Personal Freedom vs. Public Welfare

[Arthur Brain]

but you are, artie

you are, demonstrably, retarded

not intellectually, not cognitively

you are retarded in your degree of reasoning development

Like a child, you reason based on emotion. Fact based reasoning and logic is a foreign tongue to you. Your reasoning is developmentally delayed, it is stunted, it is retarded, at the level of emotional reasoning. You treat emotions as facts.

And I realize that all this is beyond you, that all it will get in response is more angry emotion :sigh:

Wow, the level of angry projection in this is fascinating. The whole passive aggressive, almost reasonable tone with an attempt at subtle condescension and the implied superiority on your part as if what you're saying is substantive. Honestly, it is fascinating as to why you persist with it because you're just making yourself look like a kid who forgot to do his homework. You seem to forget that your whole shtick in this regard has been undone before. You even undid yourself with it with your bizarre obsession with TH to the point that even Knight kicked you into touch with it. Remember your bonkers stuff where it came to placing a bet on his lawyer credentials? The one you lost?

The arguments against driving while drunk are based on reason, logic and fact, ones that you've been presented with time and again. The law in regards to such is not based on emotion itself so enjoy your boat ride, sober up a bit and then address the topic like an adult.

(if possible...)

 

[ok doser]

A "point" that ...

is simple and easy to understand: A law is unjust if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.

... attempt at justifying breaking the law ...

no, it wasn't doing that

it was an attempt to answer the questions asked in the OP

It wasn't a scenario either.

Yes, it was. A scenario used to illustrate a point I was making in a conversation with Chair.

You described ...

... a scenario to illustrate a point I was making in a conversation with Chair

 

[ok doser]

L:freak:L

(PS.: Do you like how I've stolen the most powerful debate weapon you have ever had in your arsenal on TOL, and started making it the centerpiece of my LOLZ?)

i like

 

[7djengo7]

i like

Considering how much of his own time Arthur Brain has wasted by attacking my use of "LOL" on TOL--it's kind of like he's made the 'O' into a bullseye for his angry lashings out; so I figure, why not cause him to have to take shots at his own ploy in so doing.

Don't know if I've mentioned it before, but I had never used--or thought to use--"LOL" on TOL before I began using it in replies to Arthur Brain's ravings.:flamer:

 

[quip]

is simple and easy to understand: A law is unjust if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.

Nobody disagrees with that.
you just haven't made its case as to drinking and driving. :idunno:

 

[ok doser]

Nobody disagrees with that.
you just haven't made its case as to drinking and driving. :idunno:

Ok :idunno:

 

[quip]

Ok :idunno:

:cheers:

 

[ok doser]

Considering how much of his own time Arthur Brain has wasted by attacking my use of "LOL" on TOL--it's kind of like he's made the 'O' into a bullseye for his angry lashings out; so I figure, why not cause him to have to take shots at his own ploy in so doing.

Don't know if I've mentioned it before, but I had never used--or thought to use--"LOL" on TOL before I began using it in replies to Arthur Brain's ravings.:flamer:

He's a curiously aggressive and abrasive little fellow - always reminds me of Yosemite Sam, hopping around angry all the time, spewing hilariously retarded insults - I know he's violently triggered by discussions about rape, because he has a friend who was raped. And I know he's violently triggered by discussions about the Nazi/Jewish Holocaust, because he visited Auschwitz once. This bizarrely violent triggering by a mention of drunk driving is new to me.

 

[Arthur Brain]

is simple and easy to understand: A law is unjust if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.



no, it wasn't doing that

it was an attempt to answer the questions asked in the OP



Yes, it was. A scenario used to illustrate a point I was making in a conversation with Chair.




... a scenario to illustrate a point I was making in a conversation with Chair

No, it isn't, not where a person engages in criminal activity where there is a significant potential to cause harm even if none ensues, like driving while drunk. Simple as that.

 

[Arthur Brain]

He's a curiously aggressive and abrasive little fellow - always reminds me of Yosemite Sam, hopping around angry all the time, spewing hilariously retarded insults - I know he's violently triggered by discussions about rape, because he has a friend who was raped. And I know he's violently triggered by discussions about the Nazi/Jewish Holocaust, because he visited Auschwitz once. This bizarrely violent triggering by a mention of drunk driving is new to me.

Hardly, I'm not immature enough to go around calling people "tards" for one thing. You seem to be smarting because you can't justify your own irresponsible behaviour where it comes to getting drunk and driving a car. Again, a simple solution. Don't do it.

 

[ok doser]

doser:

A law is unjust if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.

.. not where a person engages in ... activity where there is a significant potential to cause harm even if none ensues ....

So, my position is: A law is unjust if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.

artie's position is: A law is just if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.


Seems pretty retarded to me, but I expected nothing less. :idunno:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Considering how much of his own time Arthur Brain has wasted by attacking my use of "LOL" on TOL--it's kind of like he's made the 'O' into a bullseye for his angry lashings out; so I figure, why not cause him to have to take shots at his own ploy in so doing.

Don't know if I've mentioned it before, but I had never used--or thought to use--"LOL" on TOL before I began using it in replies to Arthur Brain's ravings.:flamer:

Hey kid, use it all you want. Just don't pretend that I had anything to do with it lol...

Oops...

 

[ok doser]

Hardly, I'm not immature enough to go around calling people "tards" for one thing.

It's an apt descriptor of your stunted reasoning development, as explained earlier.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Should getting oneself drunk be considered a criminal act? Yes or No?

If not, then why not, you hypocrite?

L:freak:L

(PS.: Do you like how I've stolen the most powerful debate weapon you have ever had in your arsenal on TOL, and started making it the centerpiece of my LOLZ?)

No, it shouldn't. Getting drunk in itself is not a crime. Driving while drunk is. No hypocrisy here.

Oh, it's just beautiful. The height of intellectual acumen and maturity all encapsulated into some...thing...

Kudos!

 

[ok doser]

7d7 asks a direct and simple question:

Should getting oneself drunk be considered a criminal act? Yes or No?

artie struggles to answer a different question:

Getting drunk in itself is not a crime.

:sigh:

it's like dealing with a child

a retarded child :sigh:

 

[Arthur Brain]

i like

Well of course you would...

Haven't you capsized yet and blamed the water?

 

[Arthur Brain]

doser:



So, my position is: A law is unjust if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.

artie's position is: A law is just if it seeks to punish people who have caused no harm.


Seems pretty retarded to me, but I expected nothing less. :idunno:

Um, nooooooo. A law is unjust if it punishes people who engage in an activity that has no potential to cause harm. What you have engaged in is an activity that most definitely has the potential to cause harm and has done so on countless occasions.

Are you drunk?

 

[annabenedetti]

Well of course you would...

Haven't you capsized yet and blamed the water?

:chuckle:

 

[Arthur Brain]

7d7 asks a direct and simple question:

artie struggles to answer a different question:

:sigh:

it's like dealing with a child

a retarded child :sigh:

Hmm, is it a crime to get drunk? No. Pretty straightforward and answered as such.

Is it a crime to get drunk and drive? Hmm, yep, it is. Again, pretty straightforward.

Are you drunk?

 

[Arthur Brain]

It's an apt descriptor of your stunted reasoning development, as explained earlier.

Nah, it's just you acting like a dipstick. You have no room to blabber on about emotional maturity given your track record of obsessive stalking on here. Who on earth would be so much of a kid to challenge another poster on their obvious legal credentials on pain of a permanent ban on here? Just you.

I've never been banned on here for that kind of whacko stuff.

(Stop driving while drunk).