As long as you break the law, you are immoral.

thank you billnewbie:) really it was a good convo and you ended up on my side. used responsibly in moderation(if legal) what i do would not be a problem. NOW, do you understand why i do what i do. that last hurdle(legal) is definetey a reality. my right, not my job, is to educate AS MANY people as i possibly can so when its time to vote i will hopefully no longer be immoral in many people eyes. good evening sir.

That's what's meant by moderation, stopping before you're inebriated.

it sounds to me like yer chasing yer own tail...even in your mind if legal it would be morally neutral and all my arugments would then apply.but i thought you said insobriety itself was immoral...

I agree that people disagree about morality, but morality is itself not subject to perspective as I have shown in my other posts. Like the law, people argue about the fine points of morality like lawyers argue about the fine points of law. And like the law, morality has a judge that confirms or denies the definitions of those fine points, and that is called a conscience. Many people control their consciences where it relates to the things they want to do to the point that they no longer hear it, but they rely on the consciences of others when they feel that they have been wronged such as when they appeal to the conscience of you and me when we sit on a jury or when they appeal to public opinion as politicians do and you do when you advocate for your cause using the hypocrisy of legal alcohol as an appeal to the collective conscience in favor of marijuana.
I will concede that the legal possession of marijuana, if that ever happens, and its use in moderation could be held by some (myself included) to be morally neutral, neither right nor wrong, and all your arguments of it being harmless would then apply. But some would disagree on other valid arguments. That is not morality by perspective, it is a disagreement about facts. For instance, we all agree that to get angry to the point of rage is immoral, but there is such a thing as righteous indignation. At what point does righteous indignation cross the line into immoral rage? That is what’s debatable. Certainly, we don’t want those prone to rage to decide where that line is without debate, and when the majority of us decide where that line is, we compel those prone to rage to obey the standard we set by force of law. We use our collective consciences to set that line.
You have free will to decide for yourself what you will do and a conscience to remind you of what is right and what is wrong. You are free to do the immoral, provided it is not illegal, and you can convince yourself that it’s O.K. but whether it is O.K. is ultimately a matter of conscience which is well developed in some and crippled in others with various degrees in between.

you just proved my point. morality is questionsable and open for debate. how can you debate something if theres not two dift PERSPECTIVES on the subject. and i wont agree that insobriety is immoral. abuse perhaps. but are you gonna tell the 3 people who read these posts;) that they are immoral if they get drunk?? i think youll find LOTS of peeps who disagree with that. we are in wisconsin;)

If it's legal, you can have all you want legally, but the morality of it is still questionable and open to debate. As I said before, insobriety is immoral, no matter what intoxicant is used. How often do you use marijuana just because you like the taste and smell, without the objective of being intoxicated?

good post. so the only thing immoral about my activities is that its illegal yes, from your perspective, if its legal i can have all i can carry morally??

The only way to settle the question of morality is through reason and logic. We also each have a conscience that nags us to do the right thing in spite of what we want to do which, with practice, we can learn to ignore and many ignore it completely. Some who cannot completely ignore their consciences become skilled in the art of rationalization. In other words, they suppress their guilt (the conscience) by convincing themselves that they had a good reason to do that thing which that little voice inside their heads said “don’t do that, it’s wrong”. After a while, and many rationalizations, the conscience becomes muted and the rationalizations become a code of conduct that some call situational ethics or moral relativism.
The Catholic Church, and many Protestant Churches, believes that homosexuality is wrong based on tradition and biblical interpretation. They also believe that the God that created us gave us free will to decide for ourselves what we should do. They believe also that God instituted human government to restrain the immorality that humans are prone to do. The reason that some immorality is illegal while other immorality is not is a mater of choice by the government about what kind of behavior it will control. Your government, a government of the people, by the people and for the people, has decided to outlaw marijuana. This law is not the dictate of an autocrat, such as an emperor or king, who issues edicts based on what he wants, but rather the laws against marijuana we instituted by our representatives acting in our name due to the fact that they were elected to their offices by us. Our current representatives uphold those laws by leaving them in force. When you and those of like mind can convince those representatives to change the law, then you can have all the marijuana you can carry.
There are many immoralities that are legal. You object to the paradox that your favorite immorality is illegal while other, more dangerous immoralities are not. I object to that paradox, too. But rather than legalizing more immorality, I would prefer that more immoralities were illegal.

