Miguel Cabrera gets hit with a DUI

[Dipre]

Then this begs the following questions :

 

Do we have all the facts about what happened? Are we judging on facts? Do you know what actually happened? That's why i bring up the Taylor story. The "FILTHY RAPIST" screams reached the heavens. Look how that turned out.

 

Why does a declared alcoholic have a valid driver's license? For a system as astringent as the one in place as America regarding drunk driving, anyone with a history of alcoholic abuse, and violent behavior due to it should have his license immediately revoked until he's "clean" for a certain amount of time.

 

By the way, you should know better than trying to change my mind on something i' have a set opinion on.

[jacksonianmarch]

"See:Lawrence Taylor?"

 

You serious Dipre? Taylor didnt f*** a teenager IN FRONT OF THE COPS. The police report and the police camera will confirm this story. And he thought he was riding a donkey in Venezuela? I dont know about you, but I have a feeling that if Mark Teixeira was in the same predicament, you'd be railing on him up and down. I have a feeling that there may be some cultural or ethnic bias in terms of your defending this guy.

[Dipre]

My problem with your stance Jacko is the following:

 

You are a healthcare professional.

 

So if let's say, you were supposed (this is hypothetical) that you had to tend to the wounds of a recovering alcoholic who fell off the wagon and hurt himself after smashing his car into a tree, would you go ahead and call him an "idiot"?

 

You've bragged several times on this board about your knowledge of medicine, then why doesn't this seem to you like the symptoms of a person who has no friggin' idea what the f*** he's doing?

 

Now, let me get this straight, he should be (and will be) punished, because the law is blind. Errors in interpretation or claims of ignorance mean nothing, and i keep questioning why he has a license in the first place, since it's proven with scientifical studies (will present sources) that a drunk is much less likely to get on the wheel if he does not have a valid driver's license.

 

I am not defending or condoning his behavior, but mainly making two points:

 

Point A: We don't fully know what happened, how it happened, or why it happened.

 

Point B: We're not talking about a casual drunk, but a blown-out alcoholic, and i expect to be corrected by Jacko and his expertise here, but while in law school, we were "invited" to convene some people who were being tried for accidents while DUI'ing, and it was then that we were introduced to the phenomenon known as "blackout". That happens when someone drinks to the point where their conscious state is compromised, and they have literally no control over what they're doing.

 

Now, again, i'm not using this to condone his behavior, because he will be punished (and deservedly so), and what i take offense against is the minimizing of his person and his integrity due to something he honestly has no control over.

 

"He who is clean of sin, cast the first stone".

[Pink_Hat_Girl]

Oh my, what are you guys arguing about? You people know each other so well you seem to be carrying friction from past debates into this discussion, and probably don't even realize it.

 

Just my observation.

[a700hitter]

The only thing that interests me about this story is that I kept him on my Fantasy roster from last year at a fairly high price. He had better get his head straight. I want to finish in the money. Screw his problem and the societal issues. He's going to screw up my fantasy team.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

There shouldn't be an argument. Just don't drink and drive. Simple as that.

[a700hitter]

There shouldn't be an argument. Just don't drink and drive. Simple as that.

...and if you do, don't say that you quit and turned your life around thereby fraudulently inducing people to draft you onto their fantasy teams.

[Dipre]

Stop picking 1st basemen so early in the draft.

 

Specially if they're fat, and love the booze. So essentially, don't pick me early in the draft.

[Divinity]

Fing Idiot. He should be suspended(without pay)to help wake him the F up. Absolutely ridiculous. An example needs to be made.

 

 

Are you suggesting athletes should be held to a higher standard? Normal citizens don't get suspended from their jobs without pay for DUI.

[yeszir]

Oh my, what are you guys arguing about? You people know each other so well you seem to be carrying friction from past debates into this discussion, and probably don't even realize it.

 

Just my observation.

 

I think they realize it

[a700hitter]

Stop picking 1st basemen so early in the draft.

 

Specially if they're fat, and love the booze. So essentially, don't pick me early in the draft.

In the league that I am in, only Pujols had more points in 2010, and he goes for around $45. I kept Miguel Cabrera at $30. I had to do it, even though I don't like spending a lot on first basemen. If this idiot could stay clean and in shape who knows what he could achieve. Stupid lush.

