt. didn't just pass a speed limit because it knew it couldnt.
Instead it threatened states with the loss of their federal highway
money if they didn't each pass their own law.

It worked didn't it? Saved gas and 9,000 lives a year.

Actually that's debatable. It could be just that the price of gas
rose sharply so people used less of it (for a while).
Also, you probably know lots of 'experts' were predicting a sharp rise
in traffic deaths after the speed limit was raised back to 65. But it
didn't happen. In the meanwhile both cars and highways had been
completely redesigned with all kinds of safety features . . . . most
mandated by the Fed. Govt. BTW.
It is true, though, that lower average speeds will save some gas.
But I bet it's nothing compared to the gas we could have saved if we'd
stuck with CAFE standards.

You were doing so well until you got to the last sentence. CAFE is just
as misguided as the NMSL... probably has HURT our overall fleet fuel
economy by killing off the full sized car and pushing those drivers into
truck-based SUVs.

nate

[unknown]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by unknown
It is true, though, that lower average speeds will save some gas.
But I bet it's nothing compared to the gas we could have saved if we'd
stuck with CAFE standards.

You were doing so well until you got to the last sentence. CAFE is just
as misguided as the NMSL... probably has HURT our overall fleet fuel
economy by killing off the full sized car and pushing those drivers into
truck-based SUVs.

CAFE was abandoned LONG before the popularization of SUVs. SUVs have
been helped by the fact that for a long time SUVs didn't come under
the same rules as cars, they were considered light trucks. But if
CAFEs had stayed in place, and they had also included SUVs, we'd be
much better off today.

[N8N]

Post by unknown

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by unknown
It is true, though, that lower average speeds will save some gas.
But I bet it's nothing compared to the gas we could have saved if we'd
stuck with CAFE standards.

You were doing so well until you got to the last sentence. CAFE is just
as misguided as the NMSL... probably has HURT our overall fleet fuel
economy by killing off the full sized car and pushing those drivers into
truck-based SUVs.

CAFE was abandoned LONG before the popularization of SUVs.

Not true, it is still in effect.

Post by unknown
SUVs have
been helped by the fact that for a long time SUVs didn't come under
the same rules as cars, they were considered light trucks.

Exactly.

Post by unknown
But if
CAFEs had stayed in place, and they had also included SUVs, we'd be
much better off today.

Really? Then people would simply be driving something else - crew cab
pickups? - as personal vehicles.

nate

[Brent P]

Post by unknown
CAFE was abandoned LONG before the popularization of SUVs. SUVs have
been helped by the fact that for a long time SUVs didn't come under
the same rules as cars, they were considered light trucks. But if
CAFEs had stayed in place, and they had also included SUVs, we'd be
much better off today.

CAFE is still law today. It has not been repealed or rolled back.

[unknown]

Post by Brent P

Post by unknown
CAFE was abandoned LONG before the popularization of SUVs. SUVs have
been helped by the fact that for a long time SUVs didn't come under
the same rules as cars, they were considered light trucks. But if
CAFEs had stayed in place, and they had also included SUVs, we'd be
much better off today.

CAFE is still law today. It has not been repealed or rolled back.
To meet the goal of doubling the 1974 passenger car fuel economy average by
1985 (to 27.5 mpg), Congress set fuel economy standards for some of the intervening
years. Passenger car standards were established for MY 1978 (18 mpg); MY 1979
(19 mpg); MY 1980 (20 mpg); and for MY 1985 and thereafter (27.5 mpg). Congress
left the level of 1981-84 standards to the Department to establish administratively.
Subsequently, standards of 22, 24, 26, and 27 mpg were established. For the
post-1985 period, Congress provided for the continued application of the 27.5 mpg
standard for passenger cars, but gave the Department the authority to set higher or
lower standards. From MY 1986 through 1989, the passenger car standards were
lowered. Thereafter, in MY 1990, the passenger car standard was amended to 27.5
mpg, which it has remained at this level.

[Brent P]

Post by Brent P

Post by unknown
CAFE was abandoned LONG before the popularization of SUVs. SUVs have
been helped by the fact that for a long time SUVs didn't come under
the same rules as cars, they were considered light trucks. But if
CAFEs had stayed in place, and they had also included SUVs, we'd be
much better off today.

CAFE is still law today. It has not been repealed or rolled back.

1) extreme technicalities will get you no where.
2) You were still dead wrong.
3) CAFE was 27.5mpg in 1985, it's 27.5mpg today.

Post by Brent P
To meet the goal of doubling the 1974 passenger car fuel economy average by
1985 (to 27.5 mpg), Congress set fuel economy standards for some of the intervening
years. Passenger car standards were established for MY 1978 (18 mpg); MY 1979
(19 mpg); MY 1980 (20 mpg); and for MY 1985 and thereafter (27.5 mpg). Congress
left the level of 1981-84 standards to the Department to establish administratively.
Subsequently, standards of 22, 24, 26, and 27 mpg were established. For the
post-1985 period, Congress provided for the continued application of the 27.5 mpg
standard for passenger cars, but gave the Department the authority to set higher or
lower standards. From MY 1986 through 1989, the passenger car standards were
lowered. Thereafter, in MY 1990, the passenger car standard was amended to 27.5
mpg, which it has remained at this level.

[unknown]

Post by Brent P

Post by Brent P
CAFE is still law today. It has not been repealed or rolled back.

1) extreme technicalities will get you no where.

Nor will snottiness, young fella. 8^)

Post by Brent P
2) You were still dead wrong.

Meaning: "We disagree."

Post by Brent P
3) CAFE was 27.5mpg in 1985, it's 27.5mpg today.

Beside the point, actually. The idea of CAFE standards is that they
would be, you should pardon the expression, -progressive-. By the
90s, we were told, cars would be getting in the mid-30s and we would
have eliminated our need for middle east oil. (Actually at the time
were were importing very little of our oil from the middle east, today
it's about a third.)

[N8N]

Post by unknown

Post by Brent P

Post by Brent P
CAFE is still law today. It has not been repealed or rolled back.

1) extreme technicalities will get you no where.

Nor will snottiness, young fella. 8^)

Post by Brent P
2) You were still dead wrong.

Meaning: "We disagree."

Post by Brent P
3) CAFE was 27.5mpg in 1985, it's 27.5mpg today.

Beside the point, actually. The idea of CAFE standards is that they
would be, you should pardon the expression, -progressive-. By the
90s, we were told, cars would be getting in the mid-30s and we would
have eliminated our need for middle east oil. (Actually at the time
were were importing very little of our oil from the middle east, today
it's about a third.)

...and, of course, the whole idea that you can legislatively mandate
technological breakthroughs is still ludicrous today.

nate

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

Post by N8N
...and, of course, the whole idea that you can legislatively mandate
technological breakthroughs is still ludicrous today.
nate

No "breakthrough" is needed you idiot. You just make smaller cars and
use weaker engines. Of course it would help if the speed limit was
lowered too. Anyway, we could double gas mileage of new cars overnight
and it wouldn't cost a thing. THINK

[Nate Nagel]

Post by Laura Bush murdered her boy friend

Post by N8N
...and, of course, the whole idea that you can legislatively mandate
technological breakthroughs is still ludicrous today.
nate

No "breakthrough" is needed you idiot. You just make smaller cars and
use weaker engines. Of course it would help if the speed limit was
lowered too. Anyway, we could double gas mileage of new cars overnight
and it wouldn't cost a thing. THINK

Wow, you are astonishingly stupid. How can we double gas mileage
overnight without a technological breakthrough. As an engineer, you
weak-minded liberal tree-huggers who AREN'T SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT
THERE IS NO GODDAMNED CONSPIRACY really piss me off.

