|
Post by I hate TNA on Sept 4, 2011 20:16:22 GMT -5
You decide to take the wheel even if you're above the legal limit because you know 100% you aren't drunk and will be able to drive as if you had zero alcohol in your blood. Does that make you a moron? pretty much, yeah. It's called a "legal limit" for a reason. Come on now. We all know you can be a little bit above the legal limit without being drunk or unable to drive as if you were under.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2011 20:17:17 GMT -5
You decide to take the wheel even if you're above the legal limit because you know 100% you aren't drunk and will be able to drive as if you had zero alcohol in your blood. Does that make you a moron? No. Anyone who's made up their minds that they're going behind the wheel after drinking beyond the legal limit is gonna believe that they're good enough to drive. It's still stupid. You're intoxicated, that in itself contributes to the delusion that you're okay to drive. While there are cases of people who can "manage" while tipsy/drunk just because you did it once and didn't kill anyone doesn't mean the next time will be the same. It's stupid to take that chance.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,373
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Sept 4, 2011 20:17:45 GMT -5
He drank. He drove. THAT'S it. Nothing else needs to be taken into consideration, especially for a repeat offender. He consumed alcohol and drove. Had he been under the legal limit, they wouldn't have arrested him, would they? If you want to insult someone, yes it does. (remember this all comes from someone who never drinks alcohol, never) Let's say you're at a family diner, you drink alcohol. The legal limit says two glasses, you take three glasses. You know it didn't made any difference in your body, you know you aren't drunk, you know you don't have any vision problems and things like that. Most important you know 100% that you can take the wheel and you won't have any problems to drive. You decide to take the wheel even if you're above the legal limit because you know 100% you aren't drunk and will be able to drive as if you had zero alcohol in your blood. Does that make you a moron? No. So if you're only a little bit above the legal limit that makes it OK? Yeah, that's why I already said three times he shouldn't have had. Christ... Alright, please don't take this the wrong way. You say that you don't drink , but have you ever partaken? I don't ask to insult as I rarely drink myself. It is just that I read this post and I think I understand where you are coming from, but I think you are off because you may be inexperienced with alcohol. If you have drunk enough to be over the legal limit there is no way that you think that you are unaffected by the alcohol. I have probably only drunk enough to be over the legal limit three times in my life but in those instances I sure did not think that there was any way that I was relatively unaffected (I took a cab twice and stayed the night the other time). Kurt did not get pulled over because the cops were impressed with his driving skills and wanted to tell him so. His driving was affected. He had to know that they were as well. The thing I have to wonder is how he even had a license to drive with anyways? Maybe where he lives is different, but around these parts a DUI will cost you your license for a year in addition to everything else.
|
|
|
Post by ritt works hard fo da chickens on Sept 4, 2011 20:21:43 GMT -5
He drank. He drove. THAT'S it. Nothing else needs to be taken into consideration, especially for a repeat offender. He consumed alcohol and drove. Had he been under the legal limit, they wouldn't have arrested him, would they? If you want to insult someone, yes it does. (remember this all comes from someone who never drinks alcohol, never) Let's say you're at a family diner, you drink alcohol. The legal limit says two glasses, you take three glasses. You know it didn't made any difference in your body, you know you aren't drunk, you know you don't have any vision problems and things like that. Most important you know 100% that you can take the wheel and you won't have any problems to drive. You decide to take the wheel even if you're above the legal limit because you know 100% you aren't drunk and will be able to drive as if you had zero alcohol in your blood. Does that make you a moron? No. So if you're only a little bit above the legal limit that makes it OK? Yeah, that's why I already said three times he shouldn't have had. Christ... So just for clarification so I can call him a moron at the appropriate time, is it the third, the fourth or fifth offense that qualifies idiocy? Does he have to swerve through three lanes?
|
|
Mr Captain Falcon
Dennis Stamp
So I could write anything in here and it'll be posted?
Posts: 4,689
|
Post by Mr Captain Falcon on Sept 4, 2011 20:22:11 GMT -5
What a jackass. Not his first offense and right after the Matt Hardy situation? This guy should just be placed in a cell where he can't drink and drive anymore. Someone get the six sides of steel!
|
|
Massive G
Hank Scorpio
yo hago esto
Posts: 6,224
|
Post by Massive G on Sept 4, 2011 20:25:01 GMT -5
pretty much, yeah. It's called a "legal limit" for a reason. Come on now. We all know you can be a little bit above the legal limit without being drunk or unable to drive as if you were under. for what its worth, this is precisely the kind of thinking that law enforcement would prefer to eliminate.
|
|
Krimzon
Crow T. Robot
This guy is the man!
