Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > Fellowship Hall
Facebook

Notices

Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:48 PM
Nahum Nahum is offline
Registered User


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea View Post
Myth #1: RW glorified drunkeness ... DISPELLED
Myth #2: Others are advocating drunkeness and don't believe it's a sin .. DISPELLED.
Myth #3: The bible prohibits alcoholic consumption ... DISPELLED.

When do we address the root of this?
You're kind of like the great and powerful Oz, Daniel.

Just a little sham.

Bellow all you want, but others don't have the same deficient reading comprehension skills as you.

The gloating on the other thread was obvious.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:49 PM
Nahum Nahum is offline
Registered User


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Griffin View Post
While staying out as long I could bear of the teetotaler vs drunk argument, I cannot in good conscience let your attempts at legal definitions slide. With 15 years criminal law experience as both prosecutor and defense attorney, I can say your concept is totally erroneous. DUI and DWI are different names for the same offense, depending on state. Both make ANY impairment from the norm a CRIMINAL offense, whether or not the driver is aware of the impairment! DUI does NOT require a buzz. Because the driver may not show any overt outward signs most states have laws allowing the presumption of impairment at certain blood alcohol levels. (Example Texas it's .08) Furthermore the law makes NO allowance for degrees of impairment.

If you want to confine your position to theology go ahead, but please do not attempt to shroud your position with total misinformation and using words carrying legal implication.

Thank you!
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:50 PM
SDG SDG is offline
Guest


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster View Post
You're kind of like the great and powerful Oz, Daniel.

Just a little sham.

Bellow all you want, but others don't have the same deficient reading comprehension skills as you.

The gloating on the other thread was obvious.
Obviously your past hurts are shrouding your better judgment on this one PP and put you on this course of offensive .... I will bow out.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:51 PM
BrotherEastman's Avatar
BrotherEastman BrotherEastman is offline
uncharismatic conservative maverick


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 5,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by COOPER View Post
Originally Posted by Pianoman
Oh brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What are you when you get a DUI??? A drunkard or a buzzard???

DUI: Driving under the influence. "Buzz"

DWI: Driving while Intoxicated. "Drunk"

DUI is a lesser offence than DWI.
So, that makes it okay?
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:52 PM
Nahum Nahum is offline
Registered User


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster View Post
You're kind of like the great and powerful Oz, Daniel.

Just a little sham.

Bellow all you want, but others don't have the same deficient reading comprehension skills as you.

The gloating on the other thread was obvious.
BTW, who could have guessed Pastor Dan would take a position that satiates flesh?
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:52 PM
COOPER's Avatar
COOPER COOPER is offline
Hello AFF!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amarillo, Tx.
Posts: 3,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Griffin View Post
While staying out as long I could bear of the teetotaler vs drunk argument, I cannot in good conscience let your attempts at legal definitions slide. With 15 years criminal law experience as both prosecutor and defense attorney, I can say your concept is totally erroneous. DUI and DWI are different names for the same offense, depending on state. Both make ANY impairment from the norm a CRIMINAL offense, whether or not the driver is aware of the impairment! DUI does NOT require a buzz. Because the driver may not show any overt outward signs most states have laws allowing the presumption of impairment at certain blood alcohol levels. (Example Texas it's .08) Furthermore the law makes NO allowance for degrees of impairment.

If you want to confine your position to theology go ahead, but please do not attempt to shroud your position with total misinformation and using words carrying legal implication.

yada yada yada blah blah blah.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:54 PM
Nahum Nahum is offline
Registered User


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 8,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea View Post
Obviously your past hurts are shrouding your better judgment on this one PP and put you on this course of offensive .... I will bow out.
Good idea.

Now where is Rhoni to help me deal with "those past hurts?"

BTW, I haven't been drinking so my judgement is fine.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:55 PM
SDG SDG is offline
Guest


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Poster View Post
BTW, who could have guessed Pastor Dan would take a position that satiates flesh?
To further the thoughts of a previous poster ...

sex satiates the flesh ... yet under the covenant of marriage it is not a sin ...

eating satiates the flesh and is not a sin ... yet it can become gluttony ....

alcohol as a drink can satiate the flesh yet is not a sin but it can become drunkeness ...

satiating the flesh is now a sin?

I have never questioned your ability as a pastor PP ... even when I've disagreed w/ your views .... this is troublesome indeed.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:55 PM
COOPER's Avatar
COOPER COOPER is offline
Hello AFF!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amarillo, Tx.
Posts: 3,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by COOPER View Post
yada yada yada blah blah blah.



DUI vs. DWI in Texas

The first thing that a person must understand after having been arrested for DUI or DWI is that there are two separate cases pending against them. The first case is the Driving Under the Influence (DUI) or Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) civil case and the second is the DUI or DWI criminal case.

Driving Under the Influence:

Driving Under the Influence - Civil Case:

Texas has long been known as a “zero tolerance” state meaning that minors (anyone under 21 years of age) are not permitted to consume any alcohol and drive a vehicle.

The Department of Public Safety adheres to this public policy and will suspend the driver’s license of any minor who is found to be operating a vehicle after consuming any amount of alcohol. In other words, if an officer testifies that he could smell and odor of alcohol coming from a minor’s breath the Department of Public Safety can suspend the license automatically for 60 - 120 days. Generally, an officer will simply give a citation to a minor if he feels that they have only consumed a small amount of alcohol and release them to an adult. However, if the officer feels that the minor is possibly intoxicated, that individual can be arrested for DWI.