It astonishes me that people as dumb as you aren't sterilized in grade
school.

nate

[unknown]

Post by Nate Nagel
Wow, you are astonishingly stupid.

Wow, you are astonishingly rude!

Post by Nate Nagel
How can we double gas mileage
overnight without a technological breakthrough. As an engineer, you
weak-minded liberal tree-huggers who AREN'T SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT
THERE IS NO GODDAMNED CONSPIRACY really piss me off.

Depends on what you mean by 'conspiracy'. We could tax cars by engine
size, like they do in Europe. People would buy smaller cars. We
could tax gas up the wazoo, like they do in Europe, and people would
buy smaller cars and consider public transportation more often
(instead we raise the gas prices and the money goes to the oil corps.
who run our government).

Pres. Bush announced (to great fanfare in the press) that he was going
to funnel tens of millions into hydrogen technology. What nobody
mentioned is that this money was coming -out- of govt. research into
electrics and hybrids, technology that is available NOW instead of 30
years from now, if at all. If that's not a conspiracy, what would you
call it?

Post by Nate Nagel
It astonishes me that people as dumb as you aren't sterilized in grade
school.

You are showing me that you aren't interested in a serious discussion,
just looking for excuses to sling insults at 'liberals'. If I was
you, especially these days, I'd want to show people that 'intelligent
Republican' is not an oxymoron.

[Nate Nagel]

Post by unknown

Post by Nate Nagel
Wow, you are astonishingly stupid.

Wow, you are astonishingly rude!

Wow, you're astonishingly new here. If you're going to reply to SADDAM,
it's not worth being polite, because it is neither polite nor coherent.

Post by unknown

Post by Nate Nagel
How can we double gas mileage
overnight without a technological breakthrough. As an engineer, you
weak-minded liberal tree-huggers who AREN'T SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT
THERE IS NO GODDAMNED CONSPIRACY really piss me off.

Depends on what you mean by 'conspiracy'. We could tax cars by engine
size, like they do in Europe.
People would buy smaller cars.

I doubt it. CAFE hasn't worked, nor have gas-guzzler taxes, which make
far more sense than a displacement tax anyway...

Post by unknown
We
could tax gas up the wazoo, like they do in Europe,

DING DING DING! GIVE THAT MAN A COOKIE!

Post by unknown
and people would
buy smaller cars and consider public transportation more often
(instead we raise the gas prices and the money goes to the oil corps.
who run our government).

Eh, what would *likely* happen is whoever proposed the higher taxes
would be voted out of office the next go-'round. But that doesn't
change the fact that making more fuel efficient vehicles ECONOMICALLY
VIABLE is the only way we'll ever get them. Simply legislating "give us
more fuel efficient cars!" is doomed to failure, because the truth is
that the general public wants big cars, and needs a real incentive to
move away from them. And assertions of various nutjobs to the contrary,
there is no current viable technology that will provide markedly better
economy than we're getting out of vehicles now, at least not without
huge tradeoffs in range, performance, cost of operation, or all three.

Post by unknown
Pres. Bush announced (to great fanfare in the press) that he was going
to funnel tens of millions into hydrogen technology. What nobody
mentioned is that this money was coming -out- of govt. research into
electrics and hybrids, technology that is available NOW instead of 30
years from now, if at all. If that's not a conspiracy, what would you
call it?

Stupidity. Hydrogen isn't even a fuel; it's simply an energy storage
technology much like a battery. It takes more energy to make a usable
hydrogen fuel than you get out of it by burning it.

If I were a betting man, I'd be betting on fuel cells. But something
else might win the race - some new ultra-light battery or ultracapacitor
for instance.

Post by unknown

Post by Nate Nagel
It astonishes me that people as dumb as you aren't sterilized in grade
school.

You are showing me that you aren't interested in a serious discussion,
just looking for excuses to sling insults at 'liberals'.

No, I'm slinging insults at SADDAM who is either an extraordinarily
gifted troll or a barely functional moron who has enough of an idiot
savant streak that it's figured out how to post to Usenet.

Post by unknown
If I was
you, especially these days, I'd want to show people that 'intelligent
Republican' is not an oxymoron.

Indeed. However, I think it's time to kill the Republican party and
start over with a new, real conservative party without all the religious
right nutjobs, neoconservative imperialists, and ignorant rednecks and
simply concentrate on fiscal conservatism, small government, and minimal
intrusion on personal liberties. The name "Republican" has too many
negative connotations to be viable, at least among thinking people.

nate

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
No "breakthrough" is needed you idiot. You just make smaller cars and
use weaker engines. Of course it would help if the speed limit was
lowered too. Anyway, we could double gas mileage of new cars overnight
and it wouldn't cost a thing. THINK

Wow, you are astonishingly stupid. How can we double gas mileage
overnight without a technological breakthrough. As an engineer, you
weak-minded liberal tree-huggers who AREN'T SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT
THERE IS NO GODDAMNED CONSPIRACY really piss me off.

That's right. Don't address the issue - just be an infant and call
people names. HAHAHA. Now if you can, explain why smaller cars and
weaker engines and lower speeds would NOT result in huge fuel savings.
If you were an engineer (which you're not) it would be obviously true.

[Nate Nagel]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
No "breakthrough" is needed you idiot. You just make smaller cars and
use weaker engines. Of course it would help if the speed limit was
lowered too. Anyway, we could double gas mileage of new cars overnight
and it wouldn't cost a thing. THINK

Wow, you are astonishingly stupid. How can we double gas mileage
overnight without a technological breakthrough. As an engineer, you
weak-minded liberal tree-huggers who AREN'T SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT
THERE IS NO GODDAMNED CONSPIRACY really piss me off.

That's right. Don't address the issue - just be an infant and call
people names. HAHAHA. Now if you can, explain why smaller cars and
weaker engines and lower speeds would NOT result in huge fuel savings.
If you were an engineer (which you're not) it would be obviously true.

Because people won't buy them without an economic incentive to do so.
They'll just keep the vehicles they have now. Which, actually, would
not be a bad thing from an ecological standpoint (it takes FAR more
energy to make a vehicle than operate it) but would have the minor
drawback of killing the entire automotive industry (of course, body
shops and engine rebuilders would be doing pretty well for themselves.)

Oh, and your slander is duly noted. Of course I'll never be able to
collect damages from you because a) you have no assets and b) nobody
actually believes you anyway.

nate

(you know you're bored when it's Friday night and responding to SADDAM
seems like a good idea. I hope the girlie gets home from work soon...)

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
That's right. Don't address the issue - just be an infant and call
people names. HAHAHA. Now if you can, explain why smaller cars and
weaker engines and lower speeds would NOT result in huge fuel savings.
If you were an engineer (which you're not) it would be obviously true.

Because people won't buy them without an economic incentive to do so.
They'll just keep the vehicles they have now. Which, actually, would
not be a bad thing from an ecological standpoint (it takes FAR more
energy to make a vehicle than operate it) but would have the minor
drawback of killing the entire automotive industry (of course, body
shops and engine rebuilders would be doing pretty well for themselves.)

