Two doctors and an HMO manager died and lined up at the pearly gates for admission to heaven. St. Peter asked them to identify themselves. One doctor stepped forward and said, “I was a pediatric spine surgeon and helped kids overcome their deformities.” St. Peter said, “You can enter.”
he second doctor said, “I was a psychiatrist. I helped people rehabilitate themselves.” St. Peter also invited him in. The third applicant stepped forward and said, “I was an HMO manager. I helped people get cost-effective health care.” St. Peter said, “You can come in, too.” But as the HMO manager walked by, St. Peter added, “You can stay three days. After that, you can go to Hell.”
Copyright (c) 2003 Beliefnet, Inc. All rights reserved.
Having a alcohol level in blood test to determine capability of driving is kinda like measuring the water level in a pool to determine if you can swim. The issue is and always will be can the individual drive. Yes I know alcohol impairs driving. so do my other things, heart attacks, seizers, unruly children, cell phones. Shall I go on. I do not understand why our whole legal system is devoted to the drinking not the drivingIn a better world I would pursue a little different way. First I think of anyone that abuses alcohol is an alcoholic (maybe not true but good for this point). I do not believe a nonalcoholic gets more than one DUI. I have from many experiences from Al-Anon friends telling their experiences trying to keep their loved ones (alcoholics) from drinking. Things such as pouring out liquor, hiding liquor, punishing the alcoholic by withholding sex, money and the list goes on. When they join a fellowship of people trying to recover they try to avoid these acts and try to focus upon the unacceptable behavior and let the drinking rest. These experiences lead me to many conclusion on alcohol/drugs use and abuse. The question you and I are discussing is the impairment alcohol has upon driving.
Before getting into the substantive nature of this discussion let us talk some about highway safety. We have been using automobile for a method of transportation for about 100 years. During that time we have had about 4 or 5 time the number of deaths on our highways than have been killed in all the wars since the beginning of the Nation. The president of the United States is responsible for our national security. If our security is in doubt then the President must pay the political price. We have no office that our highway safety can be held accountable for all those deaths. We have laws we hope work. We have maintenance crews that we hope do their job. We have police that are suppose to enforce the laws we hope work, but these folks are much more incline to get into a car chase to get their adrenaline running than enforcing highways laws. To say the least it ain’t working.
I purpose the we create an agency that can be held politically responsible for moving people and materials across our country in a safe manner. This agency would write regulations under legislative review and be give authority to enforce these regulations, not laws. This agency would keep records, in their jurisdiction, man/miles driven, tons/miles transported, property damaged via accidents, personally injuries, and deaths. These records will be use to better regulate the movement of of vehicles on our highways.
The agency would only have limited powers: Issue license to use the highway, take away the right to use the highway, confiscate property that does not meet the standard the agency has set. of course they could on hold property until it is brought to standard. Regulator would be in van with 2 or 3 people with computers and any other aids they would need to enforce these regulations. Drivers will be stop and a decision on the spot as to violation of the rules. Upon minor violations the license will be electrically tagged and noted in computer files. When stopping a person impaired a physical test will be given (they do this now). Determination will be made if the individual can drive or no. If no the individual will summons transportation his driver license will be taken his automobile impounded. If he wishes get his car he will report to the agency in 24 to 48 hrs and he will be physically check again for impairment if not impaired he will be given his license back with it electrically tagged so he can be tracked as a person that drives impaired.
Someone driving without license will go before the court for action in the judicial system
NITRO, W.Va. (AP) – The man who won the largest single lottery jackpot in U.S. history is in trouble again.