as i said before, i understand why peeps see what i do as immoral, simply cuz it is illegal. you and lots of people say its immoral, i and lots of people say its not. whos rite?? and how do you determine whos rite?? the act of marijuana possession/consumption is far from immoral. there are NO innocent people affected or even at risk by my possession/consumption. as for the pols regarding the tavern league. the pols are suppose to do whats in the best interest of the voters. not raising alcohol tax while they raise all others is not in our best interest and depending on yer perspective;) could be immoral. i dont blame the tavern league for not wanting higher taxes or think what they do is immoral, their job is to protect the taverns. if in the next few years its medically cleared in wi or de-criminalized, when my kids are a bit older i will have no problem explaining what i do and why i do it and why they shouldnt until they meet whatever requirements are included in the updated rules. i will also explain that if they chose to not follow those laws its no one but them who will face the consequences. they will not know otherwise cuz unlike the legal 'eviler of two evils' and tobacco what i do is illegal and its not done in the open or by no means in front of my children. i can risk judgement but its not my job to risk someone judging them cuz of what i do. if moral/immoral is independant of perspective, then why do millions of people smoke pot?? how can it be medically smoked in 12 states?? legally smoked in other countries?? if as you believe its not about perspective, without opening another discussion, in a quick answer tell me why the catholic church views homosexuality as immoral yet there are states that allow gays to marry?? isnt that morality question about religous perspective??

Laugh all you like, but if you’re going to claim that morality is a matter of perspective, then the perspective of all people are equivalent without regard for the severity of the actions they choose to commit. My assertion is that morality is independent of perspective and that rape, murder, drunken driving and marijuana possession are all immoral. The difference between those immoral acts is the severity of their effects on the innocent which is why we deal more harshly with rapists and murderers than with marijuana possessors.
I do see the problem with the preferential treatment given the tavern league. My point was that you should not have a problem with this since from the tavern league’s perspective, as well as from the perspective of the politicians, they do no wrong, unless you are willing to concede that their perspective is irrelevant to the morality, or immorality of that preferential treatment. If you concede that perspective is irrelevant to morality on this point, then you must realize that perspective is always irrelevant to morality or you have to say that the tavern league and those politicians (and rapists and murderers too) do no wrong. Your statement that morality is “about perspective” is a house of cards that cannot stand against the turbulence of reason.
By the way, I think your kids will find out. You underestimate their abilities based on their present development. They will very quickly surprise you with how perceptive they will be. You wrote “i will not allow my kids to break the rules i set for them. those rules, including no alcohol or drugs, are in their best interest and welfare in mind”. When they decide that those rules are not in their best interest and they break them anyway, when you challenge their rebellion, how will you respond when they remind you of your own disregard for the rules as they parrot your rationalizations? You say that you will respond the same way as other drinkers and smokers? Perhaps you’ll say “do as I say and not as I do”? Or maybe “You’ll understand when you’re older”? Or “it’s O.K. for me but not for you”? The responses of those millions of parents consistently fail. That is one reason why the incidence of drinking and drug use is so high among middle and high school kids.