No reason to think it would kill the automotive industry. Many people
would love to have a car giving 50 mpg. And there are many other ways
to entice the car buyer to opt for small cars. As i've mentioned
before, we could base penalties for moving violations on the listed
weight of the vehicle or institute an annual gas tax based on vehicle
weights. THINK

[Nate Nagel]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
That's right. Don't address the issue - just be an infant and call
people names. HAHAHA. Now if you can, explain why smaller cars and
weaker engines and lower speeds would NOT result in huge fuel savings.
If you were an engineer (which you're not) it would be obviously true.

Because people won't buy them without an economic incentive to do so.
They'll just keep the vehicles they have now. Which, actually, would
not be a bad thing from an ecological standpoint (it takes FAR more
energy to make a vehicle than operate it) but would have the minor
drawback of killing the entire automotive industry (of course, body
shops and engine rebuilders would be doing pretty well for themselves.)

No reason to think it would kill the automotive industry. Many people
would love to have a car giving 50 mpg.

No, they wouldn't. Otherwise everyone would be driving them. They SAY
they want them, but they're not willing to make the tradeoffs in size
and performance.

nate

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Nate Nagel said in
rec.autos.driving:

<< reply limited to r.a.d >>

Post by Nate Nagel
Wow, you are astonishingly stupid.

Firm grasp of the obvious, Nate... :)

Post by Nate Nagel
How can we double gas mileage
overnight without a technological breakthrough. As an engineer, you
weak-minded liberal tree-huggers who AREN'T SMART ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT
THERE IS NO GODDAMNED CONSPIRACY really piss me off.

THere is no way. Sure, you could make smaller cars, but as history has
shown us, people won't buy them or will only buy them untill the latest
OPEC hissy-fit is over and gas prices return to normal.

BTW, I seem to remember reading somewhere (don't ask where, its been
long forgotten; just the number is remembered) that about only 30% of
the fuel that goes into an engine actually gets burned. If that's true,
sounds like there are some breakthroughs remaining. The thought of a
65MPG Suburban is appealing since it would blow one of SADDAM's pet
causes out of the water....

Post by Nate Nagel
It astonishes me that people as dumb as you aren't sterilized in grade
school.

<going political> While I generally oppose abortion, SADDAM is a walking
advertisement for abortion and genetic testing of fetuses to determine
if the baby is going to be an imbicle like SADDAM and thus making
abortion mandatory..... </going political>

[Studemania]

Post by necromancer
BTW, I seem to remember reading somewhere (don't ask where, its been
long forgotten; just the number is remembered) that about only 30% of
the fuel that goes into an engine actually gets burned.

In a rough estimate, tradityionally, 1/3 of potential energy in fuel
(HHV) goes to powering car, 1/3 is lost via radiator, 1/3 goes out the
exhaust..
Nearly all fuel is burned.
Most gain can be made by cutting drag (including under the car,) and
increasing efficiency of engine, gearboxes, cooling fans and other
components
(How about having the exhaust heat power the AC, like a gas fridge?)

[Brent P]

Post by unknown

Post by Brent P
2) You were still dead wrong.

Meaning: "We disagree."

No, you're dead wrong. CAFE has been effect since it came into effect and
continues to be as I type this.

Post by unknown

Post by Brent P
3) CAFE was 27.5mpg in 1985, it's 27.5mpg today.

Beside the point, actually. The idea of CAFE standards is that they
would be, you should pardon the expression, -progressive-. By the
90s, we were told, cars would be getting in the mid-30s and we would
have eliminated our need for middle east oil. (Actually at the time
were were importing very little of our oil from the middle east, today
it's about a third.)

You have all the intelligence of a typical congress critter when it comes
to technical matters, less than zero.

We could stop importing oil from middle east entirely by simply
eliminating the taxpayer funded military support. This would encourage
oil companies to seek raw materials from more stable nations in the
western hemisphere.

[Matthew T. Russotto]

Post by Brent P
We could stop importing oil from middle east entirely by simply
eliminating the taxpayer funded military support. This would encourage
oil companies to seek raw materials from more stable nations in the
western hemisphere.

Not likely. It would just lead to oil companies buying from a
slightly different set of Islamic dictatorships. Getting oil from
them is easier than getting oil from a South American kleptocracy or
worse, a North American NIMBY country.

[unknown]

Post by Brent P

Post by unknown

Post by Brent P
2) You were still dead wrong.

Meaning: "We disagree."

No, you're dead wrong. CAFE has been effect since it came into effect and
continues to be as I type this.

Conservative argumentation technique no. 1--you aren't wrong so long
as you don't admit you're wrong. If the other guy is right, you can
make him wrong by repeating over and over that he's wrong.

Just insisting over and over that someone is wrong doesn't make him
wrong. Except in your mind.

Post by Brent P
You have all the intelligence of a typical congress critter when it comes
to technical matters, less than zero.

Argumentation technique no. 2 -- If you can't win with facts, win with
insults.

You have shown you're not interested in a serious debate. If we're
just going to have an insult contest, then I concede. I know when I'm
beat. 8^)

Post by Brent P
We could stop importing oil from middle east entirely by simply
eliminating the taxpayer funded military support. This would encourage
oil companies to seek raw materials from more stable nations in the
western hemisphere.

Like . . . Venezuela? 8^D Actually, the fastest, simplest and least
painful way to reduce reliance on Middle East oil (or foreign oil in
general) would have been to attack the consumption side of the
equation through conservation measures. Buying from friendlier
sources (Mexico, Norway, etc.) could help, but buying a lot -less-
would help a lot more.

We use at least twice as much energy per person as any other developed
country, including very cold countries like Sweden and Norway, and
very big countries like Australia (and Canada is -both- big and cold).
Over a several-year period we could easily have lowered our
consumption by at least a third with very little pain. This was the
original goal of PROGRESSIVE CAFE standards. Every president since
Carter has announced a plan to address fuel consumption, but Carter
was the only one who actually did anything about it. (Well, at least
he -tried-.)

However, for decades now the top priority of US energy policy has not
really been to improve national security and our economy by reducing
dependance on foreign oil, it has been to maximize oil company
profits. We have never really used very much oil from Iraq, we just
want to -control- that oil. It's been suggested that the primary
motive of Bush41's Gulf War was to keep Iraqi oil off the world market
for a few years, to allow prices to rise. The purpose of Bush43's war
is to secure the oil for the American companies who got him elected.
Is it just a coincidence that the 35 top people in the Bush
admin--Bush himself, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, etc. etc.--all came from
the oil industry?

[Matthew T. Russotto]

Post by unknown

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by unknown
It is true, though, that lower average speeds will save some gas.
But I bet it's nothing compared to the gas we could have saved if we'd
stuck with CAFE standards.

You were doing so well until you got to the last sentence. CAFE is just
as misguided as the NMSL... probably has HURT our overall fleet fuel
economy by killing off the full sized car and pushing those drivers into
truck-based SUVs.

CAFE was abandoned LONG before the popularization of SUVs.

CAFE is still in place.

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by unknown
Also, you probably know lots of 'experts' were predicting a sharp rise
in traffic deaths after the speed limit was raised back to 65. But it
didn't happen. In the meanwhile both cars and highways had been
completely redesigned with all kinds of safety features . . . . most
mandated by the Fed. Govt. BTW.