R.I.P. Deadpool
Posts: 43,870
|
Post by Krimzon on Sept 4, 2011 20:25:03 GMT -5
Let's say you're at a family diner, you drink alcohol. The legal limit says two glasses, you take three glasses. You know it didn't made any difference in your body, you know you aren't drunk, you know you don't have any vision problems and things like that. Most important you know 100% that you can take the wheel and you won't have any problems to drive. You decide to take the wheel even if you're above the legal limit because you know 100% you aren't drunk and will be able to drive as if you had zero alcohol in your blood. Does that make you a moron? No. Yes, because I just knowingly broke the f***ing law. I would deserve to have my intelligence questioned.
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,529
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Sept 4, 2011 20:25:23 GMT -5
TNA is turning into a glorified halfway house
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Sept 4, 2011 20:33:23 GMT -5
Don't even try to minimize or excuse the fatally dangerous behavior of drunk driving. Especially for a repeat offender. Or what? Plus, did I minimize something? No, I just said that doesn't make him a moron, or a tool, or whatever the f*** you could call him. And when you don't know how much alcohol in his blood, I really don't know how you can judge someone who doesn't looks like he's drunk as hell. What is telling you that he wasn't simply at 0.06%? What is telling you that he had so much alcohol in his blood he could have killed someone/himself on the road because of it? Nothing. I'm not saying that's a good thing, I'm not saying he shouldn't be blamed, I'm just saying you shouldn't insult someone when you don't know how much alcohol he had in his blood. That's it. Another driver saw him swerving from lane to lane and called the police. If you drink and drive you are an idiot. I've never been able to understand the attitude that it's no big deal as long as you don't kill someone.
|
|
|
Post by stormwrestling on Sept 4, 2011 20:33:53 GMT -5
He should get fired fired this, right? After all, this is his what, second offence in a year? Matt got fired after his first and Angle's the friggin' world champion.
Matt's surely got grounds for wrongful dismissal if nothing happens to Angle
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2011 20:36:54 GMT -5
He should get fired fired this, right? After all, this is his what, second offence in a year? Matt got fired after his first and Angle's the friggin' world champion. Matt's surely got grounds for wrongful dismissal if nothing happens to Angle It seems like the wrestling business likes to wait until tragedy occurs before things like this are taken seriously.
|
|
|
Post by 01010010 01101001 01100011 on Sept 4, 2011 20:40:06 GMT -5
He should get fired fired this, right? After all, this is his what, second offence in a year? Matt got fired after his first and Angle's the friggin' world champion. Matt's surely got grounds for wrongful dismissal if nothing happens to Angle Not really. Matt was already suspended for poor job performance, Kurt hasn't had that, yet.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Backlund on Sept 4, 2011 20:42:12 GMT -5
As someone who has lost family and friends to drunk drivers, seeing people try and defend this is kind of sickening. We're going to argue semantics and levels of drunkenness for a repeat offender? Who cares if he's really good at pretend fighting, the guy clearly has a problem that is either going to be handled with rehab or by having him kill someone (himself or otherwise).
TNA basically only shows up in the mainstream with "former WWE star arrested for..." anymore. Kind of sad, really.
|
|
Haulk
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,298
|
Post by Haulk on Sept 4, 2011 20:43:53 GMT -5
Its not the same thing as the Matt Hardy situation, Kurt's not an annoying douche on the inter.. nevermind
|
|
|
Post by rnrk supports BLM on Sept 4, 2011 20:46:29 GMT -5
Kurt's still on probation from his previous DUI, isn't he? I could see this leading to jail time...
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,203
|
Post by Mozenrath on Sept 4, 2011 20:47:10 GMT -5
Kurt's still on probation from his previous DUI, isn't he? I could see this leading to jail time... Could, should, we'll see.
|
|
|
Post by moneyman20 on Sept 4, 2011 20:48:26 GMT -5
As someone who has lost family and friends to drunk drivers, seeing people try and defend this is kind of sickening. We're going to argue semantics and levels of drunkenness for a repeat offender? Who cares if he's really good at pretend fighting, the guy clearly has a problem that is either going to be handled with rehab or by having him kill someone (himself or otherwise). TNA basically only shows up in the mainstream with "former WWE star arrested for..." anymore. Kind of sad, really. Right on the money. [img src="[http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/GifGuide/clapping/busey_clapping.gif"]
|
|
|
Post by Joe Galt on Sept 4, 2011 20:49:32 GMT -5
C'mon guys. It wasn`t the fact of him being drunk that got him pulled over. It was the fact that he was tweeting about "how great I am" that caused his car to swerve. The policeman pulled him over and found him to be very drunk and arrested him. It was the tweeting, I tell ya.
|
|
|
Post by I hate TNA on Sept 4, 2011 20:50:42 GMT -5
Anyone who's made up their minds that they're going behind the wheel after drinking beyond the legal limit is gonna believe that they're good enough to drive. It's still stupid. You're intoxicated, that in itself contributes to the delusion that you're okay to drive. While there are cases of people who can "manage" while tipsy/drunk just because you did it once and didn't kill anyone doesn't mean the next time will be the same. It's stupid to take that chance. Let's use the "family diner" case another time. The legal limit says two glasses, but we all know you won't be drunk if you take three glasses (i'm not saying 3.5, I'm not saying 4). Then, even if you shouldn't because it's illegal, it won't make any difference if you take the wheel with three glasses instead of the legal two. Now if after taking those three glasses you take the wheel to drive back to your house, you won't have any problems driving in all safety just like as if you took the two limit glasses. Should you have? No because it's illegal. Does it make you a public danger? Not either. Back to Kurt. Judging by his track record he probably had more than three glasses, the thing is: I don't know. That doesn't forbid me to blame him, because he shouldn't have had, but I won't insult him because it may have been a case of him having just three glasses. That's my whole point. Don't insult the guy when you don't know everything. Blame him, but don't insult or say he feels like he can do whatever the hell he wants to/doesn't care for others drivers. Yes, because I just knowingly broke the f***ing law. I would deserve to have my intelligence questioned. For what it's worth, everyone breaks the law on a daily basis without even knowing it. Another driver saw him swerving from lane to lane and called the police. This. It wasn't on the TMZ report at the time I first saw it. Now I can say Kurt is a f***ing moron. If you drink and drive you are an idiot. I've never been able to understand the attitude that it's no big deal as long as you don't kill someone. That's not what I said nor think. To me it's no big deal if you're above the legal limit but only if at the same time it doesn't make any difference as if you were under the limit, wich is a slight margin. Alright, now that everything has been clarified I can go to sleep (yeah, it's already 4:00am in France). G'night everyone.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Sept 4, 2011 20:51:21 GMT -5
Anyone who's made up their minds that they're going behind the wheel after drinking beyond the legal limit is gonna believe that they're good enough to drive. It's still stupid. You're intoxicated, that in itself contributes to the delusion that you're okay to drive. While there are cases of people who can "manage" while tipsy/drunk just because you did it once and didn't kill anyone doesn't mean the next time will be the same. It's stupid to take that chance. Let's use the "family diner" case another time. The legal limit says two glasses, but we all know you won't be drunk if you take three glasses (i'm not saying 3.5, I'm not saying 4). Then, even if you shouldn't because it's illegal, it won't make any difference if you take the wheel with three glasses instead of the legal two. Now if after taking those three glasses you take the wheel to drive back to your house, you won't have any problems driving in all safety just like as if you took the two limit glasses. Should you have? No because it's illegal. Does it make you a public danger? Not either. Back to Kurt. Judging by his track record he probably had more than three glasses, the thing is: I don't know. That doesn't forbid me to blame him, because he shouldn't have had, but I won't insult him because it may have been a case of him having just three glasses. That's my whole point. Don't insult the guy when you don't know everything. Blame him, but don't insult or say he feels like he can do whatever the hell he wants to/doesn't care for others drivers. For what it's worth, everyone breaks the law on a daily basis without even knowing it. This. It wasn't on the TMZ report at the time I first saw it. Now I can say Kurt is a f***ing moron. If you drink and drive you are an idiot. I've never been able to understand the attitude that it's no big deal as long as you don't kill someone. That's not what I said nor think. To me it's no big deal if you're above the legal limit but only if at the same time it doesn't make any difference as if you were under the limit, wich is a slight margin. Alright, now that everything has been clarified I can go to sleep (yeah, it's already 4:00am in France). G'night everyone. This is why 17 year olds aren't legally allowed to purchase alcohol....even in France.
|
|