DUI checkpoints and 'no refusal' weekends

[Into the Night]

Why should anyone believe what your friend, the one YOU said was "somewhat shitfaced", when it comes to his opinion? If he was that intoxicated, enough to not drive, how can his judgment be trusted?

Irrelevant. He was not driving. It is perfectly legal to get shitfaced.

 

[Into the Night]

Into the ground? According to his "logic" you could fire it AT them and as long as it didn't hit them there is no victim or crime.

Yes there is. Discharging a gun in a dangerous and careless manner.

 

[Scut Farkus]

It's neither, fuckhead. Learn what words mean.

I'm not in a popularity contest. Don't care if a bunch of whiny drunks get pissed at me because I don't want to see INNOCENT people killed because they think it's OK to drive after drinking.

why are you so invested in lies? what do you think you're doing with your life?

 

[Into the Night]

so you can find anywhere the founders believed you had an absolute right to do what you want to do. Not man enough to admit it, huh.

I'm not the one that has a dishonorable discharge from the military. That's you, boy.

Bulverism fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Not the wording but the meaning.

Word salad. Try again.

SCOTUS does not have authority to change the Constitution.

 

[Into the Night]

STY believes it's OK to drive drunk as long as you don't hurt/injure/kill an innocent person.

Repetitive distortions and contextomy fallacies. RDCF.

 

[Into the Night]

No one said he was. By your own words, he wasn't driving because he was "somewhat shitfaced". That means his judgment was impaired yet you absolutely accept his claim that the cop was an asshole. To make such a claim he'd have to be able to do what you admit he was incapable of doing based on his condition. If his judgment ability was good enough to make such a claim, why wasn't he capable of driving.

irrelevance fallacy. This has nothing to do with drunk driving or sobriety checkpoints.

 

[Into the Night]

Poor baby was inconvenienced and it hurt his feelings.

Yet another lame insult fallacy, no argument presented. YALIFNAP

 

[Into the Night]

So you admit your friend couldn't make a rational decision.

Irrelevance fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

You claim there was no reason because you got your feelings hurt by being a little inconvenienced.

There was no reason to stop the car.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes. If he's too impaired to drive, he's too impaired to make that type of judgment. He can't be both.

No one questions who was driving and who was the passenger.

Irrelevance fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

You proved they were. You got mad because you were inconvenienced and blamed it on someone else. That's the progressive mentality.

Redefinition fallacy (constitution<->progressive mentality). Irrelevance fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Your determination was made because you didn't like being inconvenienced. Your friend's determination is invalid because, according to you, he didn't have the ability to make good judgments.

There was no reason to stop the car or suspect drunk driving. The amount of alcohol the passenger drank is inconsequential. It is legal to get shitfaced.

 

[Into the Night]

Another drunk that can't stay out from behind the wheel. Hopefully you'll wreck with your family the car. As long as you don't hurt/kill innocent people, who gives a shit about you.

WTF???? Who said anything about NiftyNiblick driving while drunk, besides YOU????

 

[Into the Night]

Then he should have been able to drive.

Why?

Since by your own words he couldn't, your judgment ability is in question.

Non-sequitur fallacy.

Sad how you trust someone you admit is a drunk over someone that hasn't had a drink for a far longer period of time than you've been alive.

I agree with his judgement and his reasoning. Bulverism fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

I drove, you fool! I picked him up at his house and took him home. And what the hell are you talking about, anyway? Longer than I've been alive????? DUH!!

He is trying to condemn your passenger for being legal.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

It's neither, fuckhead. Learn what words mean.

you should take your own fucking advice, because you CLAIM to know what the founders meant, but can't produce their words.....................

 

[Into the Night]

No one says you didn't drive. Why didn't he drive?

The reason was stated. He was drunk. That's legal, you know.

You claim he had enough judgment to make a rational decision about the police and pool shots yet claim he didn't have enough judgment to be able to drive.

Irrelevance fallacy.

He can't be rational enough to do that but not rational enough to drive. It can't be both.

Yes it can.

 

[Into the Night]

Sure, you drink. It is all over your writing that you drink. But if you were not drinking, no one gives a fuck if you like or not like checkpoints. Your opinion is yours and beholden not on anyone else.

Fallacy fallacy, based on a circular argument fallacy. You do not get to speak for anyone else but you. You don't get to dictate another's opinion. You are not the king.

 

[Into the Night]

Fuck your 'fuck you,' R B 60. No one cares what you think. If you post, you are fair game. Start telling the truth, whiner.

You don't get to speak for anyone but you. Fallacy fallacy.