That issue was conclusively settled back in 1974 when we went to the 55
overnight and immediately highway deaths dropped by 9,000 a year. The
raising of speed limits in the 90s was a gradual thing and occurred
while other safety measures were being implemented and thus nothing was
proven. THINK

[Alan Baker]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by unknown
Also, you probably know lots of 'experts' were predicting a sharp rise
in traffic deaths after the speed limit was raised back to 65. But it
didn't happen. In the meanwhile both cars and highways had been
completely redesigned with all kinds of safety features . . . . most
mandated by the Fed. Govt. BTW.

That issue was conclusively settled back in 1974 when we went to the 55
overnight and immediately highway deaths dropped by 9,000 a year. The

And passenger-miles travelled also dropped and they changed they way
they kept the stats.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
raising of speed limits in the 90s was a gradual thing and occurred
while other safety measures were being implemented and thus nothing was
proven. THINK

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Alan Baker

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
That issue was conclusively settled back in 1974 when we went to the 55
overnight and immediately highway deaths dropped by 9,000 a year. The

And passenger-miles travelled also dropped and they changed they way
they kept the stats.

Passenger miles are not the issue, you numbskull. Vehicle miles are
what matters and they dropped just 2% from 1973 to 1974 while
fatalities dropped 16%.

And they didn't change the way they kept stats so stop making things
up. Dead is dead, you idiot.

[Alan Baker]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Alan Baker

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
That issue was conclusively settled back in 1974 when we went to the 55
overnight and immediately highway deaths dropped by 9,000 a year. The

And passenger-miles travelled also dropped and they changed they way
they kept the stats.

Passenger miles are not the issue, you numbskull. Vehicle miles are
what matters and they dropped just 2% from 1973 to 1974 while
fatalities dropped 16%.

As I said, they changed they way they kept the stats.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
And they didn't change the way they kept stats so stop making things
up. Dead is dead, you idiot.

[YES to Freedom - NO to CFR!]

Post by unknown
In some western states (Wyoming, Arizona, I think) if you got caught
between 55 and 65 it was not the same as speeding, you just got a $5
ticket for wasting gas.

OH, NO! Speeding IS murder!!! lmao

The only appropriate response would be the death penalty. I am kidding
around.

"Speeders" is a murderer, I bet he speeds everyday. I am also, willing
to bet he is a crappy driver who drives recklessly, even if it's
occasionally, he needs the death penalty, lol. Speeder thinks dopamine
is in cough medicine and that brings you 'up'. lmao What a fool! I
seriously think he is a disinformation tool trying to lead public
opinion for the state. When we know NO ONE can keep up with the
millions of laws THEY are forcing on us.

We are NOT your slaves. We are human beings. What did we do and how did
we survive as a free nation before DUI was made supposedly equivalent
with MURDER?

Don't be a sucker for this utterly BASE brainwashing.

This is the big fascist takeover that these scum have been looking
forward to for a few hundred years, if not thousands of years. This IS
the big show people. TYRANNY is at your doorstep. Tyranny is in your
living room, it's in bed with you, it's in your cellphones, tyranny is
in the black box under the dash of your car.You are a big person now,
you can think for yourself. You are mature enough and responsible
enough to decide for yourselves and make your own decisions. Just make
the right one. Why give up your freedom to two-bit, snuff film
syndicate scumbags?

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), YES to Freedom -

Post by YES to Freedom - NO to CFR!
"Speeders" is a murderer, I bet he speeds everyday. I am also, willing
to bet he is a crappy driver who drives recklessly, even if it's
occasionally, he needs the death penalty, lol.

Well, we do have it documented here in r.a.d that SADDAM has admitted to
speeding, red light running, driving with bald tires (or "tars," as it
calls them), an inoperative emergency brake and inoperative dashboard
lights among other safety hazards in its POS and it apparently was
involved in a fatal accident about 3.5 years ago.....
--
--
Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend (a.k.a. SADDAM) admits to being
a deadly speeder, psychopath and criminal coddler:

"> Have you ever driven a car faster than the legal speed limit?

Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5
years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in
cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open
stretch could be 25, i thought."

Pride of America (c.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE/Speeders And Drunk Drivers
Are Murderers (SADDAM)), 10/3/2002
Message-ID: <***@posting.google.com>
http://tinyurl.com/5u4wg

Proof that POA is LBMHB/lbVH/SADDAM:
See the following: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), said in

Post by unknown
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:38:31 -0500, necromancer

Post by necromancer
Call them all what they are: a War on Freedom and Liberty.

BONG! Direct hit! Give that man a cigar!
The war on drugs was conceived by Pres. Nixon as a pretense to give
poilce more power. It allowed them to knock down doors, it loosened
the rules of gathering evidence, it allowed 'selective enforcement'
against minorities, etc. etc. etc. A lot of people saw it as a
slippery slope, and they've been proven right. The war on terror is
the war on drugs on steroids.

Not only that, but it (the war on drugs) has given the police free reign
to commit armed robbery on our highways (especially of minorities). One
need only look at Camden County, GA where the Sheriff rakes in literally
millions from traffic stops and siezing people's cash if they can't
prove that the money was obtained legitimately.

[YES to Freedom - NO to CFR!]

Post by unknown
The war on drugs was conceived by Pres. Nixon as a pretense to give
poilce more power. It allowed them to knock down doors, it loosened
the rules of gathering evidence, it allowed 'selective enforcement'
against minorities, etc. etc. etc. A lot of people saw it as a
slippery slope, and they've been proven right. The war on terror is
the war on drugs on steroids.

The war on drugs was to give the gubment the opportunity to seize
peoples' property. Now, if Jerry Jones want to build a football stadium
at taxpayers expense he just teams up with the city and seize peoples'
land through "imminent domain". We have no property rights 'living'
under corporate fascism.

Speeders and Drunk Drivers is an asshole. He is probably the murderer
and he probably molests children too, he is a fool. Except for when he
says terrorism and 911 is a hoax and he is right, there.

..because one drives 5 miles over the speed limit, that makes them a
murderer??? FUCK YOU!

You are scum. You are are scummy fool.

[Eeyore]

Post by unknown

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Penalties for drunk driving have doubled and doubled again in the last
20 years. The acceptable blood alcohol limit has been lowered. Just
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.
Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

Wars on human behaviour tend to be lost.

Graham

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Eeyore said in

Post by Eeyore

Post by unknown

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Penalties for drunk driving have doubled and doubled again in the last
20 years. The acceptable blood alcohol limit has been lowered. Just
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.
Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

Wars on human behaviour tend to be lost.

Thank GOD for that!

[unknown]

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 05:19:34 +0000, Eeyore

Post by Eeyore
Wars on human behaviour tend to be lost.

Interesting proposition, but I'm not sure it's true. The wars on
drugs, crime and terror didn't work because they were ulterior
motives. But look at the war on tobacco! We went from a nation of
85% smokers to somethng like 7%, simply through -education-!

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by unknown
On 9 Jan 2007 10:31:32 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Penalties for drunk driving have doubled and doubled again in the last
20 years. The acceptable blood alcohol limit has been lowered. Just
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.
Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

Yes - the war on drunk driving has helped a lot. Everyone now knows
it's a serious crime and people do go to prison for it esp if they kill
someone. That has scared a lot of drunks into not driving . Having
said that, penalties are still not stiff enough. Even first time
offenders should get a five year license suspension and if they're
caught driving then they do the five years in prison. That would just
about eliminate drunk driving.