Intoxication is not an element of Driving Under the Influence. If an ALR hearing is requested, the Department of Public Safety is only required to prove that the officer had 1) a reason to stop the car and 2) a reason to believe that the minor had consumed any amount of alcohol.

Driving Under the Influence - Criminal Case:

Driving Under the Influence is a Class “C” misdemeanor punishable by a maximum fine of $500.00, but no time in jail, for a first time offender. Repeat offenders would be subject to higher fines and the possibility of jail time. Probation, alcohol assessments and classes, as well as, community service are also required by most prosecutors.


Driving While Intoxicated:

Driving While Intoxicated is a common criminal offense which affects all types of individuals. The penalties for DWI are dependent upon the severity of the offense as well as an individual’s history. DWI convictions are enhance able offenses, meaning that an old conviction will be considered in punishment of a second conviction. The same is true for any license suspension which may occur after an arrest.

Intoxication can occur in one of two ways in Texas. If a person provides a specimen of blood, breath, or urine which shows a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 or great at the time of driving then they are intoxicated by law. Likewise a person may be intoxicated because of a loss of their normal use of mental or physical faculties by introduction of alcohol, illegal drugs, prescription drugs or a combination of these.

DWI encompasses numerous types of vehicles including automobiles, boats, planes, amusement park equipment and other water vessels. If a person is shown to be operating any of these while intoxicated they risk serious consequences. Minors can also be arrested for DWI. If a person is under 21 years of age and is operating a motor vehicle, they will be subject to the same penalties as an adult in both the criminal and civil case with one exception, the license suspension for a minor who provides a specimen above a 0.08 will be for 60 days instead of 90 days.

Driving While Intoxicated - Civil Case:

A person who is arrested for a DWI can face significant automatic license suspensions. If a person who submits to a breath or blood test has a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) at or above a 0.08, DPS will try and suspend the person’s driver’s license for a minimum 90 days to a maximum 1 year. If a person has a previous alcohol related contact, like a DWI, within ten years and they provide a specimen, DPS will attempt to suspend the person’s license for a term of not less than one (1) year.

If, a person refuses to provide a specimen of breath or blood, DPS will try to suspend a person’s driver’s license for no less than 180 days and mo more than 2 years. In the case of a refusal, actions as well as words can be considered refusing to provide a specimen. The officer is not required to obtain a “no” or “I refuse”, in order to make that determination. In fact, requesting an attorney or not answering at all can also be considered a refusal. These license suspensions are completely independent of the criminal case. The burden on the Department is extraordinarily low and most people arrested for DWI suffer through some type of license suspension. If a person has a previous alcohol related contact, like a DWI, within ten years and refuse to provide a specimen, their license will be suspended for a term of not less than two (2) years.

Driving While Intoxicated - Criminal Case:

If this is a first time arrest for DWI, it will be classified as a Class “B” misdemeanor. The punishment range for a Class “B” DWI is not less than three (3) days in jail and a two thousand dollar ($2000) fine. As with DUI, alcohol education classes, community service, probation and court costs are all possibilities when facing a DWI conviction.

An additional license suspension, independent of the civil case, may also occur as a result of a DWI conviction. Because this is an enhance able offense, the punishment for subsequent DWIs will included significant jail time, fines and community service hours.

The Texas Legislature has also recently enacted a law which requires that the Department of Public Safety collect a surcharge from any individual convicted of DWI. This surcharge is a fee entirely separate from your criminal or civil case. If a person refused to provide a specimen or provided a specimen under 0.15, then they must pay a surcharge of $1,000 a year for three (3) years after being convicted of DWI. If a person provided a specimen of 0.16 or above, the surcharge is $2,000 a year for three (3) years. If the surcharge is not paid it can result in further license suspensions or cancellation of a person’s driver’s license altogether.







KEN GIBSON

DWI Criminal Defense Trial Attorney

700 Lavaca, Suite 1010
Austin, Texas 78701
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 10-29-2007, 03:56 PM
BrotherEastman's Avatar
BrotherEastman BrotherEastman is offline
uncharismatic conservative maverick


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 5,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea View Post
AND AGAIN THE BIBLE, GOD'S INFALLIBLE WORD, SPECIFICALLY ALLOWS FOR ALCOHOL.

IF YOU TEACH DIFFERENTLY ... THAT'S ON YOU.
Okay Dan, I can't help but to join in this conversation. When the bible says anything about wine, does that mean that it always had alcohol in it?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Drinking hammondb3klingon1 Deep Waters 88 12-29-2007 11:56 PM
Letting The Word Speak vs Making The Word Talk Digging4Truth Deep Waters 4 07-25-2007 10:05 AM
rejoice Sister Alvear Fellowship Hall 8 07-19-2007 08:52 PM
(((EXCLUSIVE!))) Randy White Openly Mocks Standards,Admits drinking AND!!!..... Thad Fellowship Hall 364 06-11-2007 10:58 PM
Rejoice Sister Alvear Fellowship Hall 5 05-18-2007 12:00 PM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Salome

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.