• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

State Rep. Kip Smith charged with DUI in Buckhead

AdamT said:
Yes, I would say that if you driver under the influence that you have a drinking problem. At least while you're driving under the influence!
Click to expand...


Bull. You clearly do not know what you are talking about.


j-mac
 
VanceMack said:
Which is the ONLY reason why the .02 is even relevant...correct? Not substance abuse...DUI...which makes your whole argument as stupid as its maker.
Click to expand...

When you drive drunk, you ARE abusing a substance. Duh!!
 
danarhea said:
When you drive drunk, you ARE abusing a substance. Duh!!
Click to expand...


Really? Is that so? meh, I have never seen such self righteous full of crap bull in my life. Is there anyone here that can honestly say that they have NEVER had a couple of glasses of wine at dinner? or gone out to a sports bar for the game and had two beers then drove home? The only thing we know is that this person was ticketed for DUI which means that they were above .08 in most states. That's bad luck, not evidence of a 'problem', 'abuse' of alcohol, or anything else.

Face it dana, the only reason you started this thread with the story you did, which was a stretch for you to link it to testing welfare recipients in the first place "mr. 'conservative' "

If you people like supporting people that are drug users for real, then do it with your own money, but don't force me to do it.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Really? Is that so? meh, I have never seen such self righteous full of crap bull in my life. Is there anyone here that can honestly say that they have NEVER had a couple of glasses of wine at dinner? or gone out to a sports bar for the game and had two beers then drove home? The only thing we know is that this person was ticketed for DUI which means that they were above .08 in most states. That's bad luck, not evidence of a 'problem', 'abuse' of alcohol, or anything else.

Face it dana, the only reason you started this thread with the story you did, which was a stretch for you to link it to testing welfare recipients in the first place "mr. 'conservative' "

If you people like supporting people that are drug users for real, then do it with your own money, but don't force me to do it.

j-mac
Click to expand...

I was convicted of a DWI, and yes, in making a choice to drive impaired, I abused a substance - alcohol. In doing so, I put other drivers in danger. There is no difference between me doing it and some asshole hypocrite who demands that others meet a moral standard that he never intends to apply to himself. He should resign his office IMMEDIATELY!! By making a choice to drive drunk, he is much more dangerous than someone on welfare who smokes a joint while not leaving his house. And, because of his history of abusing alcohol, while putting other drivers in danger, he should be drug tested himself.

This is just like today's Republicans - They make demands of others, while demanding no accountability for their own actions, even if those actions put others at risk. Disgusting.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
What makes this newsworthy? How about the fact that it was Kip Smith who has been pushing for all welfare recipients in Georgia to be drug tested. You know, I have a better idea. How about drug testing all legislators in Georgia, as a condition for them to keep their jobs? If it is fair to test welfare recipients, then it is only fair that those who made that law be subject to the same law.

Article is here.
Click to expand...

Well assuming that she has to follow the rules everyone else does; she'll soon find out about weekly/daily testing.
 
j-mac said:
Really? Is that so? meh, I have never seen such self righteous full of crap bull in my life. Is there anyone here that can honestly say that they have NEVER had a couple of glasses of wine at dinner? or gone out to a sports bar for the game and had two beers then drove home? The only thing we know is that this person was ticketed for DUI which means that they were above .08 in most states. That's bad luck, not evidence of a 'problem', 'abuse' of alcohol, or anything else.
Click to expand...

HA tell that to the f'n state! You have to go through all sorts of classes, therapy, evaluations, blah blah blah.

In the end, I think that our punishments for DUI are excessive. By a lot. But this politician should damned well have to go through the same process as the rest of us (even though we all know politicians rarely face the same punishments as the rest of us).
 
danarhea said:
I was convicted of a DWI, and yes, in making a choice to drive impaired, I abused a substance - alcohol. In doing so, I put other drivers in danger. There is no difference between me doing it and some asshole hypocrite who demands that others meet a moral standard that he never intends to apply to himself. He should resign his office IMMEDIATELY!! By making a choice to drive drunk, he is much more dangerous than someone on welfare who smokes a joint while not leaving his house. And, because of his history of abusing alcohol, while putting other drivers in danger, he should be drug tested himself.

This is just like today's Republicans - They make demands of others, while demanding no accountability for their own actions, even if those actions put others at risk. Disgusting.
Click to expand...



Well, first off, the difference between a DUI, and a DWI is pretty significant. Second, it is just a little more than disingenuous to link a DUI citation, as the same as advocating drug testing for welfare recipients.

Can you tell us exactly what his DUI level was? Can you point to a history of drinking that leads you to claim that this man has a 'problem' with alcohol? Like say Teddy Kennedy? Or is this you just making a mountain out of a mole hill because of your own drinking problems?

j-mac
 
His own drinking problems? Comeon, you said it yourself. Almost everybody in their life (many times multiple times) deserved a DUI. We rely on the fact that there is inefficiency at catching DUI's. Did Dan have a "problem"? Can you prove it other than a single DUI case against him?