chose to *disobey laws

its not the actions of the tavern league that bother me, as much as the politicians who allow it to happen. they raise taxes on gas, tobacco, property, income, sales, but not alcohol. you dont see the problem there??
.
how old must a child be to intoxicate themselves?? i believe there was a whole nother thread about that. we dont need to open that up again but my belief is that its on the child. some kids are ready at 16 and some arent ready at 23.
.
my kids wont find out, but how would i explain its ok for me and not my 12 year old. the same way i would and millions DO if my kid saw me drink a beer or smoke a cigarette(which they wont)
.
do you think that you can legally chose to drink today cuz people were following the alcohol prohibition laws?? nope. you can legally chose alcohol today cuz people werent following the law. they were drinking anyways. unlike marijuana prohibition, alcohol prohibition didnt punish the user. we can chose to obey laws we dont like. if we do that we also risk the penaltys. im well aware of the penalties i face by possessing marijuana. i do it repsonsibly so theres pretty much no risk of that happening, but nonetheless we do have the choice to not obey the laws.
.
i will not allow my kids to break the rules i set for them. those rules, including no alcohol or drugs, are in their best interest and welfare in mind. uncle sam did not have my best interest or welfare in mind when he outlawed marijuana, in fact they literally knew nothing about it.
.
lastly, i think its hilarious that you actually reference murderers, rapists, and drunk drivers in the same morality convo as pot smoking. but im the one whos single minded....

Morality is not a matter of perspective. If it were, then we could not hold drunk drivers responsible for their actions as they could argue that from their perspective they needed to drive to get where they needed to be. The same is true for other activities as well. The man who rapes could argue that from his perspective it was alright to do so as his need was great or that she wanted him to rape her. Haven’t many rapists used that same rationalization? The man that murders could say that from his perspective the victim was preventing his wellbeing.
Human beings have an inherent aptitude to rationalize our behavior. If we can invent a good rationalization, does that justify whatever act we wish to commit?
If we allow morality to be defined by personal preference, which our perspective will most certainly lead to, most will choose what benefits themselves without regard to the consequences born by others.
If morality is a matter of perspective then why do the actions of the tavern league bother you?
How old must a child be for it to become O.K. for them to think they can intoxicate themselves as you apparently believe that it’s O.K. for you to intoxicate yourself?
Your children may be too young to notice, but how long do you think you will be able to hide your activity from them? When they find out, and they decide that they want to smoke marijuana too, will that be O.K. with you? Even if they’re only 10 or 12? If not, how will you explain that it’s O.K. for you but not for them? I suspect that will that change your perspective.
Are all laws subject to the same agreeability standard as marijuana laws? If not, why not?
If we can choose not to obey laws we don’t like, then we have no basis to enforce any law. Will you allow your children to ignore the rules you make that they don’t like?

Wow billnewbie, you best be careful not to break your neck falling from your incredibly high soapbox. Oops, sorry to say "high." I hope that didn't offend you, you clean-livin' saint!

insobriety is immoral?? maybe, but thats all perspective. as you can tell, i personally hide NOTHING about my usage, other than from my kids, and thats not cuz its immoral in my book but cuz i dont want ANY child thinking its ok to intoxicate themselves with ANY drug. their minds arent nearly developed enough. now when they come back from college.....
.
as for being immoral simply cuz its illegal, well i will flat out disagree on that point. there are a ton of immoral things out there that are illegal, and some that arent illegal(cheating, lying). when it was illegal for blacks or women to vote, was that immoral that they wanted to?? or were the laws immoral?? there is nothing immoral about me coming home from work and relaxing how i chose whether that be pot or alcohol. it hurts NO ONE, and theres little evidence EITHER used responsibly will even hurt me in the long run. itnoxication on the roads and risking others lives, thats a dift story altogethor. now, what i do is most def illegal so i can see why people think what i do is immoral simply cuz i DO break the law(daily;). from my perspective, and again millions like me, i think its immoral that uncle sam allows people the option to drink the 'eviler of two evils' even tho we ALL know how many negatives it creates in our society and denies the same taxpaying adults the option to smoke pot. i think its immoral the amount of money we spend every year fighting this 'war on drugs' and those of you who dont smoke dont care. i learned last nite that the wi tavern league have blocked any increase in beer tax since 1969. its 3.6 cents/six pack. that to me is immoral. legal/illegal is clearly defined. moral/immoral is all about perspective.