[jacksonianmarch]

I see drunk idiots all the time who come in after wrecking their cars, and yes I call them idiots while doing my best to fix them up. And while you try and say that we shouldnt "condone" his behaviour, you are building in an excuse for him. He has a problem, yes. He shouldnt be driving, yes. BUT HE DID DRIVE. My biggest problem with drunk drivers is that they put other people at risk. If you wanna go out and snort some coke and smoke some crack, then it's your life. I dont recommend it, but you are doing it to yourself. But getting behind the wheel that cocked is not only dangerous to yourself, but dangerous to others. And it isnt like he doesnt have the funds to get driven around.

[italstallianion]

Are you suggesting athletes should be held to a higher standard? Normal citizens don't get suspended from their jobs without pay for DUI.

 

 

Right, a lot of them get fired all together. At least Cabrera would still have his job (and his oversized paycheck) when he returns.

[jacksonianmarch]

Are you suggesting athletes should be held to a higher standard? Normal citizens don't get suspended from their jobs without pay for DUI.

 

If I got a DUI, I would lose my job

[yankees228]

My problem with your stance Jacko is the following:

 

You are a healthcare professional.

 

So if let's say, you were supposed (this is hypothetical) that you had to tend to the wounds of a recovering alcoholic who fell off the wagon and hurt himself after smashing his car into a tree, would you go ahead and call him an "idiot"?

 

You've bragged several times on this board about your knowledge of medicine, then why doesn't this seem to you like the symptoms of a person who has no friggin' idea what the f*** he's doing?

 

Now, let me get this straight, he should be (and will be) punished, because the law is blind. Errors in interpretation or claims of ignorance mean nothing, and i keep questioning why he has a license in the first place, since it's proven with scientifical studies (will present sources) that a drunk is much less likely to get on the wheel if he does not have a valid driver's license.

 

I am not defending or condoning his behavior, but mainly making two points:

 

Point A: We don't fully know what happened, how it happened, or why it happened.

 

Point B: We're not talking about a casual drunk, but a blown-out alcoholic, and i expect to be corrected by Jacko and his expertise here, but while in law school, we were "invited" to convene some people who were being tried for accidents while DUI'ing, and it was then that we were introduced to the phenomenon known as "blackout". That happens when someone drinks to the point where their conscious state is compromised, and they have literally no control over what they're doing.

 

Now, again, i'm not using this to condone his behavior, because he will be punished (and deservedly so), and what i take offense against is the minimizing of his person and his integrity due to something he honestly has no control over.

 

"He who is clean of sin, cast the first stone".

 

I won't dispute the fact that he doesn't have control over how much he drinks, because alcoholism is a terrible disease. But after that is where we're going to disagree. If you want to argue that we can't 'minimize his person and his integrity' because of the DUI, then, under the same justification, you could argue that we also couldn't do that if he went out with a shotgun and killed the first five people he saw. That would speak to his stupidity (among other things), and so does this.

[jacksonianmarch]

Exactly. y228 rings the bell of wisdom again

[Divinity]

If I got a DUI' date=' I would lose my job[/quote']

 

 

Aye, I should have said most.

 

"Let's face it, lots of people have DUIs," says attorney Patricia Shiu, vice-president for programs at the Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center in San Francisco. "It's not a career-ending thing."

[a700hitter]

If I got a DUI' date=' I would lose my job[/quote']But practicing medicine under the influence is okay.

[jacksonianmarch]

A DUI gets you fired, meaning you are still a doctor, but you have to practice elsewhere. Practicing medicine under the influence gets your license revoked. Meaning you cannot work anywhere

[a700hitter]

A DUI gets you fired' date=' meaning you are still a doctor, but you have to practice elsewhere. Practicing medicine under the influence gets your license revoked. Meaning you cannot work anywhere[/quote']As it should be.

[jacksonianmarch]

I agree completely.

[yankees228]

Exactly. y228 rings the bell of wisdom again

 

Appreciated.