[Clave]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by unknown
On 9 Jan 2007 10:31:32 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Penalties for drunk driving have doubled and doubled again in the last
20 years. The acceptable blood alcohol limit has been lowered. Just
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.
Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

Yes - the war on drunk driving has helped a lot. Everyone now knows
it's a serious crime and people do go to prison for it esp if they kill
someone. That has scared a lot of drunks into not driving . Having
said that, penalties are still not stiff enough. Even first time
offenders should get a five year license suspension and if they're
caught driving then they do the five years in prison. That would just
about eliminate drunk driving.

Yeah -- more laws will get people to think rationally when they're drunk.

Jim

[Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by unknown
On 9 Jan 2007 10:31:32 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Penalties for drunk driving have doubled and doubled again in the last
20 years. The acceptable blood alcohol limit has been lowered. Just
another crusade, like the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism and the
War on Poor People.
Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

Yes - the war on drunk driving has helped a lot. Everyone now knows
it's a serious crime and people do go to prison for it esp if they kill
someone. That has scared a lot of drunks into not driving . Having

Laughing my ass off. It has? Reminds me of the guy who used to live
beside me. One day he came outside with a 24 oz budweiser in his hand,
headed for his car. We chatted for a few minutes, then he informed me
he was late for his court-ordered alcohol abuse program.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
said that, penalties are still not stiff enough. Even first time
offenders should get a five year license suspension and if they're
caught driving then they do the five years in prison. That would just
about eliminate drunk driving.

--
gpstard (***@driversmail.com) demonstrates his inability to comprehend the
simple differences of the definitions of the monosyllabic words "time" and "chance:"
(Message-ID: <***@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>)
Why don't you argue that the faster one drives the less time spent driving and available to be involved in an accident?

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's homosexuallity:
the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie.
: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's ability to operate a vehicle:
I must be doing something right to go 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash.
: http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/a376114ee8a61824?hl=en

Joshua Calvert <***@hotmail.com> demonstrates his lack of understanding of the terms "sarcasm", "irony", and "hypocrisy":
Poor rightard, forced to whine about an 40 year old event.
Message-ID: <***@68.6.19.6>

[Larry Bud]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by unknown
Has any progress been made in the war on Drunk Driving? Maybe a
little. Drugs, terrorism and poverty, not much.

Yes - the war on drunk driving has helped a lot.

So your question of why isn't there a war on drunk drivers was a lie to
begin with, since you admit there is a war on drunk driving. Ok, got
that out of the way, we know you're a liar.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
Everyone now knows
it's a serious crime and people do go to prison for it esp if they kill
someone. That has scared a lot of drunks into not driving . Having
said that, penalties are still not stiff enough. Even first time
offenders should get a five year license suspension and if they're
caught driving then they do the five years in prison. That would just
about eliminate drunk driving.

What possible incentive would the states have to do this? They make a
ton of money on alcohol taxes, and throwing people who are barely over
an arbitrary limit for years costing the state hundreds of thousands of
dollars won't put a dent into dd accidents at all.

The REAL problem, for those who might be reading this that can actually
comprehend, are the repeat offenders who are caught at 0.15+ (often WAY
of that). These are the guys that will be killing others, not the guy
who had 2 or 3 beers and is at 0.08.

[unknown]

On 9 Jan 2007 21:32:37 -0800, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
Yes - the war on drunk driving has helped a lot. Everyone now knows
it's a serious crime and people do go to prison for it esp if they kill
someone. That has scared a lot of drunks into not driving . Having
said that, penalties are still not stiff enough. Even first time
offenders should get a five year license suspension and if they're
caught driving then they do the five years in prison. That would just
about eliminate drunk driving.

In Norway the first DUI offense brings an automatic 6-month jail
sentence. Does that eliminate drunk driving? Not at all.

I'm not saying that drunk drivers should go free, but we've doubled
the punishments already and then doubled them again. We're reaching
diminishing returns. We can spend the money better in educating
people (as we did so successfully with tobacco!) Educating kids in
high school about how alcohol works on the brain. Educating drivers
about the dangers, and also how much it will cost them if they get
caught drunk driving.

We can also return to seeing alcoholism (and all addiction) as a
health problem, not a crime problem. Punishment is reactive, it's
after the fact. We should be looking for pro-active solutions to
problems like this.

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), said in

Post by unknown
I'm not saying that drunk drivers should go free, but we've doubled
the punishments already and then doubled them again. We're reaching
diminishing returns. We can spend the money better in educating
people (as we did so successfully with tobacco!) Educating kids in
high school about how alcohol works on the brain. Educating drivers
about the dangers, and also how much it will cost them if they get
caught drunk driving.

Now, all we need is to educate drivers on how to drive defensively and
how to react when they encounter a drunk driver (and I don't mean
calling 911) and we'd be all set.....

[Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Fixed the subject for you, faggot.
--
gpstard (***@driversmail.com) demonstrates his inability to comprehend the
simple differences of the definitions of the monosyllabic words "time" and "chance:"
(Message-ID: <***@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>)
Why don't you argue that the faster one drives the less time spent driving and available to be involved in an accident?

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's homosexuallity:
the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie.
: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's ability to operate a vehicle:
I must be doing something right to go 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash.
: http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/a376114ee8a61824?hl=en

Joshua Calvert <***@hotmail.com> demonstrates his lack of understanding of the terms "sarcasm", "irony", and "hypocrisy":
Poor rightard, forced to whine about an 40 year old event.
Message-ID: <***@68.6.19.6>

[Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

By the way, moron, speeders and drunk drivers aren't a threat in the
least to me. See, I understand this concept known as "defensive
driving." It's a really neat concept; it allows me to escape,
unscathed, from situations where other people manage to commit
suicide.

Of course, if you're stupid enough to believe that adherence to a
speed limit is the way to obtain vehicular safety, then you're stupid
enough to prove Darwin right.

I *LOVE* when people use their vehicles to prove the validity of Mr.
Darwin's theory.
--
gpstard (***@driversmail.com) demonstrates his inability to comprehend the
simple differences of the definitions of the monosyllabic words "time" and "chance:"
(Message-ID: <***@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>)
Why don't you argue that the faster one drives the less time spent driving and available to be involved in an accident?

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's homosexuallity:
the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie.
: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's ability to operate a vehicle:
I must be doing something right to go 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash.
: http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/a376114ee8a61824?hl=en

Joshua Calvert <***@hotmail.com> demonstrates his lack of understanding of the terms "sarcasm", "irony", and "hypocrisy":
Poor rightard, forced to whine about an 40 year old event.
Message-ID: <***@68.6.19.6>

[MLOM]

I'll offer an answer by splitting up your questions.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists.

Because we'd lose that war, just like the wars on drugs, poverty,
smoking (declared by many city governments), and terrorism. Human
nature doesn't permit wars of that type to be won.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
Why are
americans so stupid.?

40-odd years of dumbing down, political correctness, tabloid fodder
posing as news, lawsuits out the ass, fat cat politicians from both
parties, shall I add more? Americans are trained that way.

Just glad to help.

"When I was a kid, this was a free country." - G. Gordon Liddy

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), MLOM said in
rec.autos.driving:

<< reply limited to r.a.d. >>

Post by MLOM
I'll offer an answer by splitting up your questions.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists.

Because we'd lose that war, just like the wars on drugs, poverty,
smoking (declared by many city governments), and terrorism. Human
nature doesn't permit wars of that type to be won.

