|
Post by monty on Sept 23, 2011 16:51:47 GMT -8
It's just absurd, and it's the absurdity of the law in that old men make them and we hold a teenager/20 year old to a higher standard than the rest of the population, if that's not backwards, I don't know what is. I know what would be backwards, allowing those who don't understand the higher standard necessary for that age group that has more accidents and more deaths related to drunk driving to make the laws - thank goodness for wise old men! Yup, nothing more dangerous than someone that has 2 beers in their system, a freakin' runaway train is what they are. These type of draconian laws make old men sleep better at night and sound good on the stump, they don't make the roads safer.
|
|
|
Post by RB Aztec on Sept 23, 2011 17:02:33 GMT -8
Chill guys. Wouldn't you rather have him learn a lesson now (early in the season) than get a DUI at a critical point in the middle of the season? I'll bet he never does anything like this again. He will be at full strength when we need him.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Sept 23, 2011 17:36:11 GMT -8
have meeting with Sterk and coaches. Admit he was wrong accept penalty(hope only 3 games),then apologize to his teamates and all the coaches. Hopefully it will be lesson to all athletes - Sterk meet again with all athletes and give his cell phone number if any athlete needs help to call him
|
|
|
Post by aztecfankrishnan on Sept 23, 2011 18:52:48 GMT -8
.07 is nothing on a 6'5" dude.
|
|
|
Post by bearfoot on Sept 23, 2011 19:55:10 GMT -8
I laughed at the "irregardless" comment and props to the reader who made it. Not only did Zeigler use a misnomer, his editor apparently was ignorant of that fact too. Just the latest example of the poor journalism out there these days. (In the interests of disclosure, I'm no fan of Zeigler. He was the clown who editorialized during the Chuck Long era that SDSU should drop football. I wonder if he still has that opinion.) It doesn't take too much to look it up on Dictionary.com Irregardless is considered nonstandard because of the two negative elements ir- and -less. It was probably formed on the analogy of such words as irrespective, irrelevant, and irreparable. Those who use it, including on occasion educated speakers, may do so from a desire to add emphasis. MZ qualifies as an educated speaker, as a Stanford grad
|
|
|
Post by PQ Aztec on Sept 23, 2011 20:06:21 GMT -8
FYI...very possible to be over 21 and still receive a DUI for under a .08 BAC. Most times those cases are pled to a "wet and reckless" (driving recklessly while alcohol is present). Which lower penalties, but can still be used as a prior to increase penalties if ever DUI again.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Sept 23, 2011 20:19:14 GMT -8
I laughed at the "irregardless" comment and props to the reader who made it. Not only did Zeigler use a misnomer, his editor apparently was ignorant of that fact too. Just the latest example of the poor journalism out there these days. (In the interests of disclosure, I'm no fan of Zeigler. He was the clown who editorialized during the Chuck Long era that SDSU should drop football. I wonder if he still has that opinion.) It doesn't take too much to look it up on Dictionary.com Irregardless is considered nonstandard because of the two negative elements ir- and -less. It was probably formed on the analogy of such words as irrespective, irrelevant, and irreparable. Those who use it, including on occasion educated speakers, may do so from a desire to add emphasis. MZ qualifies as an educated speaker, as a Stanford grad Stanford Grad no wonder he covers soccer and wanted to eliminate the heart of our athletic programs. BTW, not all people that attend and or graduate from a University (including the color) are educated.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Sept 23, 2011 20:20:14 GMT -8
FYI...very possible to be over 21 and still receive a DUI for under a .08 BAC. Most times those cases are pled to a "wet and reckless" (driving recklessly while alcohol is present). Which lower penalties, but can still be used as a prior to increase penalties if ever DUI again. You can have zero and get a DUI, why because the law is not limited to Alcohol.
|
|
|
Post by AztecFemBone on Sept 23, 2011 20:49:24 GMT -8
OMG, what kind of idiot would post a story from the U-T on a sports message board and what kind of idiot at a newspaper would write a story like this, referencing the SDSU Police Incident number, before someone has a hearing? Idiot.
(Yeah, kidding.)
|
|
|
Post by mens fashion on Sept 23, 2011 21:39:57 GMT -8
.07 is nothing on a 6'5" dude. Height effects how MUCH you can drink, but 5' at .07 is the same as 7' and.07
|
|
|
Post by mattpohl on Sept 23, 2011 22:43:59 GMT -8
I think body mass, i.e., weight is much more important than height. Hang in there, Matt
|
|
|
Post by mightymightyaztecs on Sept 24, 2011 0:29:52 GMT -8
Funny because I ran into Jamaal down at the East County traffic court a couple of months back. That time he was down there for a simple fix it ticket though. Doubt they'll go as easy on him this time.
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Sept 24, 2011 4:25:02 GMT -8
He needs to be suspended for a while. People need to be punished in order to learn lessons.
|
|
|
Post by localsonly on Sept 24, 2011 9:41:00 GMT -8
I know what would be backwards, allowing those who don't understand the higher standard necessary for that age group that has more accidents and more deaths related to drunk driving to make the laws - thank goodness for wise old men! Yup, nothing more dangerous than someone that has 2 beers in their system, a freakin' runaway train is what they are. These type of draconian laws make old men sleep better at night and sound good on the stump, they don't make the roads safer. then what does make the roads safer?
|
|