Mizzou's Michael Sam comes out

[Needschat]

Ok, let me re-phrase.....how is a crime committed if there's no victim as a result? How is it a crime if there was no disservice done to anyone?

Don't give me that crap about "potentially harming someone" being a crime....that excuse can be made for just about anything, whether it be a umbrella being kept in your car or a steak knife you're using a restaurant...both of which could be used as a weapon.

Being intoxicated/impaired removes your ability to make reasonable decisions. Being behind the wheel while drunk is dangerous, and there's NO reason for anyone to argue the point.

Driving a car period is dangerous. You can cause an accident and even kill someone while being sober. I'm even willing to bet that there's more accidents caused by sober drivers than drunk drivers. So.....

I don't know how I can make this question any more simple. How is a crime committed if there's no victim as a result of your actions? How is it a crime if there was no disservice done towards anyone?

Saying "It's a crime because it's preventing harm" can be said for just about anything you do.

Okay, you believe DWI/DUI is NOT a crime when no one's hurt? Am I correct?

Is a driver any more impaired by alcohol than they are when using a phone, eating a burger, changing radio stations, or yelling at their kids?

As long as there's no victim, there's no crime being committed. Who are you victimizing? As in present-tense, not future tense.

There are alternate methods to handling drunk drivers besides issuing out fines and jail time. We have a country of full jails and backed-up lines at the courthouse. We could put better use to taxpayer money than housing DUI offenders and the multitude of government workers that have to do line-control for speeding ticket offenders and marijuana dealers.

You do know that "Victimless Crime" is an oxymoron, right?

I am steadfastly against any crime where there is no victim. I don't know how much more simpler I can put it. Anything can be construed as "potentially causing a victim". It's not a crime if something "possibly" or "potentially" could happen but doesn't.

I'm not saying I'm all for drunk driving, but I am in favor of other methods to deter drunk driving without it being a burden on the taxpayers by having DUI offenders serve jail time, as well as victimless crimes serving as a police department's moneymaking scheme. We should better educate people, we could raise the driving age, and we could require all drivers to annual (or bi-annual or every 4 years, whatever) driving tests and exams.

On the spot executions it is. Pleasure doing business with you, your family will be billed for the bullet.

Some people just don't understand what driving while impaired/intoxicated CAN do to families.

[Cosmic]

I am steadfastly against any crime where there is no victim. I don't know how much more simpler I can put it. Anything can be construed as "potentially causing a victim". It's not a crime if something "possibly" or "potentially" could happen but doesn't.

I'm not saying I'm all for drunk driving, but I am in favor of other methods to deter drunk driving without it being a burden on the taxpayers by having DUI offenders serve jail time, as well as victimless crimes serving as a police department's moneymaking scheme. We should better educate people, we could raise the driving age, and we could require all drivers to annual (or bi-annual or every 4 years, whatever) driving tests and exams.

On the spot executions it is. Pleasure doing business with you, your family will be billed for the bullet.

It's waaay too much money to keep the few drunk drivers in jail... let's make everyone take a driving test every single year! That's free, right?

[Needschat]

I am steadfastly against any crime where there is no victim. I don't know how much more simpler I can put it. Anything can be construed as "potentially causing a victim". It's not a crime if something "possibly" or "potentially" could happen but doesn't.

I'm not saying I'm all for drunk driving, but I am in favor of other methods to deter drunk driving without it being a burden on the taxpayers by having DUI offenders serve jail time, as well as victimless crimes serving as a police department's moneymaking scheme. We should better educate people, we could raise the driving age, and we could require all drivers to annual (or bi-annual or every 4 years, whatever) driving tests and exams.

On the spot executions it is. Pleasure doing business with you, your family will be billed for the bullet.

It's waaay too much money to keep the few drunk drivers in jail... let's make everyone take a driving test every single year! That's free, right?

What has taking a test have to do with being an inconsiderate, selfish, recklessly dangerous idiot drunk behind the wheel?

[HedleyLamarr]

Some people just don't understand what driving while impaired/intoxicated CAN do to families.