You want to know why I say your use of marijuana is immoral? It is against the law. More than that, insobriety is immoral. Our own consciences say so when we get drunk or stoned. That’s why, when we were young, we hid our drunkenness from our parents, and later, we hide it from our children and we hide our drunkenness from those whose opinions we care about. When we see a drunk we do not admire his adventurous spirit, rather, we detest his self-indulgence and make fun of his foolishness. Yet we dismiss our own self-indulgence with rationalized excuses such as “as long as I only hurt myself I do no wrong” while consoling ourselves that we have a right to be inebriated. It has been said that rationalization is the second strongest human drive. That is never so clearly on display when people defend their desire to drink or use marijuana or any other intoxicating substance.

i appreciate your opinion billnewbie. im not irritated with you. ill have this discussion with anyone..as im sure yer well aware;) you are wrong about how i am in person. im not unreasonable or irritable. my opinion: you people who refuse to acknowledge that what i say is possible are unreasonable, and look at how many people post their irritation with my posts, rather than just ignoring them. im tops in sales at my company cuz im the complete opposite of that. ive had this convo a million times and ill sit an explain logically my side a million times more. the morality topic hasnt come up yet in this convo, so id actually love to have you 'assess the morality' of my choices. please tell me billnewbie how my pot consumption, in your opinion, is immoral?? you say i'challenge the morality of the laws against marijuana possession and the lack of laws against alcohol consumption. This makes your argument unreasonable'. its not about lack of alcohol cunsumption laws because i do believe free american citizens have the rite to consume alcohol, its more about lack of proper punishment for drunk drivers that bother me. maybe this is why you think i have a warped sense of reality. everyone sees everything different, but i truly dont understand how the prohibition of marijuana and the lack DD punishments makes my argument unreasonable. from my perspective it actually substantiates my argument. if i had made these changes in my life and become who i am with prozac, or any other dr prescribed medicine, or used AA or the church as my crutch, you would all say bravo kid keep up the good work. but instead i found a drug thats been used as a medicine for 10,000 years in every culture in every civilization that works for ME and lots of others like me. im a walking talking preaching ranting science experiment PROVING that like alcohol, repsonsible or irresponsible marijuana consumption is ALL ON THE INDIVIDUAL...

I've challenged your sense of reality and the tone of your replies shows increasing irritation. The source of your irritation, I believe, is that I have challenged the morality of your chosen lifestyle. Like many people, you don't want me to assess the morality of your choices, particularly when those choices are immoral. Yet you challenge the morality of the laws against marijuana possession and the lack of laws against alcohol consumption. This makes your argument unreasonable. You appeal to a sense of morality when it suits your argument and reject it when it does not. You are not likely to be more reasonable in person. In fact, I suspect that you would be even more unreasonable and irritable in person since you have time to consider what you are writing here, but in person your spontaneous responses would be ill considered. You claim to be a good father and a good employee and for all I know, you can walk on water, but my comments are directed toward your claims about marijuana.

beautiful website

http://www.drugdealercindy.com/cindy-mca...

i open my life up and risk prosecution and persecution for my cause. living my life everyday creates my sense of reality and its most certainly not warped. as i said, unless you try smoking marijuana on even a semi regular basis you will not understand how my statement is not senseless. you say 'proof' and 'opinion' regarding the same statement, how is your opinion proof?? that in my opinion is senseless. you want PROOF of what i talk about?? email me. i got NOTHING to hide and id love to have this convo in person with anyone. i dont care if yer a cop or a judge, my knowledge is not illegal. meet me and find out who i am, let me tell and SHOW you how i live my life and raise my children, then look me in the eyes and tell me my sense of reality is warped....

I did't say your life is warped. I said your sense of reality is warped. Your claim that marijuana "DOES make you look deeper into yourself and others" is proof of that. In my opinion, that statement is nonsense. If you were to get sober and stay sober for years you would see what I mean.

perfect time;)

im in sales...i take no offense;) ganja doesnt make you smarter, but unless youve smoked on a regular basis you wont understand how it DOES make you look deeper into yourself and others. im not tryin to turn non-ganja people into ganja people. im tryin to open eyes to the hyprocrisy so WHEN it comes time to vote people may ask an extra question or two. its certainly not my job...but it is most certainly my right....