<< Topic drifting >>

Thinking of the War on Freedom and smoking, I was watching an old movie
the other day (Smokey and the Bandit II, IIRC) and theere was a scene
that caught my attention when Gleason's character pulled out a smoke
with the Marlboro logo clearly visible on the pack. Could you imagine if
they tried to make that movie today? Just the mere mention of smoking
would have the anit-smoking nanny-nazis wanting to ban the flick - or at
the very least, give it an XXX rating for daring to feature a smoking
character....

Post by MLOM

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
Why are
americans so stupid.?

40-odd years of dumbing down, political correctness, tabloid fodder
posing as news, lawsuits out the ass, fat cat politicians from both
parties, shall I add more? Americans are trained that way.

And of trying to make everything so stupefyingly safe that most people
wouldn't know how to handle an adverse situation to - literally - save
their lives. Witness the guy who got lost in the woods on the left coast
and froze to death last month.

Post by MLOM
Just glad to help.
"When I was a kid, this was a free country." - G. Gordon Liddy

[Studemania]

Please give us your definition of "speeder."

Also, in what nation do you live? That info might help.

(FWIW: All my driving has been in tNorth America and Europe.)

[Studemania]

Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

Post by Studemania
Please give us your definition of "speeder."
Also, in what nation do you live? That info might help.
(FWIW: All my driving has been in tNorth America and Europe.)

[Larry Bud]

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

If you have tunnel vision, perhaps. Those who aren't so myopic
understand that terrorism has more of an effect than just deaths of
people. "Only" 3000 or so people died in the 9/11 attacks, but those
60 minutes affected our economy for 2 years. Million of people were
affected adversely because of the attacks. People who have nothing to
do with the WTC or New York, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. Entire
industries (airlines) were affected. New laws and regulations that
affect everybody were put in place because of it. Billions of dollars
spent.

You slipping while bending over to pick up your soap and bashing your
head on your tile affects you, and perhaps your immediate family.

[Brent P]

Post by Larry Bud
If you have tunnel vision, perhaps. Those who aren't so myopic
understand that terrorism has more of an effect than just deaths of
people. "Only" 3000 or so people died in the 9/11 attacks, but those
60 minutes affected our economy for 2 years. Million of people were
affected adversely because of the attacks.

And look who made money from them. Hell the vice president alone made
millions from tama-flu(sp?) with the hyped up bird flu BS.

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

If you have tunnel vision, perhaps. Those who aren't so myopic
understand that terrorism has more of an effect than just deaths of
people. "Only" 3000 or so people died in the 9/11 attacks, but those
60 minutes affected our economy for 2 years. Million of people were
affected adversely because of the attacks. People who have nothing to
do with the WTC or New York, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. Entire
industries (airlines) were affected. New laws and regulations that
affect everybody were put in place because of it. Billions of dollars
spent.

And what are the economic effects of car crashes.? The property damage
and medical costs run into the hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
So whether you look at lives or injuries or costs, car crashes dwarf
terrorism. THINK

[Larry Bud]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

If you have tunnel vision, perhaps. Those who aren't so myopic
understand that terrorism has more of an effect than just deaths of
people. "Only" 3000 or so people died in the 9/11 attacks, but those
60 minutes affected our economy for 2 years. Million of people were
affected adversely because of the attacks. People who have nothing to
do with the WTC or New York, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. Entire
industries (airlines) were affected. New laws and regulations that
affect everybody were put in place because of it. Billions of dollars
spent.

And what are the economic effects of car crashes.?

Very little outside of the people who are in the crash, which is
clearly the point. It took one event in 2001 to affect us every day of
our lives, crippling the economy for 2 years. There was a wreck on
an adjecent highway today on my way to work, it didn't affect me one
bit.

Of course, one nuke going off in the next 50 years is really going to
ruin your day.

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Speeders & Drunk
Drivers are MURDERERS, a lover of gay kid porn and sex with farm animals
spewed forth in rec.autos.driving:

<< ECP removed >>

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
And what are the economic effects of car crashes.? The property damage
and medical costs run into the hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

¿¿Gotta cite for that?? Otherwise, STFU.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
So whether you look at lives or injuries or costs, car crashes dwarf
terrorism. THINK

Terrorism = Crime, Death in and auto accident = Darwin at work making
the world better for the rest of us. You think, you idiot.
--
Aunt Judy defends a known *drunk driver*:

"Almost all vehicle 'accidents' are due to driver
recklessness but the Chappaquidick incident is one
instance where it may really have been no ones
fault except the idiot who built the bridge."
--"Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend," 11/10/2005
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/9jtjt
Msg ID: ***@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com

[Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

If you have tunnel vision, perhaps. Those who aren't so myopic
understand that terrorism has more of an effect than just deaths of
people. "Only" 3000 or so people died in the 9/11 attacks, but those
60 minutes affected our economy for 2 years. Million of people were
affected adversely because of the attacks. People who have nothing to
do with the WTC or New York, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. Entire
industries (airlines) were affected. New laws and regulations that
affect everybody were put in place because of it. Billions of dollars
spent.

And what are the economic effects of car crashes.? The property damage
and medical costs run into the hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
So whether you look at lives or injuries or costs, car crashes dwarf
terrorism. THINK

I THINK Darwin's doin' a bang-up job, pun intentional.
--
gpstard (***@driversmail.com) demonstrates his inability to comprehend the
simple differences of the definitions of the monosyllabic words "time" and "chance:"
(Message-ID: <***@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>)
Why don't you argue that the faster one drives the less time spent driving and available to be involved in an accident?

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's homosexuallity:
the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie.
: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's ability to operate a vehicle:
I must be doing something right to go 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash.
: http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/a376114ee8a61824?hl=en

Joshua Calvert <***@hotmail.com> demonstrates his lack of understanding of the terms "sarcasm", "irony", and "hypocrisy":
Poor rightard, forced to whine about an 40 year old event.
Message-ID: <***@68.6.19.6>

[Studemania]

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

If you have tunnel vision, perhaps. Those who aren't so myopic
understand that terrorism has more of an effect than just deaths of
people. "Only" 3000 or so people died in the 9/11 attacks, but those
60 minutes affected our economy for 2 years. Million of people were
affected adversely because of the attacks. People who have nothing to
do with the WTC or New York, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. Entire
industries (airlines) were affected. New laws and regulations that
affect everybody were put in place because of it. Billions of dollars
spent.
You slipping while bending over to pick up your soap and bashing your
head on your tile affects you, and perhaps your immediate family.

As a matter of fact, I lived in a nation where terrorism was active for
almost a decade and bombs were even planted on my alternate route from
work to home. I woke up each day ready to hear that another blast had
occurred, somewhere.
When I visited the US, I pointed out how lax we were in this regard and
laid the blame on a series of administrations.
I was looked at as if I were the one threatening the peace of the US.

A presernt neighbor, the former wife of the local anti-terriorst
expert, said that they had the same experiences. No one wants the
truth!

If anyone is worried about something that is less likely that a slip in
a shower, they need to be educated. If they are as prepared for
terrorism as well as they are for home fires and earthquakes, that is
reasonable, even though the later two are far more likely.

Be careful in the shower, Larry, and don't sweat the small stuff.
(I bet you listen to talk radio.)

[Brent P]

Post by Studemania
If anyone is worried about something that is less likely that a slip in
a shower, they need to be educated. If they are as prepared for
terrorism as well as they are for home fires and earthquakes, that is
reasonable, even though the later two are far more likely.

For me to believe the US government's scaremongering, they first need to
act like they believe it and secure the borders. But what are they doing?
They subcontract port security to China's Howard Huges and they leave the
southern border wide open. Not to mention the shooting that's going on there.