It is not whether you are drunk, it is whether you can drive. That should be the only legal test nothing more nothing less, but I do not create the laws.Drunk or not v. Can you drive or not
In Weirdharold’s perfect world the issue here is not possession of marijuana, but could he drive an automobile on a public highway. A manuel test on the site could determine that in about 5 minutes. The officer could make a decision from that and act accordingly and we would have never seen this in the news and our police would have their focus on insuring domestic tranquility. They could take their focus off what we inhale, ingest, inject or insert into our bodiesNot a perfect world
Surprise, surprise is anybody watching the evidence room. Of course not they are all dipping into it just like this turkey. Now tell me, which is worse drug or drug enforcement. I have posted 4 articles in the past 24 hours where the enforcers’ actions are far worse that the drug users SolutionEx-police
Folks which is worse drugs or drug enforcement. Police dogs going through schools is teaching nothing but intolerance. This stupidity can make a person cry.Stupidity
Everything I say about alcoholism I believe to be true of drug addiction. In 1914 our country started a program to make drug sales illegal, (central nervous system depressants, stimulants, hallucinogens.) Billy Sunday and his friends continued to help create the 18th AmendmentThis law had such a public backlash that it was repealed in just 15 years. The drug laws have not been so fortunate. These laws were made and crimes were created that had never been committed all with the thought if we keep drug away from the common guy he will not be disruptive. This thought has lots of errors. One is that drug addicts and alcoholics are too dumb make drugs or build stills. The capitalist idea if there is a market someone will capitalize on it legal or illegal . The other thought in error is all the users of these products will honor our laws and refrain from their use. The true drug addict and alcoholic can rationalize the use of these items sorta like a Moslem can justify spanking his wife.
The manufacturing, transporting, possession, and selling of drugs or alcohol dose not disrupt our domestic tranquillity. nor does earning money from these activities. The selling of these products can easily be conducted in a dishonest manner thus should be regulated not illgal Selling Drugs
All this legislation was created because we have a little problem with the behavior of some addict and alcoholics. Reckon we could deal with the misbehavior of the folks and forget about these other laws and the disruptive effort to enforce them.
Then we have this group of folks who believe they can save people from becoming drug addict and alcoholics. well I say to them please read Letter to Sam Donaldson
Also I would like to say, if you truly believe you can save or help an addict or alcoholic go to Al-Anon
This is supposedly a true story …
An elderly Florida lady did her shopping,
and upon returning to her car, found four males in the act of
leaving with her vehicle. She dropped her shopping bags and
drew her handgun, proceeding to scream at the top of her
voice, “I have a gun, and I know how to use it!
Get out of the car!” the four men didn’t wait for a second
They got out and ran like mad. The lady, somewhat shaken, then
proceeded to load her shopping bags into the back of the car and
got into driver’s seat. She was so shaken that she could not get
her key into the ignition. She tried and tried, and then it dawned
on her why.
A few minutes later, she found her own car parked four or five
spaces farther down. She loaded her bags into the car and drove
to the Police station.. The sergeant to whom she told the story
couldn’t stop laughing. He pointed! to the other end of the counter,
where four pale men were reporting a car jacking by a mad,
elderly woman described as white, less than five feet tall,
glasses, curly white hair, and carrying a large handgun.
No charges were filed.
AH, SENIOR MOMENTS
At 85 years of age, Morris married Lou Anne, a
lovely 25 year old. Since her new husband is so old, Lou Anne decides
that after their wedding celebration that she and Morris should have
separate bedrooms, because she is concerned that her new but aged
husband may overexert himself if they spend the entire night together.
After the wedding festivities Lou Anne prepares herself for bed and the
expected “knock” on the door. Sure enough the knock comes, the door
opens and there is Morris, her 85 year old groom ready for action. They
unite as one. All goes well, Morris takes leave of his bride, and she
prepares to go to sleep. After a few minutes, Lou Anne hears another
knock on her bedroom door, and it’s Morris. Again he is ready for more
“action”. Somewhat surprised Lou Anne consents for more coupling. When
the newlyweds are done, Morris kisses his bride, bids her a fond
goodnight and leaves. She is set to go to sleep again, but aha you
guessed it – Morris is back again, rapping on the door, and is as fresh
as a 25 year old ready for more “action”. And once again they enjoy each
other. But as Morris set to leave again, his young bride says to
him: “I am thoroughly impressed that at your age you can perform so well
and so often. I have been with guys less than a third of your age who
were only good once. You are truly a great lover, Morris” Morris,
somewhat embarrassed, turns to Lou Anne and says: “You mean I was here
There is a good editorial over at the Star Tribune talking about the was in Iraq. The basic premise is that the things we were told about why we were going to War were not really true. Check it out. I particularly like the last paragraph of the article.
Note, apparently you have to register to read the article. I somehow originally got to it without registering, but now I can’t get to it. Maybe the first time you check out the link, you don’t have to register. I don’t know.