This Drunk Driver is Totally Crazy

We all know the perils of driving while under the influence. While many of us accept that it is wrong, there are still people who try to ...


We all know the perils of driving while under the influence. While many of us accept that it is wrong, there are still people who try to justify their actions, or rather their special ‘status’, as to why it is discriminatory! Well, not everyone, but this one fella.

A certain Mr. Ralph Alfred Friesenhahn (pictured below) was arrested for his fourth DUI and brought to court after his car rolled over on a rural road. Blood tests indicated that he had an alcohol concentration of 0.29—more than 3½ times the legal limit of 0.08 blood-alcohol concentration. Records show that he also was convicted for driving while intoxicated in 1985, 1990 and 1998.

image credit.
The most ludicrous thing is that he argued that practiced drunks should be a “protected class of alcoholics”. (Really, now?)

Of course, his case challenge was rejected by an appeals court, but here’s a bit of the DUI legal writing stating his claim:

'In essence, appellant does not argue that members of his defined class of alcoholics are treated differently than other DWI defendants under the statutes. Instead, he argues that they should be treated differently. Appellant’s argument—complaining about the 0.08 alcohol concentration standard being applied to alcoholics in the same manner that it is applied to offenders who are not alcoholics—challenges the failure of the DWI statutory scheme to provide different treatment of defendants who are alcoholics and, according to appellant, “maintain normal functioning” with an alcohol concentration of 0.08 because of “a significantly higher tolerance to alcohol.” In fact, he asserts in his brief that alcoholics “are grouped together like the average DWI defendant, but should not be due to their involuntary illness.” This “deserving of different treatment” argument does not demonstrate that similarly situated persons are treated differently and thus, fails to establish an equal-protection violation.'

Treated differently? Involuntary illness? C’mon...

The universal message is: Don’t drive if you can’t. Wait, that’s not right, because drunks ‘think’ they can drive when they can’t. A better one would be: Get an Uber or Grab to send you back.


Related

news 5065541359003491259

Post a Comment

emo-but-icon

Subscribe

sponsored by

Hot in week

Connect With Us

item