[Larry Bud]

Post by Studemania
If anyone is worried about something that is less likely that a slip in
a shower, they need to be educated. If they are as prepared for
terrorism as well as they are for home fires and earthquakes, that is
reasonable, even though the later two are far more likely.

You're still missing the point. A terrorist act in California or NY
affects me in Michigan through new legislation, a hit on the economy,
increase in gas prices, increase in airline fares, etc. You slipping
in your shower doesn't affect me one bit, unless a sleezy lawyer
decides to sue the soap company for making the soap too slippery.

Of course, it only takes one nuke will ruin everybody's day.

Post by Studemania
Be careful in the shower, Larry, and don't sweat the small stuff.

I'm not sweating anything. I just don't have my head stuck in the
ground saying everything is OK.

Post by Studemania
(I bet you listen to talk radio.)

I listen, read, and watch all sorts of media. I like to be informed,
and make my own decisions. I you want to limit your exposure to
different points of view, feel free.

[Brent P]

Post by Larry Bud
Of course, it only takes one nuke will ruin everybody's day.

Yet, that scanning (at least for one port, if not more) has been handed over
to a company owned by the chinese howard hughes.

Why is he called that? Because like HH, he has strong ties to the chinese
military and inteligence orgs.

The federal government is all about taking away our liberty in the name of
security because of the war on terror with one hand but the other hand is
out there acting like there is no problem what so ever. Open southern
border, sub-contracted port security to dubai ports world (yes, that went
through after the media storm died down) and hutchenson-lampoa, and other
blatant idiotcy if this war on terror was real. Like the war on drugs,
it's a war on the people.

I'll take the risk of terrorism seriously when the government acts to
protect itself from foreign born terrorism instead of using foreign born
terrorism as an excuse to secure itself against US citizens rising up
against its status quo.

[Larry Bud]

Post by Brent P

Post by Larry Bud
Of course, it only takes one nuke will ruin everybody's day.

Yet, that scanning (at least for one port, if not more) has been handed over
to a company owned by the chinese howard hughes.
Why is he called that? Because like HH, he has strong ties to the chinese
military and inteligence orgs.

Just because the government doesn't have the political will to fight a
problem doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

If the government doesn't close the southern border doesn't mean the
southern border isn't a threat. It means we need government officials
that ALSO don't have their head in the sand, who isn't in the political
business to get reelected, basing their votes in Congress on the polls.

I'm just wondering how many 9/11s will it take until enough people
finally won't put their head back IN the sand. What concerns me is
that the next 9/11 will make the first one look like a bruised knee.

[Brent P]

Post by Larry Bud
Just because the government doesn't have the political will to fight a
problem doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

They have lot's of political will for court rulings, legislation, and
regulation to control, monitor, and track US citizens using this so
called threat as the excuse.

Post by Larry Bud
If the government doesn't close the southern border doesn't mean the
southern border isn't a threat.

It's a threat (an economic one) to us, the US people, not threat to those in
power.

Post by Larry Bud
It means we need government officials
that ALSO don't have their head in the sand, who isn't in the political
business to get reelected, basing their votes in Congress on the polls.

The government isn't listening to the people that's for sure.

Post by Larry Bud
I'm just wondering how many 9/11s will it take until enough people
finally won't put their head back IN the sand.

And finally realize that elements within the US government are more than
willing to at the very least allow such things to happen for their own
gain.

Post by Larry Bud
What concerns me is
that the next 9/11 will make the first one look like a bruised knee.

Of course it will. But as usual, we'll find out later that US law
enforcement, intelligence orgs, etc were aware of it. Government
informants or assets even being involved up to the point of pushing the
group to the act and providing the means to carry it out or the perps
will have odd ties to the CIA, US military, MI6, or similiar. And the same
day there will be a drill for something identical or sufficently close
to it such that any response or move to stop it will be too confused to be
effective.

[Matthew T. Russotto]

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

If you have tunnel vision, perhaps. Those who aren't so myopic
understand that terrorism has more of an effect than just deaths of
people. "Only" 3000 or so people died in the 9/11 attacks, but those
60 minutes affected our economy for 2 years. Million of people were
affected adversely because of the attacks. People who have nothing to
do with the WTC or New York, Pennsylvania, or the Pentagon. Entire
industries (airlines) were affected. New laws and regulations that
affect everybody were put in place because of it. Billions of dollars
spent.

Sure, but most of that was caused by over-reaction or inappropriate
reaction to terrorism, not by terrorism itself.

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

Just about everything is more dangerous than terrorism. It's all a
gigantic hoax just like in the 50s-80s when america was told COMMUMISM
was public enemy number 1 even though the commies never did a thing to
us. The gover-media just invents these bogeymen to justify their wars
whether in korea or vietnam or iraq or afghanistan.

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Speeders & Drunk
Drivers are MURDERERS, a lover of gay kid porn and goat sex spewed in

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Studemania
Forgot to add: Slipping in the shower is more dangerous to Americans
than terrorists, too!

Just about everything is more dangerous than terrorism. It's all a
gigantic hoax just like in the 50s-80s when america was told COMMUMISM
was public enemy number 1 even though the commies never did a thing to
us. The gover-media just invents these bogeymen to justify their wars

More like the military-industrial complex, you goob.

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
whether in korea or vietnam or iraq or afghanistan.

No fucking shit, Sherlock! You just noe figuring that out??
--

[Larry Bud]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

The war IS on, that's why most states have a 0.08 limit, which, as we
all know, is ridiculous, since most of the people that do the killing
are WAY above that in the first place.

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

The war IS on, that's why most states have a 0.08 limit, which, as we
all know, is ridiculous, since most of the people that do the killing
are WAY above that in the first place.

Don't gimme that crap about how driving with a BAC of .08 is ok.
That's like saying stealing should be legal as long as it's under
$300!!! There should be NO legal minimum on BAC, though of course the
penalties should vary with the alcohol concentration. Someone with a
BAC of .01 should pay say $100 fine while .20 would get you a month in
jail and a 5 year license suspension.

[Nate Nagel]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

The war IS on, that's why most states have a 0.08 limit, which, as we
all know, is ridiculous, since most of the people that do the killing
are WAY above that in the first place.

Don't gimme that crap about how driving with a BAC of .08 is ok.
That's like saying stealing should be legal as long as it's under
$300!!! There should be NO legal minimum on BAC, though of course the
penalties should vary with the alcohol concentration. Someone with a
BAC of .01 should pay say $100 fine while .20 would get you a month in
jail and a 5 year license suspension.

You do realize that you can blow a .01 after eating slightly old bread, yes?

nate

[MLOM]

Post by Nate Nagel

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

The war IS on, that's why most states have a 0.08 limit, which, as we
all know, is ridiculous, since most of the people that do the killing
are WAY above that in the first place.

Don't gimme that crap about how driving with a BAC of .08 is ok.
That's like saying stealing should be legal as long as it's under
$300!!! There should be NO legal minimum on BAC, though of course the
penalties should vary with the alcohol concentration. Someone with a
BAC of .01 should pay say $100 fine while .20 would get you a month in
jail and a 5 year license suspension.

You do realize that you can blow a .01 after eating slightly old bread, yes?
nate
--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Heck, anyone using OTC cold remedies, especially liquid types, could
easily blow .02+. I knew a guy who was diabetic, he'd never be able to
blow below .04.