THEKID....no offense...but I bet you think ganga makes you smarter and able to think deeper too?? You are entitled to your opinions, but your bantering is super old. And to tell you the truth, I don't read any of your comments in full, I just found out you were on a rant again from the others commenting. I don't judge you, that is not my job, but I do think you should stop trying to convert non-ganga people into ganga people. That isn't YOUR job.

PAISLEYSDADDY.....I totally agree with you. My brother is one of those "nothing to lose" people. And quite frankly, that scared the crap out of me. Those people are the ones who would rather be dead themselves (in most cases), and don't care who they take down with them. But fortuneately, those people are a small fraction of our society. Otherwise those public records would be much longer. THANK GOD!

i can truly completely understand why everyone would see me in that light. all you people know about me is what i write on this blog. meet me and youll see the fact is im faaar from single minded. overbearing, on this subject, yes. cuz i KNOW. the murders over drug deals arent victimless, there are however responsible adults sitting, as we type, in jail for mere possession, which IS a victimless crime. legalize/de-criminalize and you will see most of those senseless murders stop. take away the profit you take away the motive. al capone anyone?? wheres the governments accountability in helping to stop these senseless murders?? but im single minded?? i do refuse to accept there are detrimental effects of marijuana use for myself, other than the risk of losing my freedom. im not sayin thats the case for anyone who uses marijuana, but i also know there are MILLIONS of me all over the world who have not seen these so called detrimental effects. plus ill just circle back to the detrimental effects of alcohol or tobacco which i can legally choose to consume. is it 'good' for me. maybe. maybe not. what i KNOW is it has caused not one single negative effect in my entire life. and i know many many smokers who will tell you the same thing. crutch?? sure, cruthes are used to help. i am a better person now than i was 3 years ago. factors for that: my kids, my ex wife, my family, my job, yoga, rollerblading, jack herer, reading, time, patience and MARIJUANA. ive never said it would cure 'many' diseases. there has been a cannabanoid isolated that possibly halts the spread of breast cancer. i didnt perform that study myself. tell me how marijuana is medical in 12 states but not the other 38?? its the same stuff regardless of where yer smoking it. solve the energy crisis?? not solve but certainly not hurt. www.hemp4fuel.com my knowledge/use of marijuana and my justifications have warped reality?? seriously anyone that believes that i invite you to come meet me. my life billnewbie is most certainly a reality. im a good father. a good employee. a good ex. a good friend and a responsible member of society who smokes marijuana on a regular basis. please come show me what part of my life is warped.....

I can think of a couple of negative affects your favorite drug has induced in you.
You are single-minded and overbearing, bringing this subject into every discussion about drinking.
You refuse to acknowledge your complicity in the criminal activity of the murderers that supply you with your drug which would, if you acknowledged it, destroy your “victimless crime” theory.
You refuse to accept that there are any detrimental effects of marijuana.
You seem to believe that your use of it is actually good for you instead of it being a substitutionary crutch for your previous vulnerability for alcohol.
You go so far with your fascination with marijuana that you seem to think it will cure many diseases and solve the energy crisis.
In short, your use of marijuana and your rationalizations for it have warped your sense of reality.

