Quote:
Originally Posted by chipj29
In the example you cited above, the persons were allegedly consuming the alcohol that was being transported. That would be the problem. The transportation of the alcohol has nothing to do with anything. It is the consumption.
I will give you the same example I have given before, again with no response from you.
On my way home from work on Friday, I picked up a case of beer. Since I like it cold when I get home, I put it in a cooler with ice. Between the store and home, I have a horrible accident. I crashed my car into a telephone pole and was gravely injured, I might have even died. Upon investigation, the police found a bunch of beer cans in the passenger compartment of my car. *GASP* beer cans!?!? He must have been drunk! Blood is drawn to determine how much I had to drink that day.
Blood tests confirm that I was not drinking when I crashed my car. The store receipt in my pocket confirms this. The receipt says I bought an 18 pack. 18 full beer cans are found in my car. It is obvious to the investigators that I was not drinking the beer, I was only transporting it from the store to my house.
What did I do wrong?
Was anything I did illegal, immoral or unethical?
|
1) There is much information omitted. These sound like the arguments I used when I was a teenager:
Quote:
"Your Honor, I couldn't have been going 60-MPH!
I saw the officer when I was accelerating in 2nd gear!!!"
|
2) "On my way home from work on Friday, I picked up a case of beer. Since I like it cold when I get home, I put it in a cooler with ice."
You can buy beer
cold but my experience has shown
that must have one heck of a commute! Make the ice in your cooler slushy with water, and any beverage will cool much faster.
3) "I crashed my car into a telephone pole and was gravely injured, I might have even died."
You couldn't have drowned! 
Just as "45 is a very fast speed on the water",
BWI is a much-more serious form of abusing alcohol than
DWI.
I had a telephone pole in my front yard sheared-off by a Mazda RX-7's impact—after hitting it sideways! Driving
faster is probably safer! 
What a great argument for
SBONH!
Were they in the
front seat's footwell? Were they
prior "empties" or the 18-pack you spoke of? Besides Erica, who stores "empty beer cans"
inside their vehicle?
Somebody else must have dropped them in there.
(Please, SBONH, don't all you "safe boaters" race to support the storage of empty beer cans inside the passenger compartment of your boat!)
5) "Blood tests confirm that I was not drinking when I crashed my car."
If your BAC was .03,
you were somewhat impaired upon your collision.
Why was your BAC omitted from the above account?
6) "BTW, I crashed because I was texting. Yes, I know that is illegal".
Texting while driving indicates a "judgment problem"—just as what follows upon taking that first sip of alcohol.
7) "Was anything I did illegal, immoral or unethical?"
Your texting definitely put you off to a bad start! Since you admit that texting is illegal, will you also continue to ignore other NH laws that you don't like?
I'd previously stated, "This isn't an easy question to answer." But ask the question enough times—it won't get ignored!
8) "First of all, you might as well just drop the witches canal thing. I am not sure what you are trying to suggest or imply, but it makes no sense whatsoever. No one has even considered or suggested any such canal."
The Witches Canal was merely expanding on a prior suggestion of FLL's: The State could:
• placate the Lake's scariest thrill-seekers,
• expand on viewing-options and locations for any speedsters who don't care to take in the Lake's scenic views at sane speeds,
• to keep over-sized boats from terrorizing any other boaters transiting the Broads,
• to transform a "problem area" into a revenue-creating area—other than sending revenue for new propellers—
to Maine.
Are you
denying that powerboats will speed-up within the confines of a canal?
BTW: Are you reading that SB27 is described as "A Dead Man Walking" ?