Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 1) 314

by flyneye (#48684107) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

They chose to be impaired, so YES they used up their choice.
Victims of drunks had no choice. So drunks should have no choice in being killed for killing.
After I stopped and thought about it a bit, it still sounds too nice without torturing the drunk for days before you tire of him and end his worthless life.

Comment: Re:How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 2) 314

by flyneye (#48684095) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

Playing GTA5 only puts the choice before you.
Alcohol shouldn't be illegal either, driving drunk should remove your license to drive forever, and drunk driving that kills should end the drunks life forever as well.
We CAN improve society by eliminating those who kill by drunk .
There is no given, that not being able to drive causes crime. If you choose not to adapt to your new , low station in life and commit a crime, then pay for your crime. If there is an undue burden on the state to process a vast bulk of prisoners, then, ACLU be damned, the road gangs need be started back up to make sure the prisoners have enough funds to eat while in prison, have heat, guards, light and all the expenses that they incur because we LET THEM LIVE preserved ,away from societies murderous hate for them. Yup, forced labor is better than bread and water in an unheated cell.
Road crews, farm crews, scrap crews, there are all kinds of jobs for a prisoner with a shotgun on head and a chain on his ankle. We should do this regardless of the outcome of drunk laws.

Comment: Re:How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 1) 314

by flyneye (#48684057) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

It's reasonable to take away their lives and freedom before they do the same by driving drunk and killing again.
No death? O.K. take away their license and they can be free to struggle to live without personal transportation, big fuckin deal.
Criminals because of limited transportation? More than half the world doesn't own a car and probably doesn't drive on either.
No excuses. If you are a criminal, pay the price just like any other day. So, probably best just to kill the ones that hurt or kill others and hope the would be criminals adjust to the brave new world. If not, lay one on top of the other so it only uses one bullet to kill both and save the cost of ammo.

Comment: Re:How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 1) 314

by flyneye (#48684033) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

Like I said to you above, don't ruin their lives, take their lives. That is the safest, cheapest, best solution to this problem.
The mercy could be; if you didn't kill anyone driving drunk, you only get your license pulled for the rest of your life. Tough shit.
Better to have a few would-be drunk drivers who never enjoy the benefit of driving again and adapt to their new poor lifestyle, than to continue with this catch and release cycle with the vain fantasy that recidivism doesn't exist.
Nope, time to make an end and an ACTUAL solution that works for EVERYBODY; this!

Comment: Re:How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 1) 314

by flyneye (#48683959) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

Dumbass! Do you realize how many drunk drivers you are locking up? Do you realize what that costs? Do you realize you end up PAYING to preserve these fuckheads? Do you know what it costs to keep a single prisoner for even 3 months? Look it up, I'll wait, your state may be different than mine, but I bet not.

Take their license away permanently if caught driving drunk.
If they kill while driving drunk take their life away.
No one deserves a second chance to endanger others for their trivial reasons.
No one should have to pay the way for a dangerous drunk to prosper and thrive.
Not human just kill them. Don't care what you rationalize.
If you're not on the same page with me, perhaps you will be the drunk that deserves to die.
Think about it.

Comment: Re:How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 1) 314

by flyneye (#48683913) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

I'd rather ruin their lives than let them endanger mine. I mean fuck them really! Ever had anyone killed by a drunk driver? Permanently injured? Ruined your car?
Well, fuck drunks boy! I wish we could just go right ahead and put them down with a pistol right there on the side of the road for the garbage truck to pick up.
I don't care if you want to get drunk. Just don't drive after you do it. Simple, no? BUT, poor drunkypoo just can't bother to get a ride and just HAS to get his car home, if he buys a cab, well thats just throwing away good drinking money. Yeah, I think to myself, I've lost enough to drunks, if a drunk ever EVER causes me loss, ever again, I would be glad to kill him and his family just so those bad ol drunk genetics don't bother anyone ever again and IT WOULD BE WORTH IT to myself and society at large. NO, I can't think of a single redeeming quality anyone could have that would justify letting them use up air after they take MY life in their hands for their pathetic reasons. You just can't weigh the scales with anything in favor of the drunk. Just kill them when they drive and quit telling me how human they are and how they deserve a CHANCE. Fuck no they don't deserve a chance, they deserve to have rum poured over them and light them on fire for amusement.
They're LUCKY to have interlocks and stupid fuckhead cops to protect them. Now I'm mad and considering going back to my teen game of roll the drunks for fun and money.(may take their car too)

Comment: Re: How about mandatory felony sentences instead? (Score 3, Funny) 314

by flyneye (#48683889) Attached to: Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices

I was gonna say, there's laws like that here too. California just catching on? I guess that explains a few things.
I work with an asshole driving with an interlock. They don't work well in anyones case, from reports I've heard over the years.
That means, when they randomly shut the car off in traffic, to check to see if you had a drink, they may not start back up for several minutes...or at all.
Guess no one cares to work the bugs out of these poor tech contraptions, but, that makes it even funnier to point out to the drunk when he complains, that if he weren't out there endangering everyone, he wouldn't have to drive with an interlock and how funny it is that he is just another fucked drunk. If he continues, I just talk about the old Denver sport of lighting drunks on fire in alleys and how no one misses them anyway. That gets them back to their work and out of my face....
They drive drunk endangering ME and MINE and suddenly I'm the insensitive one, LOL!!

Comment: Re:60 Minutes Pushing Propaganda? (Score -1) 409

by flyneye (#48513629) Attached to: Is Chernobyl Still Dangerous? Was 60 Minutes Pushing Propaganda?

60 min. barely had any credibility when Cronkite worked it.
There isn't a single news program out there, from national to local, that isn't involved in ratings chasing SPIN.
Just because you want news, the facts, to know what really happened, doesn't mean you get it.
You get whatever keeps their program afloat, news doesn't provide enough security to run a show.
Try this experiment; Want the news, as hard as you can in one hand, shit as much as you can in the other hand, now, observe which hand has more in it.
And that's the way it is; Dec.3 2014......

Comment: Re:Consider this (Score 1) 262

by flyneye (#48511405) Attached to: Obama Offers Funding For 50,000 Police Body Cameras

No, no. No action, nothing to see in victims misery.
I'm talkin live action CRIME. Bad boys, bad boys whatcha gonna do? They can blur the innocent, hell, the gov't redacts docs, no difference.
I don't want to see every damn kitten up a tree saved, but I do want to see the shootouts, the thieves caught, the assaults halted,the meth labs closed and ALL the other shit the two bit swine ARE supposed to be doing with all this high tech equipment, instead of the usual patrolmen driving too fast between donut stops, traffic stops,piss stops, food stops,domestic disputes(also not on the menu, because it doesn't affect ME), hassling ethnics/teens/homeless, sneaking a joint under the overpass, etc. I think they should be subject to random camera checks where the boss looks in through their cams, whenever the mood strikes.
          So fuck you and your self righteous, poorly thought attempt at condescension.

If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.

Working...