i apologize if i annoy you people. if you dont like what i write...dont read it. bring the word marijuana up around me in person and im worse. i literally tell EVERYONE i can about the hypocrisy. i was arrested for drinkin 12 times in 12 years. yet its STILL legal for me to drink, i choose not to. marijuana has not caused a SINGLE NEGATIVE EFFECT in my life...EVER, yet thats illegal. in fact im in the best physical/mental/financial shape of my life. last weekend i closed the bars down an drove some friends home on fri nite. i walked out of the bars and saw 5 cops standing there watching everyone bail into their cars and drive home...while im a criminal. saturday i went to a birthday party and watched people drink whatever they wanted absolutely free and get in their cars and drive home. sunday at miller park i watched people tailgate drinking countless beers and smoking cancer causing cigarrettes as fast as they could. yet im a criminal if i want to catch a buzz in the same setting?? no one sees why this might irritate me?? you say that alcohol prohibition wasnt successful. has legal alcohol been successful, or should we check the death toll to date?? people dying daily from alcohol. pot prohibition is successful?? really you should do some research on that cuz marijuana use has been virtually unchanged since the whole 'war on drugs' began. i watch people blog on here about 'times are tough, lets stop spending money' yet most people have no problem turning a blind eye to the fact that those numbers havent changed in 40 years and yet we still spend MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR, billions over time, fighting this ridiculous 'war on drugs' and incarcerating people for a VICTIMLESS CRIME. it doesnt affect them directly so why should they care. i dont blame anyone for not caring about the pot laws, but ill certainly try to get you to see it from my perspective. i see a 4th an 5th offense for DD gets 180 days. id get more if i got caught twice POSSESSING ANY AMOUNT OF POT. not selling, not using, not driving, simply POSSESSING. i dont agree that one could argue anything be legal. i will argue that as a 'free' american citizen in these united states that as long as i have the option to intoxicate myself with the 'eviler of two evils' i should 100000% have the option to intoxicate myself with marijuana. in the time it took me to type this more people have died from the DIRECT USE of alcohol or tobacco than have EVER died from marijauna use. ignorance and hypocrisy...were not the criminals. peace....im out.

No, I have no problem with them responding to a rash of recent alcohol incidents. I was just asking the question of what they were responding to; i.e., I wasn't aware the incidents recently were more than usual.

tnimmo89....I can't remember that last time I saw JPD using a radar. That's a fraction of their job. For the person asking about the 'drinking holidays', well, I guess the police a simply responding to a recent rash of alcohol related incidents. Would you rather they did not respond, because it isn't a holiday?

All good points I guess, but your talking to the wrong person. You see I understand the typical responses keep coming. But aren't those arguments simply a deflection from the topic at hand. I mean you could argue anything is bad or anything could be legal. So I agree with those of you who are asking for the comparisons to stop. I wouldn't care if they made alcohol illegal again. That simply won't happen, but marijuana should stay out of the subject and stay illegal! In the mean time, yet another article has popped up about an alcohol related incident. Lets stay focused and gripe about that! Trying to mitigate a hot button subject, gets no where and is a sign you are trying to justify something that shouldn't be justified.

In the meantime, people should assist the efforts and not just ask for 'treatments' and more 'punishments'. Such as telling your friend they should stop, or offering a ride, or partying a heck of alot less....whatever, but do more than just watch the news. Or people will keep doing it until they hurt someone close to you.

Why is a person with 3,4, 5 or more dui's allowed to have a title and/or license plates in there name. If they get the car from a friend then that person should be held as a accomplice as if you let them use a gun. If they say you did not have permission then the charge should be upped to prison time for auto theft. Also the state should be held responsible if they give titles and plates and driver licences to repeat offenders

Soo does this mean that 100% of the efforts of the J.P.D. will no longer be devoted to just radaring??

thekid, the short answer to why marijuana is illegal and alcohol is not: banning alcohol was already tried and failed (read history), whereas banning marijuana is sucessful (at least much more sucessful than banning alcohol). It would make more sense if they both were banned.

About drunk driving, when are the most severe drunk driving days? I thought it was days like Saint Patricks, New Years, etc. I like the idea of cracking down more on drunk drivers, but why now in the summer?

Maybe we should have the gazette pose an article about marijuana so this thekid3477 will stop bringing it up for every other article.

villajanesville, you write good posts. That's why I'm surprised by your nonsequitur below.

A 3 week crackdown...that'll make a big impact...not.

