Post: #1

What if a DUI recipient felt bad about their choice to drive drunk, and they decided to go to court to fight the penalty because they were simply too drunk to make the conscious decision to not get behind the wheel?

Obviously apples and oranges to drunken sex, but it is something to think about. Why does lacking the self-control to limit your consumption negate your decision to have sex?

Post: #2

Had to fight through the wording, but you're asking;
If a woman is not held responsible for her drunk actions (sex), then other should not as well (DUI).

I'd like to see that argument in court, but I don't think it will work.

Post: #3

No, I'm not saying intoxicated drivers should be given mulligans. I'm pondering why intoxication can only legally impair one decision people make. I'm not out to rewrite any laws; I'm just thinking of how ludicrous intoxicated based rape accusations are when compared to other intoxicated decisions.

Post: #4

In drunken sex it's almost always both the man and woman who are drunk. So the more pertinent question is why is it the man who is accused of taking advantage of the drunk woman and not the other way round? Since members here have at least some knowledge of sociobiology we know why. But the law today affects to uphold the idea(l) that there are no differences between men and woman.

Post: #5

Pathetic thread title.

Don't do this.