CDZ What is the bigger problem, drunk drivers or terrorists?

[Toronado3800]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

 

[Jackson]

We don't condone either. Is it right to ignore the terrorist threat just because 10,000 people don't count?

 

[boedicca]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

What a bunch of sophistry.

 

[Toronado3800]

lol, nice word boedicca.

I'd say you all are jumping the gun a bit condemning me for pointing this out.

There is no reason we can't dedicate as much effort to catching what people are leaving bars and vetting them as we are on securing the borders against countries who's terrorists did not cause the preponderance of terrorism related deaths on 9-11.

Heck, let me position sobriety check points by where I know drunks are and I'll extend the Vetting process to 100% of would be immigrants from 100% of the world.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

You're right, we need to deport all the drunk illegal aliens who keep driving the wrong way down our highways.

 

[Toronado3800]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

You're right, we need to deport all the drunk illegal aliens who keep driving the wrong way down our highways.

Lol. I'll sign off on that.

 

[Muhammed]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

I think your drunk driving stats are way off.

 

[Toronado3800]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

I think your drunk driving stats are way off.

Maybe. Do you think I am high or low?

Here is where I came up with 160,000 drunk driving deaths since 2001. I know there is a 0% chance it is exactly right, just an estimate.

First stat I saw was 2014 claiming 9,967.

It came from here: Impaired Driving: Get the Facts | Motor Vehicle Safety | CDC Injury Center

Then I looked at some old graphs on the google and saw numbers just above 10,000 per year between 2000 and 2010.

Take that 10,000 per year over 16 years and I got 160,000. Just rough, sloppy numbers.

 

[Muhammed]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

I think your drunk driving stats are way off.

Maybe. Do you think I am high or low?

Here is where I came up with 160,000 drunk driving deaths since 2001. I know there is a 0% chance it is exactly right, just an estimate.

First stat I saw was 2014 claiming 9,967.

It came from here: Impaired Driving: Get the Facts | Motor Vehicle Safety | CDC Injury Center

Then I looked at some old graphs on the google and saw numbers just above 10,000 per year between 2000 and 2010.

Take that 10,000 per year over 16 years and I got 160,000. Just rough, sloppy numbers.

The problem with those stats is that in very few (if any) of those cases has it been proven that drunken driving was the cause of the fatalities.

 

[Toronado3800]

I looked up the stats and it does not appear to be even close. No one on Google even seems to offer much variety in stats.

Just with sloppy in my head math, am I estimating correctly this tally:

Wars on Terror, 9/11, Shoe Bomber etc : 10,000 Americans since 2001

Drunk Driving : 160,000 ?

I think your drunk driving stats are way off.

Maybe. Do you think I am high or low?

Here is where I came up with 160,000 drunk driving deaths since 2001. I know there is a 0% chance it is exactly right, just an estimate.

First stat I saw was 2014 claiming 9,967.

It came from here: Impaired Driving: Get the Facts | Motor Vehicle Safety | CDC Injury Center

Then I looked at some old graphs on the google and saw numbers just above 10,000 per year between 2000 and 2010.

Take that 10,000 per year over 16 years and I got 160,000. Just rough, sloppy numbers.

The problem with those stats is that in very few (if any) of those cases has it been proven that drunken driving was the cause of the fatalities.

So what you are saying is despite the driver's blood alcohol level being above .08 (or whatever) we do not know the accident was caused by them drinking?

ASSUMING I understand right....

I suppose I saw a Denzel Washington(?) movie based on him being intoxicated yet not at fault and I do accept the possibility in any accident. However if you are drunk driving and have an accident the NTSB will almost need to be involved to prove you are not at fault.

If I want chocolate milk I drink it. If I want a buzz I get out the Kahlua and milk. The buzz is a tangible thing which signals a change in my brain's function.

 

[jwoodie]

I'd say you all are jumping the gun a bit condemning me for pointing this out.

So what is your point? That we should increase spending on drunk driving enforcement and decrease spending on immigration enforcement until they are the same amount?

Without a proposition to debate, your vapid premises are nothing more than trolling.

 

[Toronado3800]

I'd say you all are jumping the gun a bit condemning me for pointing this out.

So what is your point? That we should increase spending on drunk driving enforcement and decrease spending on immigration enforcement until they are the same amount?

Without a proposition to debate, your vapid premises are nothing more than trolling.

I haven't really formed a solid opinion on that yet. Trolling for answers or ideas I will plead guilty to.

Here is the best I came up with was a half hearted joke.

"I'll give you Donald's vetting if he applies it to all immigrants equally if you give me State Troopers doing mandatory breathalyzer tests on bar parking lots."

What do you make of my idea or the stats?

 

[usmbguest5318]

"What is the bigger problem, drunk drivers or terrorists?"

I haven't read the OP, but basic knowledge about the state of the nation tells me the answer has to be drunk drivers. The quantity of drunk drivers on any given Saturday night literally dwarfs the quantity of terrorists over the past 30+ years. And make no mistake, one is just as dead when a drunk driver kills one as when a terrorist does.

 

[usmbguest5318]

We don't condone either. Is it right to ignore the terrorist threat just because 10,000 people don't count?

Yes, but we also don't send hundreds of billions of dollars combating and talking about it, and it's not on the news everyday, yet it accounts for far more deaths and personal injuries. Moreover, it's not anywhere near as hard to find drunk drivers or potential drunk drivers as it is to find terrorists.

Drunk Driving Figures:

• Every day in America, another 28 people die as a result of drunk driving.
  
• Each day, people drive drunk almost 300,000 times, but fewer than 4,000 are arrested.
  
• Every 90 seconds a person is injured in a drunk driving crash.
  
• An average drunk driver has driven drunk 80 times before first arrest.
  