When they legalize marijuana (it is still illegal and its users are still criminals), it will still be illegal to drive under its influence as well.
Some claim that punishing drunk drivers is not the answer. Does that apply to drunk drivers who kill the unsuspecting citizens who share the roads with these alcohol afflicted inebriates who need understanding and not discipline? If I have a few too many and I sit out on my front porch with my rifle intending to pick off a few jack rabbits and I unintentionally pick off a neighbor or two, should I be sentenced to 30 days of rehab and a couple of months worth of public service with 6 month’s psychological treatment thrown in for good measure?

thanx kai. from your fingers to (insert personal belief)s ears;)

thekid,
I love how you bring the criminalization of marijuana into almost all of your posts, especially with stories about alcohol.
I'm actually being serious, by the way. I think that some day soon, within the next few years, drastic steps will finally be taken to decriminalize marijuana.

i agree 110% 8675309. it wont change things. but it may open someones mind to the possibility of a reality other than what theyve been told. i too am sick and tired of seeing 3rd 4th and 5th offenses. drunk drivers are a cancer on our society with no apparent cure. i too would love the pot vs 'the eviler of two evils' debate/education to stop. i actually would love nothing more. unfortunately as long uncle sam lives in hypocrisy by allowing anyone 21 or older the option to drink, and not allow the SAME PERSON the option to smoke a joint, it wont stop. legalize/de-criminalize and most of us will shut up and tend to our garden. too many people out there like myself who are passionate about what we believe in. as far as me blogging about it on the gazette, as ive said before, if you see my name and you dont want to read about the ignorance/hypocrisy of the current marijuana prohibition, you are better off to skip my comment cuz thats what ill be talkin about 99% of the time....

Seriously...pot vs booze argument needs to stop. Blogging on the Gazette extra isn't going to change things. Drunk drivers are killing people and and possibly themselves. It makes me sick to see 3rd, 4th, 5th, ect drunk driving convictions in the paper. When are they going to make the penalties harder for those who CHOOSE to be re-offend.

'a class of people'?? so does it matter if your 4 year old is killed by someone whos never been arrested for DD before?? no it doesnt. the current punishments are enough for you, so if we multiply the punishment 5 times would that change your choice?? no, it would however possibly change the minds of that 'class of people' who dont care. we are just plain to lenient on drunk drivers. period.
.
truecitizen: yes it is a drug that impairs. alcohol is legal, does that impair?? imagine trying to keep it out of the workforce if legal?? umm its in the workforce now, you just dont know it cuz it doesnt affect you like alcohol, which is legal and also in the workforce. does it lead to more drugs?? debatable but perhaps. what does alcohol do?? what does caffeine or nicotine do for that matter. 'people keep dyeing'?? really?? you should google annual marijuana deaths and tell me what you find. ANY negative you have for legal pot i can make the SAME argument and more for your currently legal alcohol. marijuana is a lot like alcohol, only without the ignorance, violence, and hangovers....

I don't understand why people can't see the evidence before their eyes that punishment doesn't work. If punishment doesn't work, why is the solution always more punishment?
.
The drug court that the county will be implementing for drunk driving will be a step in the right direction, giving offenders supervised options to take the carrot or the stick. Jail will always be there but it will be a choice or consequence of being unable to make positive steps to deal with their addiction.

I love how people that "DO" drink and drive get on these blog's. Just like the drugies driving around with the D.A.R.E. stickers on their bumpers & M.A.D.D. stickers. That was the trend years ago,maybe still going on,to foooooool the cops into thinking these drivers are following the law. It's all fun and games,untill some one gets hurt OR worse!! JUST SAY NOOOOOOOOO!! Act on what you preach.

Good point Paisleydaddy...that's why I think sentences should be applied differently to each person. Make it affect them individually and make it count. One person doesn't care about 3 months in jail and another would be devistated. Doesn't seem fair. But what could you do then? Start taking property for example. Then they will become thieves? There has to be an answer.

No it's not legal to drink and drive the rest of the time. It simply means they will place an extra officer or two into just DUI detection and / or a shift of patrol assignments. That's why they are emphasing until 9-1-08. And why do people keep trying to justify illegal drugs. That stuff impares also. It IS a drug which leads to other drugs. Furthermore, imagine trying to keep it out of the daily workforce, if it ever became legal.

You people are simply trying to justify marijuana, because you enjoy it and want it. At least stop being COY about it. That stuff is wrong, and people will keep dying because of it, even if legalized (which I hope not). In the meantime people need to STOP DRINKING AND DRIVING, and the extra patrol won't apply to them!

thekid3477.... As you note, the punishment obviously isn't sufficient to those people, just as you stated. However, now we're talking about a class of people that could care less about anything, much less spending time in jail. Sometimes life isn't fair and we can't punish those who could care less. Those people have nothing to lose.
For someone like me, I've got a life. I've got a 4 year old daughter, a good job, good credit, and nice things. I would like to keep it that way. The threat of going to jail for 90 days or more and having to pay more money than I can afford is sure enough punishment for me not to drink and drive. I've got too much to lose, as do I'm sure most people. Unfortunately, there will always be those people out there with nothing to lose, so they just don't care.

davis hopes the drivers get the message. what message is that i wonder?? from todays police report
.
--FAILURE TO REPORT TO JAIL, a Rock County correctional officer reported at 1:50 a.m. Monday that ROBERT S. MORGAN, 49, of an unknown address, failed to report to the Rock County Jail on Friday for a 90-day sentence to serve for his fourth drunken-driving offense.

-- FAILURE TO REPORT TO JAIL, a Rock County correctional officer reported at 1:50 a.m. Monday that RICKEY E. EARLE, 53, of an unknown address, failed to report to the Rock County Jail on Thursday to serve a 180-day sentence for his fourth and fifth drunken-driving convictions and a convicted hit-and-run.
.
screaming at the top of my lungs...IS THIS THE FREAKIN MESSAGE YOU WANT DRIVERS TO GET?? 4th offense gets ya 90 days, 4th AND 5th with a H&R thrown in get ya 180. cuz the only message this sends is that we will arrest you to get you off the road temporarily and take your money to support the system, but other than money theres no REAL punishment. multiply all drunk driving jail sentences by 5 and see if the drivers get that message. i cant believe with as much as we see/hear about drunk driving and drunk driving related deaths and all the other bs associated with it theres still people out there who dont understand why i TELL EVERYONE I CAN about the hypocrisy of the current marijuana prohibition. its sick and its insulting to myself and every other responsible smoker i know that uncle sam allows this poison to be legal to anyone of a certain age, regardless of actual maturity or responsibility while calling us potsmokers criminals. ridiculous....

Let's just be happy that they are making an effort to clean up the roads without the help of a recker. And hopefully, the message of this article will do it's job, warn people to NOT drink and drive.

Shouldn't we step up our efforts ALL OF THE TIME??!!

ok stepping up the enforcement is going to do nothing when they let them free in a couple hours. they need to step up the punishments so we dont have them back on our roads with in hours to do it again. i think we have enough proof that they dont care about being pulled over and getting tickets when we see people out there with 2+ offences anyways.

I believe the police departments receive grant money to pay for the extra overtime involved. They are always on the lookout for drunk drivers, but when they do this, they work overtime to find them.

Ends September 1! So that means that the rest of the year it's okay to drink and drive? What the $%#$%#$

90% is a little bit steep of a number, the people actually drunk over the limit who drive away is probably more like30-40% depending on the time of day/night. Also the thing with cigarettes if you choose to smoke them thats your decision and you suffer from it but me sitting 3 people down from you inhaling your carcinogenic smoke is not my decision and i shouldnt have to put up with it. again, if a drunk driver gets drunk and hits a tree and kills himself, thats his own decision and he will pay for it, god forbid he hits an innocent driver and kills them too, but i guess thats what you smokers do to us non smokers, hit us with the cancer-causing smoke that we dont choose to inhale.

what a waste of a story, they shouldnt have to step it up, it should be comon procedure.