Bob goes driving. Does a little bit of weaving, not unlike a driver on a cellphone. Gets pulled over by a cop. What family got affected?

Tommy gets a speeding ticket. Who's the victim of Tommy going fast on a vacant road?

Some of you just can't get past what might happen instead of what actually happened. There's a problem when you're getting issued citations for what might happen instead of what actually happened. If there's no victim as a result of you speeding or you making an improper lane change, why are you being penalized?

And yes, we should have to be subjected to driving tests every so often. We should also raise the driving age. Let's do whatever it takes to get less drivers on the road.

[dbadefense1990]

I've been surprised how low key the coverage of Sam has been. Surprised in a good way but still surprised.

I'm quite surprised as well. I think the Rams are doing a great job focusing the media away from Sam's sexual orientation and directing it on how the team will be next year. That will help both Michael Sam and the Rams in the long run.

It'll also help all future gay athletes in all sports. The Rams, Sam and the NFL (so far) have demonstrated the classy, professional and correct approach to handling this issue, which could be the blueprint for any future situations.

[rams80]

Bob goes driving. Does a little bit of weaving, not unlike a driver on a cellphone. Gets pulled over by a cop. What family got affected?

Tommy gets a speeding ticket. Who's the victim of Tommy going fast on a vacant road?

Some of you just can't get past what might happen instead of what actually happened. There's a problem when you're getting issued citations for what might happen instead of what actually happened. If there's no victim as a result of you speeding or you making an improper lane change, why are you being penalized?

And yes, we should have to be subjected to driving tests every so often. We should also raise the driving age. Let's do whatever it takes to get less drivers on the road.

On the spot executions it is. Pleasure doing business with you, your family will be billed for the bullet.

[wonderbread]

Some people just don't understand what driving while impaired/intoxicated CAN do to families.

Bob goes driving. Does a little bit of weaving, not unlike a driver on a cellphone. Gets pulled over by a cop. What family got affected?

Tommy gets a speeding ticket. Who's the victim of Tommy going fast on a vacant road?

Some of you just can't get past what might happen instead of what actually happened. There's a problem when you're getting issued citations for what might happen instead of what actually happened. If there's no victim as a result of you speeding or you making an improper lane change, why are you being penalized?

And yes, we should have to be subjected to driving tests every so often. We should also raise the driving age. Let's do whatever it takes to get less drivers on the road.

It's not that something might happen

It's that you are currently driving dangerously when you speed, drive impaired, drive distracted, or break any other rule of the road, it doesn't matter that you could get home or where ever without anything happen, it's trying to prevent people getting hurt or killed.

[HedleyLamarr]

Some people just don't understand what driving while impaired/intoxicated CAN do to families.

Bob goes driving. Does a little bit of weaving, not unlike a driver on a cellphone. Gets pulled over by a cop. What family got affected?

Tommy gets a speeding ticket. Who's the victim of Tommy going fast on a vacant road?

Some of you just can't get past what might happen instead of what actually happened. There's a problem when you're getting issued citations for what might happen instead of what actually happened. If there's no victim as a result of you speeding or you making an improper lane change, why are you being penalized?

And yes, we should have to be subjected to driving tests every so often. We should also raise the driving age. Let's do whatever it takes to get less drivers on the road.

It's not that something might happen

It's that you are currently driving dangerously when you speed, drive impaired, drive distracted, or break any other rule of the road, it doesn't matter that you could get home or where ever without anything happen, it's trying to prevent people getting hurt or killed.

So....it's to prevent something from happening, right?

You guys just won't convince me that the prevention of something happening is worthy of being fined and/or jail time. And on that note, it's time we get back to the subject at hand.....

[wonderbread]

If you have the consequence of a fine or jail time you are less likely to do it right?

[crashcarson15]

Some people just don't understand what driving while impaired/intoxicated CAN do to families.

Bob goes driving. Does a little bit of weaving, not unlike a driver on a cellphone. Gets pulled over by a cop. What family got affected?

Tommy gets a speeding ticket. Who's the victim of Tommy going fast on a vacant road?

