The article discusses forfeiture of driving license as a consequence of cycling whilst drunk. My stand is that this is unreasonable, as the damage that a drunk cyclist can inflict on others or themselves is magnitudes lower than that of driving drunk.
We can discuss walking if walking whilst drunk also can lead to a forfeiture of a driving license. Because hey, a drunk person could walk into traffic just as much as a drunk cyclist could.
Yup, there is no good counter apart from simply not being there. And CVNs aren’t known for their agility.
One country has recognized the ill effects of corruption and the other hasn’t.
Given the same “price”, the ‘rational consumer’ (of illegal activities) would choose the (seemingly) more valuable purchase (crime) - value here being time saved and convenience.
Article compares cycling and driving, so we should stock to that. Opening it up invites all manner of options like designated driver, and a all others.
Because we’re comparing legal consequences of dui and (the new consequences of) cycling-ui.
Consequences are far smaller than that of a car though. I’d prefer drunks going on bicycles then cars.
So this is what nerd-baiting feels like
Got to lay the groundwork to paint trump in a better light.
I think it’s a fact?
What’s up with all the corn today? Ootl
A silver lining in all of us
I think you’re thinking about avocados
Who was the good samaritan?
Absolutely cursed.
Also, is the reverse possible?
It happens all the time. That’s how the multiverse branches are kept under a manageable number for the simulation.
If I accidentally bite an atom and the tiny shards shatters nearby atoms, wouldn’t that just make more? Like sort of… a chain reaction ?
Maybe I just have to gobble up all my salad before all the booms blow my jaws and neighbours away.
Got to cradle dem bois
You’re 20. Bathrobe is a blanket
From a certain point of view he’s the biggest troll/shit poster right now so =\