[Dipre]

I won't dispute the fact that he doesn't have control over how much he drinks' date=' because alcoholism is a terrible disease. But after that is where we're going to disagree. If you want to argue that we can't 'minimize his person and his integrity' because of the DUI, then, under the same justification, you could argue that we also couldn't do that if he went out with a shotgun and killed the first five people he saw. That would speak to his stupidity (among other things), and so does this.[/quote']

 

This is the ultimate apples to oranges comparison, and i'm glad you brought it up.

 

Legally, the difference between murder and manslaughter is intent. When you board a vehicle under the influence you're not looking to kill someone (i do not condone this, and people who board a vehicle under the influence should be punished regardless of whether or not they were in control of themselves). When you pick up a shotgun to shoot someone, you're, well, looking to kill someone, and there is not instance where you can find someone who took a weapon, loaded it with ammunition, then shot another person without intent behind it. You just can't. This is not an issue or "should he or should he not be punished" because you know my answer from a legal standpoint. This is about denigrating someone as a person for actions they have no control over. Massive difference, both in the law, in application, and hell, even in everyday life.

 

You seem to have taken a liking to using extremes as means of comparison, and in this case it doesn't ring true.

 

@ Jacko:

 

Shame on you again, because if you go around calling your patients idiots you have an attitude problem. You're there to provide service as a physician, not to insult and demean the people you treat. Who do you think you are, Dr. Phil?

[yankees228]

I wasn't equating the two things to each other, by any standard. All I was doing was using your justification "what i take offense against is the minimizing of his person and his integrity due to something he honestly has no control over", and applying it in other ways.

[Dipre]

An extreme. And my point stands. Intent is the key to the equation.

[yankees228]

An extreme. And my point stands. Intent is the key to the equation.

 

It really doesn't matter whether you consider it to be an extreme example, because it fits perfectly under your justification and puts a whole in your 'it says nothing about their person because they had no control theory' (unless you want to also accept my example under your justification and stick to it). As for intent, that means nothing, because as you said, they have no control (so there is no intent one way or another).

[jacksonianmarch]

@ Jacko:

 

Shame on you again, because if you go around calling your patients idiots you have an attitude problem. You're there to provide service as a physician, not to insult and demean the people you treat. Who do you think you are, Dr. Phil?

 

Notice what you put in front of Phil's name. Part of the treatment is to encourage people to do what is safe, and if that means I have to call them an idiot to get that point across, I will. My job isnt to be a robot and condone everyone's behavior, because someone who does that isnt a good doctor. Sometimes you have to say the obvious and you need to be stern. Calling a drunk driver an idiot is stern. You may think differently when you have kids or get married, but the idea that this idiot was on the road and could have killed someone you know, your kids, your wife, whatever, is unsettling.

[jacksonianmarch]

It really doesn't matter whether you consider it to be an extreme example' date=' because it fits perfectly under your justification and puts a whole in your 'it says nothing about their person because they had no control theory' (unless you want to also accept my example under your justification and stick to it). As for intent, that means nothing, because as you said, they have no control (so there is no intent one way or another).[/quote']

 

The non-lawyer is schooling the supposed lawyer. Exactly, they had no control my ass. You know what, I don't think the 9/11 terrorists were bad people, they just got drunk on a plane and look what happened! Extreme example, but you are willing to justify anything a drunk does because they were drunk? Once again, I think that if this was Mark Teixeira, an American guy on the Yankees, you wouldnt be feeling so strongly.

[yankees228]

To expand upon that, I want to make a point about 'extreme examples'. They're a very useful tool in these types of debates, because they can be used to defeat justifications similarly to the one Dipre is using. As soon as it's realized that there are exceptions, no matter how extreme they might be considered, the line between what is acceptable and what isn't becomes arbitrary and the argument loses its validity.

[BSN07]

Are you suggesting athletes should be held to a higher standard? Normal citizens don't get suspended from their jobs without pay for DUI.

 

I don't care if you flip burgers at MCD's. If you drink and drive your an fing idiot. Your license should be taken on the spot for good and if you lose your job because of it, tuff tits. Don't be a tool and it won't be a problem. There is absolutely no excuse for anyone to drink and drive. Maybe if they upped the penalties people would get a clue.