Just look at the speed that the RV was going! The driver was given a $500 ticket for almost killing 30 cyclists. Insane that they’re even allowed to drive after that.

  • HikingVet@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Drunk drivers who get into “accidents” get their licences revoked.

    It’s not extreme, its logical.

      • HikingVet@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Doesn’t matter. It shows that there is precedent for suspended licenses when there is a collision.

        You make it seem like they can’t take away your license for unsafe driving, for some fucked reason.

        Your arguments aren’t holding up.

        • Strangle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Of course it matters. Driving drunk is not the same as driving stone cold sober.

          How could you think they are at all comparable?

          • HikingVet@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Well, the US has laws about unsafe driving. Not all unsafe driving is when drunk.

            But losing your license is normal for unsafe drivers.

            I don’t know what you are arguing at this point.

              • HikingVet@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                The fact that they were close to the cyclists that they hit them in an area that has a minimum distance law kinda disproves your argument.

                Also you don’t have one on whether the licence being revoked as governments retain the ability to take your driving privileges.

                So what are you actually arguing, because you see to be in a rut.