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by MLOM
Heck, anyone using OTC cold remedies, especially liquid types, could
easily blow .02+. I knew a guy who was diabetic, he'd never be able to
blow below .04.

I don't doubt that and people should not be driving when they're doped
up on cold meds. And if your diabetic friend is permanently drunk as
you say, then he shouldn't be driving period. Stop coddling these
killers.

[Studemania]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

The war IS on, that's why most states have a 0.08 limit, which, as we
all know, is ridiculous, since most of the people that do the killing
are WAY above that in the first place.

Don't gimme that crap about how driving with a BAC of .08 is ok.
That's like saying stealing should be legal as long as it's under
$300!!! There should be NO legal minimum on BAC, though of course the
penalties should vary with the alcohol concentration. Someone with a
BAC of .01 should pay say $100 fine while .20 would get you a month in
jail and a 5 year license suspension.

Where do you think you would find the greatest variation in driving
ability?
Between the worst driver holding a clean licence and the best
or
between that best driver at a .00 reading and a .10 reading?

(I expect that you're familiar with the experiments along this line.)

I'm sorry for any booze related occurance that has effected your
outlook, but we must aim to rid the roads of the bad drivers, be they
intentionally that way by lack or skill or care or having consumed too
many drinks.

(If we were only trying to stop accidents we could not allow anyone
born in the first quarter of any year from driving.)

[necromancer]

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Speeders & Drunk
Drivers are MURDERERS, a connisseur of gay kid porn and criminal coddler
spewed forth this crapola all over the landscape in rec.autos.driving:

<< ECP removed >>

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS

Post by Larry Bud

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

The war IS on, that's why most states have a 0.08 limit, which, as we
all know, is ridiculous, since most of the people that do the killing
are WAY above that in the first place.

Don't gimme that crap about how driving with a BAC of .08 is ok.
That's like saying stealing should be legal as long as it's under
$300!!! There should be NO legal minimum on BAC, though of course the
penalties should vary with the alcohol concentration. Someone with a
BAC of .01 should pay say $100 fine while .20 would get you a month in
jail and a 5 year license suspension.

SO let me get this straight: Are you saying that we should coddle
certain DUI's based on the results of a breathalyzer test which is not
always 100% accurate?

I wonder if the quote in the .sig has anything to do with your
position...

If anyone needs a war declared on them, it is you, criminal coddler.
--
Loco Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend defends a known *DRUNK DRIVER*:

"Teddy went off a single lane bridge with no guard rail at night.
The real killer was the idiot who built the bridge. Next question."
--Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/laura bush - VEHICULAR
HOMICIDE
June 20th, 2006
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/zlnyz
Message ID: ***@4ax.com

[Patriot Games]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

If they didn't want me to drive home from the bar they wouldn't have a
parking lot there!

[Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)]

Post by Patriot Games

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

If they didn't want me to drive home from the bar they wouldn't have a
parking lot there!

Really! I don't know why they call it "drinking and driving." When I
was doing it, I was drinking, THEN driving. =))
--
gpstard (***@driversmail.com) demonstrates his inability to comprehend the
simple differences of the definitions of the monosyllabic words "time" and "chance:"
(Message-ID: <***@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>)
Why don't you argue that the faster one drives the less time spent driving and available to be involved in an accident?

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's homosexuallity:
the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie.
: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's ability to operate a vehicle:
I must be doing something right to go 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash.
: http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/a376114ee8a61824?hl=en

Joshua Calvert <***@hotmail.com> demonstrates his lack of understanding of the terms "sarcasm", "irony", and "hypocrisy":
Poor rightard, forced to whine about an 40 year old event.
Message-ID: <***@68.6.19.6>

[Patriot Games]

"Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad

Post by Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)

Post by Patriot Games
If they didn't want me to drive home from the bar they wouldn't have a
parking lot there!

Really! I don't know why they call it "drinking and driving." When I
was doing it, I was drinking, THEN driving. =))

Two rednecks, Bubba and Earl, were driving down the road drinking a couple
of bottles of Bud.

The passenger, Bubba, said, "Lookey thar up ahead, Earl, it's a po-lice
roadblock! We're gonna get busted fer drinkin' these here beers!!"

"Don't worry, Bubba," Earl said. "We'll just pull over and finish drinkin'
these beers, peel off the label and stick it on our foreheads, and throw the
bottles under the seat."

"What fer?" asked Bubba.

"Just let me do the talkin', OK?" said Earl.

Well, they finished their beers, threw the empty bottles under the seat, and
each put a label on their forehead.

When they reached the roadblock, the sheriff said, "You boys been drinkin'?"
....

"No sir," Earl said. "We're on the patch."

[Patriot Games]

"Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad

Post by Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)

Post by Patriot Games
If they didn't want me to drive home from the bar they wouldn't have a
parking lot there!

Really! I don't know why they call it "drinking and driving." When I
was doing it, I was drinking, THEN driving. =))

A drunk is weaving down the road when a policeman stops him.

The policeman says, "Did you know that a few miles ago your wife fell out of
the car?"

The drunk says, "That's great news. For a minute, I thought I'd gone deaf."

[Patriot Games]

"Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad

Post by Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)

Post by Patriot Games
If they didn't want me to drive home from the bar they wouldn't have a
parking lot there!

Really! I don't know why they call it "drinking and driving." When I
was doing it, I was drinking, THEN driving. =))

Your mamma!

...is so dumb when she was pulled over for drunk driving and they asked her
to walked the line she said, "Which one?"

[Patriot Games]

"Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad

Post by Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers)

Post by Patriot Games
If they didn't want me to drive home from the bar they wouldn't have a
parking lot there!

Really! I don't know why they call it "drinking and driving." When I
was doing it, I was drinking, THEN driving. =))

One night a police officer was staking out a particularly rowdy bar for
possible DUI violations. At closing time, he saw a fellow stumble out of the
bar, trip on the curb and try his keys on five different cars before he
found his. The man sat in the front seat fumbling around with his keys for
several minutes.

Meanwhile, all the other patrons left the bar and drove off. Finally he
started his engine and began to pull away. The police officer was waiting
for him. As soon as he pulled onto the street, the officer stopped him, read
him his rights and administered the breathalyzer test to determine his
blood-alcohol content.

The results showed a reading of 0.0.

The puzzled officer demanded to know how that could be. The driver replied,
"Tonight I'm the designated decoy."

[Chuck Whealton]

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Laura, American's are NOT stupid. Drunk drivers are nailed at
checkpoints and if people are seen driving erratically, they're pulled
over and tested for driving under the influence.

What more do you want?

Charles R. Whealton
Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Chuck Whealton

Post by Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS
They are a far far bigger threat to you than terrorists. Why are
americans so stupid.?

Laura, American's are NOT stupid. Drunk drivers are nailed at
checkpoints and if people are seen driving erratically, they're pulled
over and tested for driving under the influence.
What more do you want?

And then they're let go with a fine and go on to become president or
vp. I want DUI to be felony and with massive penalties as appropriate
for a super-violent and oft-deadly crime. THINK

[Paul Hovnanian P.E.]

So you want them to crack down on people who drive slowly as well as
fast?

[Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS]

Post by Paul Hovnanian P.E.
So you want them to crack down on people who drive slowly as well as
fast?

Where the hell did you get that idea?? We need to encourage slow
driving. Americans are idiot sheep who've been brainwashed into
thinking fast driving is cool. The oil industry and and the auto
industry are behind the brainwashing cause they make a fortune off fast
drivers.