• On average, one in three people will be involved in a drunk driving crash in their lifetime.

Terrorism death risk: 1 in 20 million. A person is as likely to be killed by his or her own furniture.

 

[usmbguest5318]

That we should increase spending on drunk driving enforcement?

Enforcement and prevention, yes.


I'm not willing to give credence to absurd questions by answering them; thus I didn't include the remainder of your question for it tacitly implies that immigrants are terrorists and the fact of the matter is that in the U.S., the majority of terrorist acts are not committed by immigrants. Nothing could be more sophistic.

In the post-9/11 era, conventional wisdom holds that the jihadist threat is foreign. The conventional wisdom is understandable; after all it was 19 Arab hijackers who infiltrated the United States and conducted the 9/11 attacks. Yet today, as Anwar al-Awlaki, the American born cleric who became a leader in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, put it in a 2010 post, “Jihad is becoming as American as apple pie.” Far from being foreign infiltrators, the large majority of jihadist terrorists in the United States have been American citizens or legal residents. Moreover, while a range of citizenship statuses are represented, every jihadist who conducted a lethal attack inside the United States since 9/11 was a citizen or legal resident. In addition about a quarter of the extremists are converts, further confirming that the challenge cannot be reduced to one of immigration.

Source​

 

[jwoodie]

Enforcement and prevention, yes.


I'm not willing to give credence to absurd questions by answering them; thus I didn't include the remainder of your question for it tacitly implies that immigrants are terrorists and the fact of the matter is that in the U.S., the majority of terrorist acts are not committed by immigrants. Nothing could be more sophistic.

Are you having a schizophrenic episode? First you misquote my question, then you answer it (sort of) and now you claim you are not answering it?

For the record, my question was:

So what is your point? That we should increase spending on drunk driving enforcement and decrease spending on immigration enforcement until they are the same amount?

How does this "tacitly imply that immigrants are terrorists?" And how is this "sophistic?"

I would ask you to explain your approach to preventing Islamic terrorism, but I doubt you would be able to provide a cogent answer.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Are you having a schizophrenic episode? First you misquote my question, then you answer it (sort of) and now you claim you are not answering it?

How does this "tacitly imply that immigrants are terrorists?" And how is this "sophistic?"

Are you being serious or sardonic by asking the questions above? I'm hoping the latter, but I cannot tell for sure whether you truly didn't realize how and that I answered only the first part of your earlier compound question, the red part...

So what is your point? That we should increase spending on drunk driving enforcement and decrease spending on immigration enforcement until they are the same amount? [1]

...and after doing so, via graphics and linked content, provided an explanation for:

1. Why I wouldn't answer the blue part, and
2. How it tacitly asserts that terrorist are immigrants?

Note:

1. I realize you didn't correctly punctuate your compound sentence, but I discounted it as a typo. Was it wrong of me to thus give you the benefit of the doubt in that regard?

 

[Toronado3800]

That we should increase spending on drunk driving enforcement?

Enforcement and prevention, yes.


I'm not willing to give credence to absurd questions by answering them; thus I didn't include the remainder of your question for it tacitly implies that immigrants are terrorists and the fact of the matter is that in the U.S., the majority of terrorist acts are not committed by immigrants. Nothing could be more sophistic.

In the post-9/11 era, conventional wisdom holds that the jihadist threat is foreign. The conventional wisdom is understandable; after all it was 19 Arab hijackers who infiltrated the United States and conducted the 9/11 attacks. Yet today, as Anwar al-Awlaki, the American born cleric who became a leader in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, put it in a 2010 post, “Jihad is becoming as American as apple pie.” Far from being foreign infiltrators, the large majority of jihadist terrorists in the United States have been American citizens or legal residents. Moreover, while a range of citizenship statuses are represented, every jihadist who conducted a lethal attack inside the United States since 9/11 was a citizen or legal resident. In addition about a quarter of the extremists are converts, further confirming that the challenge cannot be reduced to one of immigration.

View attachment 111740

Source​

Nice maps I must say.

Now that I have dedicated a bit of thought to the issue I want to do something about this drunk driving problem.

In my circles I feel social ridicule is the most needed punishment for drunk drivers. The possibility of the death penalty if you cause an accident is not as big a deterrant as being made to look "uncool".

30 and 40 year olds I am talking about mind ya.

Suing bars out of existence is something I am not in favor of. We are sentient beings responsible for ourselves. Not to mention one of the problems my proposal would not solve is enough people just buy booze and drink through out the night (and day).

 

[yiostheoy]

We don't condone either. Is it right to ignore the terrorist threat just because 10,000 people don't count?

Terrorism is a mere pinprick in the state of world affairs.

The very best thing would be to completely ignore it and not give it any press time.

Most victims of terrorism are simply unprepared to fight crime. They are not armed. And/or their various State legislators do not give them the right to be armed in their states.

They should be armed and they should defend themselves.

 

[usmbguest5318]

In my circles I feel social ridicule is the most needed punishment for drunk drivers. The possibility of the death penalty if you cause an accident is not as big a deterrant as being made to look "uncool".

OMG !!!

That is really a sad state of affairs if it's true. It's thoroughly imbecilic that one would find one's ego more worth preserving intact than one's life. Where do the people in your circles live? I have to ask just so I can make a point of staying away from those people.

I won't pretend to have people that think that way in my life; I don't. I won't suffer people think that way, and fortunately (not sure if it's I or they who are most fortunate as goes this matter, but anyway....) I can't recall many having tried to inure themselves with me. With any luck on my part, they can sense that I won't endure them for more than a split second.

Truly, Dude. Tell me you are not serious about the people in your crowd. Do those people really not realize that it's even less cool to show themselves to be stupid? Their ego over their life!!! Tell me at least that they don't breed.