DUI/DWAI are nothing more than State money makers.
 
Ikari said:
His own drinking problems? Comeon, you said it yourself. Almost everybody in their life (many times multiple times) deserved a DUI. We rely on the fact that there is inefficiency at catching DUI's. Did Dan have a "problem"? Can you prove it other than a single DUI case against him?

DUI/DWAI are nothing more than State money makers.
Click to expand...

Well, Dan said himself that Smith had a problem because he got a DUI, and just "knew" that because he himself got a DWI which are two different things, but to use Dan's own reasoning if Smith has a problem, for a DUI then Dan has one surely for his own DWI, no?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Well, Dan said himself that Smith had a problem because he got a DUI, and just "knew" that because he himself got a DWI which are two different things, but to use Dan's own reasoning if Smith has a problem, for a DUI then Dan has one surely for his own DWI, no?


j-mac
Click to expand...

DUI and DWI aren't necessarily two different things. Some states use on or the other to mean the same thing. Other states use both terms to disinguish between drugs and alcohol.
 
danarhea said:
When you drive drunk, you ARE abusing a substance. Duh!!
Click to expand...
Horse****. You CANT be that stupid. Wait...scratch that...YOU can be. People get drunk all the time...some people just let down steam, relax, have a ball. He didnt 'abuse a substance'...he drove drunk. I find it very hard to believe that either of you two are truly as stupid as you appear. Rather...I think you both know how stupid you look but desperately cling to your argument because you just...cant...let....go. Dood...let it go. We get it. You are a hack that trolls the lib sites and bust a nut in your shorts every time you get a chance to post a thread like this about republicans. Thats all.

No...he didnt 'abuse' a substance, any more than 100's of thousands of people that hang out at clubs and bars around the country. His crime was not having a few too many beers...it was having a few too many beers and then driving. He DID violate the drunk driving laws and he will and should have to deal with the law on the matter. But then...you really know all of that...dont you.
 
VanceMack said:
Just a guess...but with all the usual suspects coming out to hammer him...he is a republican...right?
Click to expand...

Nope not because he is a Republican, but because he is a person saying that if you abuse a substance you should not get any welfare. Well, while alcohol is legal, he was abusing it by driving under the influence of it. So if you can't be on welfare while abusing substances, you sure as hell shouldn't be a state rep.

If he doesn't step down, this is what we would call hypocrisy.
 
VanceMack said:
Just a guess...but with all the usual suspects coming out to hammer him...he is a republican...right?
Click to expand...

And, Obama did illegal drugs and those same usual suspects are cool with that. Go figger, eh?

I think DUI laws are bull**** in their current form, but this dude broke the law and he needs to be drummed out of the legislature.
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Can you tell us exactly what his DUI level was? Can you point to a history of drinking that leads you to claim that this man has a 'problem' with alcohol?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Yes, he blew twice and the intoximeter readings were 1.00 and .99. Smith first lied to the cop and said that he had nothing to drink. After slurring his words, failing to pass sobriety tests such as walking a straight line and balancing on one foot, Smith admitted to having one beer 45 minutes prior. It was apparent that he had had more than that, which the intoximeter clearly shows.

His grandfather and his father were very involved in state politics. His father was forced to resign in December as the director of the Ga. Department of Transportation. Kip will skate as much as humanly possible on the DUI charge. Bet on it.
 
apdst said:
And, Obama did illegal drugs and those same usual suspects are cool with that. Go figger, eh?

I think DUI laws are bull**** in their current form, but this dude broke the law and he needs to be drummed out of the legislature.
Click to expand...

did Obama say that if you abuse a substance you shouldn't get welfare? Hmmmm I think you don't understand what hypocrisy really is.
 
TheNextEra said:
Nope not because he is a Republican, but because he is a person saying that if you abuse a substance you should not get any welfare. Well, while alcohol is legal, he was abusing it by driving under the influence of it. So if you can't be on welfare while abusing substances, you sure as hell shouldn't be a state rep.

If he doesn't step down, this is what we would call hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
HB 464 doesnt prevent people from consuming a legal substance. It doesnt address penalty for getting a DUI while on government assistance. Driving imparied is stupid, criminal, and illegal and should be dealt with by the law. I agree with Star in that he sets a bad example and gives poor representation of his constituents. He should face the legal system like any other citizen. Alcohol use does not equate to dependence or abuse. But then...you know that. He used a legal substance (in the same way I would bet many of the people posting on this have done...and recently) and simply made a very bad decision to drive. Its NEVER a good idea to drive if you know you are having even a single drink. HB464 has absolutely zero involvment with the use of alcohol. It doesnt call for the denial of services for drinking or for being caught on a DUI. It isnt even close to an apples and oranges comparison. He committed a crime...and he should and will have to face the music. Anything beyond that is nothing more than a bunch of kneejerk liberals scanning onbsure websites finding any article or incident they can find to attack a republican.
 
apdst said:
And, Obama did illegal drugs and those same usual suspects are cool with that. Go figger, eh?

