First off- I appreciate you qualifying your opinion by sharing your experience but I'm also going to respectfully disagree with you. If you were in law enforcement (regardless of what country) I'm sure you've seen it all as well as the worst of it all. I saw a bit of it myself over the past two years and while I tried to capture some of the experience here, I likely didn't do it justice but one of the things I noticed is not only how "common" these cases are but how many of them are repeat offenders and fully admit their guilt. They're going to keep drinking & driving and their time in court is but a semi-regular inconvenience and the court seems indifferent that it's this person's X number of times in there for it- they're going to collect their fees and mutually part ways with the understanding they'll see each other again. Maybe it's different in your experiences as far as the repercussions, but that's just what I was able to observe.
That said, and to my disagreement- the point I'm trying to make (and a lot of the commentary has seemed to pick up on whatever inadequacies I was able to communicate) is there's a serious problem with the system (at least here). Look at the comments here from otherwise/usually reasonable posters. The charge itself is enough for them to immediately cast their harshest judgements and while I'll call them 'details' should they be sitting on the proverbial jury, you can see how their bias would factor into the outcome.
Again- the details I've shared and admitted to being just one side of the story is I had a few beers (think Miller Lite not double IPA's) over the course of 6+ hours with plenty of food & water in between. I've stated, and you'll either give me the benefit of the doubt or not, that I have a background where I don't screw around with this kind of stuff and take it very seriously.
I've shared that my passenger was my SIL with a broken leg & a dying dog. I don't think I've gotten into this but frankly I'm too old & too cheap to by drinks at sporting events/bars but did make a minor exception so my SIL wasn't drinking alone. Again- you'd have to take my word on this/give me the benefit of the doubt at least, but she's not a heavy drinker herself and still had me beat by a few (and was drinking IPA's) while weighing less than me and having eaten much less than I had. Again- believe it or not- but these are details that are necessary to understand to comprehend the message I'm trying to convey here.
Fast forward and trying to get to the TL/DR- I was initially pulled over in a podunk town because I had a fog light out (which by itself is a nonsense stop). I'd argue that the mistake I made was trying to be cordial with the officer (they were clearly young and new to the job and I thought they were being evaluated at the time) and being honest with them when they asked if I drank that night. I just finished two light beers over dinner, why should I lie about that.
I'm sorry if I come across as "whining" and refusing to take "responsibility" over this event. But, again respectfully, I don't see it that way and I feel that to take that particular part of my story as doctrine and worthwhile as formulating an opinion is to also ignore/dismiss the rest of what I shared and frankly that's exactly my point.
I say I was charged with a DUI and folks accept that as fact and dismiss everything else (in some cases wishing death here publicly on me). But the rest of what I said- how it went through the legal "system" and was dismissed because the charges brought against me along with the police reports were completely deemed "shenanigans" with no less than two dash cam & two body cam videos. It's like the hive mind just can't accept that.
I tried to share some metrics on the discussion (which most gun folks always argue about facts over feelings) but that is not the reaction presented even here on this topic. That's why it warrants a discussion in my mind and the discrepancy/hypocrytical rhetoric is well captured here. And folks wonder why conservatives lose so much politically. We eat our own far worse than the liberals ever can do.
If you were to analyze many of my posts you'll see much of the reaction is not only TL/DR but the default response for many to instead use a detailed response as an attack point and formulating an opinion based off of nothing other than length alone while fully admitted they didn't have the capacity to read/digest what they were making an opinion on and also that they wear their snap judgements as a proverbial badge of honor and pat themselves on their own backs for being so smart.
Wrapping up, the actual TL/DR- nothing personal against you
@Sniff (and I sincerely hope none of my reply came across as a personal attack either). I crammed a lot of other responses/comments from others in my response to you just to save myself from responding to each comment/accusation individually is all.
I don't make a habit of drinking outside of the house but for the few times that I do, I'm too old and too cheap to purchase nearly enough drinks to be of any trouble to anyone on the road. But there is a definite stigma that has been indoctrinated in many of our minds that police are otherwise infallible in their accusations of drunk driving charges and we frequently dismiss the plethora of examples of when they police were 100% wrong and STILL blame the accused as if it was somehow "their" fault to make the police think they were intoxicated (even after being proven sober) and completely refuse to entertain the idea that just maybe- the police are incentivized to make DUI arrests regardless of the circumstances or that it takes a significant amount of capital & balls from the accused to pour that money into fighting the charge because they know they were sober, did everything right, and 'fuck 'em' & the system. And... best case scenario you "win", you're still out the money you spent on lawyers, you've otherwise proven your point that in this one particular instance the police were lying their asses of, read from a preapproved script (my words) they always use and let's face it, most folks don't have the balls or money to challenge it. But you "win" and are still not reimbursed nor is there any ramifications for the police officers or department because of "qualified immunity".
I have every right to be as angry and vocal as anyone here (and trust me there's some very vocal people here on what they think about the police) and despite that- you don't hear me cursing the police and calling them "uniform hangers", pointing out the countless examples of them getting away with abject murder, and the like. Nope- I said I got severally ass fucked but still believe that the vast majority of the police are good honest people BUT the system protects the otherwise minority that complete abuse their positions. Their coworkers 100% can name these jokers (again my own words) and do vocalize it frequently to their own friends but never publicly that there's ever any reform in there. I don't think I've even countered a personal attack with anyone that opined otherwise to me here but rather pointed out their responses being rather extreme/sensationalized.
So apologies for the wall of text but hopefully that conveys why I disagree with your synopsis (respectfully).
-LD
