▲ 671 ▼ rule (thelemmy.club) submitted 3 weeks ago by not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone 71 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] DagwoodIII@piefed.social -10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) I wrote twice that the drunk kid was going to hurt themselves. How you got that I approve adults driving drunk is a mystery to me, one I prefer not to waste time solving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Let me help you out. It was this one: A drunk 14 year old on a bike is probably in more danger than a drunk 21 year old in a car. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Taldan@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago That statement is technically correct Mile per mile, drunk walking and biking is more dangerous than drunk driving for the individual. Obviously why drunk driving is not okay is the danger to others, which is why his wording specifically only mentioned the danger to themselves Source permalink fedilink source parent [–] Taldan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago You are very bad at communicating. You were correct in your initial comment, but really went off the rails and said many incorrect things afterwards Walking and biking is statistically more dangerous, mile per mile, for a drunk person than driving. The caveat is this excludes externalities such as injuring other people Had you said that, I think more people would have understood what you meant. As it stands, it sounds like you're advocating for drunk driving permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) Let me help you out. It was this one: A drunk 14 year old on a bike is probably in more danger than a drunk 21 year old in a car. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Taldan@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago That statement is technically correct Mile per mile, drunk walking and biking is more dangerous than drunk driving for the individual. Obviously why drunk driving is not okay is the danger to others, which is why his wording specifically only mentioned the danger to themselves Source permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Taldan@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago That statement is technically correct Mile per mile, drunk walking and biking is more dangerous than drunk driving for the individual. Obviously why drunk driving is not okay is the danger to others, which is why his wording specifically only mentioned the danger to themselves Source permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Taldan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 weeks ago You are very bad at communicating. You were correct in your initial comment, but really went off the rails and said many incorrect things afterwards Walking and biking is statistically more dangerous, mile per mile, for a drunk person than driving. The caveat is this excludes externalities such as injuring other people Had you said that, I think more people would have understood what you meant. As it stands, it sounds like you're advocating for drunk driving permalink fedilink source parent