Some of you just can't get past what might happen instead of what actually happened. There's a problem when you're getting issued citations for what might happen instead of what actually happened. If there's no victim as a result of you speeding or you making an improper lane change, why are you being penalized?

And yes, we should have to be subjected to driving tests every so often. We should also raise the driving age. Let's do whatever it takes to get less drivers on the road.

It's not that something might happen

It's that you are currently driving dangerously when you speed, drive impaired, drive distracted, or break any other rule of the road, it doesn't matter that you could get home or where ever without anything happen, it's trying to prevent people getting hurt or killed.

So....it's to prevent something from happening, right?

You guys just won't convince me that the prevention of something happening is worthy of being fined and/or jail time. And on that note, it's time we get back to the subject at hand.....

The same logic you're employing would say that we should let people take bombs on planes, right? We're only stopping them from what they might do with it after all.

[The_Admiral]

What's up with LoogodudeLamarr and "WHAT ABOUT TEH SPEEDING?!?" all of a sudden?

The same logic you're employing would say that we should let people take bombs on planes, right? We're only stopping them from what they might do with it after all.

Holy balls, that's a bad-faith argument.

[Needschat]

Talk about distractions...

Rules are rules. Live by them or we ALL pay for higher insurance!

[illwauk]

If you have the consequence of a fine or jail time you are less likely to do it right?

Not necessarily... the risk/reward isn't the same for a down on his luck ex-con with limited access to the job market and fewer options as it is for a well-connected upper middle class person who naturally has more options.

Not sure what this all has to do with Michael Sam or gay athletes, though.

[IceCap]

Not sure what this all has to do with Michael Sam or gay athletes, though.

Well I thought about it and opted to let the discussion continue. Coverage of Michael Sam and what effect he's had on the Rams has been, thankfully, minimal to non-existent. So there really won't be anything more to say about the subject until he makes the team/is cut or some idiot pulls a Dungy and puts his foot in his mouth. The whole drunk driving conversation, as ridiculous as I personally find it to be, has evolved naturally from the discussion at hand. Both sides have proven to be civil thus far.

So I don't see the need to kill it. It can continue until the thread dies, waiting to be brought back when something new warrants it being bumped.

[wonderbread]

If you have the consequence of a fine or jail time you are less likely to do it right?

Not necessarily... the risk/reward isn't the same for a down on his luck ex-con with limited access to the job market and fewer options as it is for a well-connected upper middle class person who naturally has more options.

Not sure what this all has to do with Michael Sam or gay athletes, though.

I said less likely, you will still do it under certain situations, whether it be stupidity, wealth, ect. But the fact of the matter is if there are rules, and laws and you have a consequence for breaking them then you are less likely to do it.

[Gothamite]

And that's the point.

Laws aren't merely to punish people who do wrong, but to deter behaviors which are dangerous to your fellow, non-consenting citizens.

"Victimless crime" refers to an action, currently illegal, that does not intrinsically have a victim. Like smoking pot alone in your own home; nobody is harmed by that except possibly you. So the law doesn't belong in that situation.

Drunk driving is not a "victimless crime", just a crime that doesn't have a victim yet. The act carries an intrinsic risk of creating victims, and is therefore proper grounds for law.

I don't think any responsible gun owner would seriously suggest that it's perfectly okay to shoot up a school yard right up to the point where you actually hit somebody. Some actions are so reckless, carry with them such a great possibility of harming others, that the law has no choice but to step in.

[pcgd]

I've only seen 2 people in my life try to argue that drunk driving should be allowed. Both times it's been magnificent.

There really isn't anything everyone can agree on huh?

[Needschat]

Monday and still waiting for "things to happen" in Rams camp. Distractions anyone?

[IceCap]

You get the feeling Tony Dungy expected Michael Sam to sexually harass someone in the locker room.

Proving that most homophobes could probably stand to know one openly gay person in their day to day lives.

There really isn't anything everyone can agree on huh?

Nope. You have people who deny that the Earth is round. In the Western world. In 2014.

[LAWeaver]

There really isn't anything everyone can agree on huh?

Nope. You have people who deny that the Earth is round. In the Western world. In 2014.

Those people are what I like to call "Amish"