I think DUI laws are bull**** in their current form, but this dude broke the law and he needs to be drummed out of the legislature.
Click to expand...
With the exception of one of his detractors in this thread, all that matters is that he was a republican. Thats the only excuse they need. I agree he should face the legal system for his DUI. Im not sure what the Georgia legislature and precednece is on representatives and DUIs. I think his consitutents should decideif he gets reelected or not but agree completely he set a very bad example for a very stupid decision.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Yes, he blew twice and the intoximeter readings were 1.00 and .99. Smith first lied to the cop and said that he had nothing to drink. After slurring his words, failing to pass sobriety tests such as walking a straight line and balancing on one foot, Smith admitted to having one beer 45 minutes prior. It was apparent that he had had more than that, which the intoximeter clearly shows.

His grandfather and his father were very involved in state politics. His father was forced to resign in December as the director of the Ga. Department of Transportation. Kip will skate as much as humanly possible on the DUI charge. Bet on it.
Click to expand...
I hope he doesnt skate on anything. DUI is a dangerous crime. Now...is that a driver making a stupid decission to drive or is it 'substance abuse' and if so, please explain how.
 
VanceMack said:
HB 464 doesnt prevent people from consuming a legal substance. It doesnt address penalty for getting a DUI while on government assistance. Driving imparied is stupid, criminal, and illegal and should be dealt with by the law. I agree with Star in that he sets a bad example and gives poor representation of his constituents. He should face the legal system like any other citizen. Alcohol use does not equate to dependence or abuse. But then...you know that. He used a legal substance (in the same way I would bet many of the people posting on this have done...and recently) and simply made a very bad decision to drive. Its NEVER a good idea to drive if you know you are having even a single drink. HB464 has absolutely zero involvment with the use of alcohol. It doesnt call for the denial of services for drinking or for being caught on a DUI. It isnt even close to an apples and oranges comparison. He committed a crime...and he should and will have to face the music. Anything beyond that is nothing more than a bunch of kneejerk liberals scanning onbsure websites finding any article or incident they can find to attack a republican.
Click to expand...

Right, he committed a crime involving an intoxicating substance. Which is what HB464 does, albeit it concerns other substances. Is someone who smokes a joint every couple of weeks a substance abuser? No more than someone who knocks back a six pack ever couple of weeks. But the Kipper would nonetheless hold back assistance for food and rent from the guy who burns an occasional joint. He's a hypocrite.
 
AdamT said:
Right, he committed a crime involving an intoxicating substance. Which is what HB464 does, albeit it concerns other substances. Is someone who smokes a joint every couple of weeks a substance abuser? No more than someone who knocks back a six pack ever couple of weeks. But the Kipper would nonetheless hold back assistance for food and rent from the guy who burns an occasional joint. He's a hypocrite.
Click to expand...
You havent recovered from your last bout of lies...maybe you should work on them before you tackle another argument. Or...where you just drunk yesterday when posting. It would explain a lot.
 
VanceMack said:
You havent recovered from your last bout of lies...maybe you should work on them before you tackle another argument. Or...where you just drunk yesterday when posting. It would explain a lot.
Click to expand...

Can you list some of those alleged lies? :popcorn2:
 
AdamT said:
Can you list some of those alleged lies? :popcorn2:
Click to expand...
Sure...post 85 and 92. You are not only a mindless partisan hack (something we already knew) but are also a liar.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Yes, he blew twice and the intoximeter readings were 1.00 and .99. Smith first lied to the cop and said that he had nothing to drink. After slurring his words, failing to pass sobriety tests such as walking a straight line and balancing on one foot, Smith admitted to having one beer 45 minutes prior. It was apparent that he had had more than that, which the intoximeter clearly shows.

His grandfather and his father were very involved in state politics. His father was forced to resign in December as the director of the Ga. Department of Transportation. Kip will skate as much as humanly possible on the DUI charge. Bet on it.
Click to expand...

Ok, so he blew a 1.0, and I'll even grant that he knew that he shouldn't drive. But, that in itself is not proof positive that this man has a substance, or alcohol problem.

What it does indicate is that on the night in question, and depending on his weight, that he had about 3 drinks within an hour then drove. Not smart sure. But "substance abuse"? Really? Come on now.

J-mac

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
 
j-mac said:
Ok, so he blew a 1.0, and I'll even grant that he knew that he shouldn't drive. But, that in itself is not proof positive that this man has a substance, or alcohol problem.

What it does indicate is that on the night in question, and depending on his weight, that he had about 3 drinks within an hour then drove. Not smart sure. But "substance abuse"? Really? Come on now.

J-mac

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

He may not have had an alcohol problem. He does now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom