forums

Mark Walton News

skibbyskibby said:
mossmadness said:
TpaBayFlyFisher said:
There are some activities that carry so much risk of harm to others that society rightfully criminalizes it. It is perfectly legal to drink yourself into a coma sitting in front of your TV. But, get into the ****pit of a jumbo jet and start drinking and you will go to jail even if the jet lands itself. And, I agree with that. Should Walton go to jail for 40 years for passing out in his car? Of course not. But, I for one would expect a drunk in a car to be punished by society.
Click to expand...

Driving drunk is not one of those activities. The relative risk increase is next to nothing.
Click to expand...

Really? A person driving with a BAC of .08 increases their risk of accident by roughly 300%. Alcohol-related accidents account for almost 1/3rd of all traffic related deaths.

The idea that any human would be arguing for drunk driving to be legalized is disturbing. Quite possibly one of the dumbest things any human has ever said.
Click to expand...
I can only assume that mossmadness was trolling, because it may be the dumbest thing I've ever seen posted here.
 
Advertisement
Mcanes305 said:
TpaBayFlyFisher said:
Mcanes305 said:
On every issue the people of this country are figuratively crabs in a boiling pot.

hes an idiot, he's only 18, he should yes sir and no sir the police, the police are corrupt, etc etc....in my opinion everything being said is insignificant.

DUI/DWI and all variations are bogus and should not be enforceable. i mean, this is a law that punishes you for violating nothing but itself. No laws or civil liberties are broken, threatened or imposed on by a drunk driver. if a person is driving recklessly or speeding he/she should be charged as such but pulling someone over and imposing on their liberties because he/she may or may not get in an accident is just madness. it literally is minority report; where you are being charged before a crime is committed.

He chose to drink and he chose to make the bad decision of driving; DEFINITELY a bad decision but bad decisions are NOT illegal. i've had unprotected *** plenty of times and im sure many in this forum have as well. Bad decision but we all have a right to take risk until we impose on the civil liberties of someone else. the government shouldnt me checking to make sure we are all doing it right. No drunk drivers should be arrested until a real law is broken. You can argue he threatened the safety of the public, bu the public has no inherent right to safety - thats why cops patrol the streets.

Im sorry for making this political but it just always suprises me how we championed our wars with cries of "they hate our freedom" but we are so quick to give ours away at home. Also, funny how EVERY bar has parking lot...hmmm
Click to expand...

Until you have your wife and daughter killed by a drunk driver, shut the F up! I love the canes, but if any player is driving drunk, and perhaps trying to grope women he forced over, he should not worry about football, he needs to worry about jail.
Click to expand...

Forcefully groping a woman is assault driving drunk is....driving. Im sorry you lost your wife and daughter, i truly am but you should be screaming out against RECKLESS driving not drunk driving.

There are already laws for reckless drivers who kill people. DUI laws are special laws for people who havent broken any laws yet.

In this Country, if you have a permit you can walk around with a concealed weapon (some states you dont need a permit) and it is perfectly legal as is drinking. But what you CANNOT do is arrest that person for going into a mall or movie theater because he may shoot the pace up.

Laws should not be made based on emotions and thats how DUI laws came to be (MADD). Theres a reason victims and families of victims do not serve on the jury of the case.

AND I know close to a dozen people that have been killed by RECKLESS drivers. But my loss and your loss doesnt give us the right to impose on the freedom of others
Click to expand...

You should stop using analogies. You're not good at it.

If you can't comprehend the difference between reckless driving and drunk driving, then you probably shouldn't be driving yourself.
 
Years ago when the blood alcohol limit was .12 Congress was getting heat from various groups to lower the legal blood alcohol limit for DUI's. Congress asked the AMA to review the matter advise them at what level drivers became too impaired to safely drive. The AMA (American Medical Assoc.), at that time, came back with .12 - the per se limit already in effect. Congress didn't like that and said think again. The AMA thought again and that lead to the reduction to .10. MADD and other groups are a very powerful lobby and got Congress to lower the limit again to .08. A set limit set as a result of politics more so than science - although to be fair small amounts of alcohol has been shown to reduce driver reaction times etc..

About two years ago MADD and Company lobbied to get the limit for adults lowered again to .06. Congress told them no. At .06 most adults would not feel any appreciable effects from alcohol and would not be less safe to drive. Mark Walton blew a .056. He is charged with DUI due to the .02 per se limit for persons under the age of 21 who are not legally allowed to drink at all.
 
This thread...

mcmurphy-pillow-o.gif
 
John77 said:
mossmadness said:
TpaBayFlyFisher said:
There are some activities that carry so much risk of harm to others that society rightfully criminalizes it. It is perfectly legal to drink yourself into a coma sitting in front of your TV. But, get into the ****pit of a jumbo jet and start drinking and you will go to jail even if the jet lands itself. And, I agree with that. Should Walton go to jail for 40 years for passing out in his car? Of course not. But, I for one would expect a drunk in a car to be punished by society.
Click to expand...

Driving drunk is not one of those activities. The relative risk increase is next to nothing.
Click to expand...

This is incredibly false and there is a massive amount of literature that says you are wrong. Just one quick example, in 1988 the government, Harvard, and some major news outlets started to promote the idea of a designated driver and drinking and driving fatalities declined by 24%. By 1998 50,000 lives were saved.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/chc/harvard-alcohol-project/
Click to expand...
I think we're saving too many lives. Drunk driving thins the herd a little, and, as this message board irrefutably proves, society needs a haircut.
 
Advertisement
When will this thread end? We got people calling for our number 1 back, coming out of spring, to be kicked off the team for a dui, in which he blew below the legal limit. Can't make this level of idiocy up.
 
Advertisement
cooks002 said:
A man believed to be Canes RB Mark Walton allegedly pulled over a female, claimed he was an off-duty police officer, grabbed the women's hands, and started rubbing his genital area against her back.

Just in: Details on incident possibly involving Mark Walton ? Slater Scoops
Click to expand...

So the cops call him "Salomon" in the police report, but this bozo Slater feels like it's Walton because they wore the same sort of chain? He better be dead certain that this was Walton because he's wide open to getting his *** sued for defaming Walton if it wasn't him.
 
The lady who has been on Twitter says,"Complainant gave cops a phone # for the person who she says stopped her/posed as cop. Name that comes back registered to that #: Mark Walton"
 
Back
Top