Forum

Free news

FREE blog

Donate

Search

Subscribe

jews/911

Feedback

dna

Gun poll

RCC

AIDS

Home

Fathers

Surveys

Holocaust

IQ

14th Amdt

19th Amdt

Israelites

NWO

Homicide

Blacks

Whites

Signatory

Talmud

Watchman

Gaelic

Traitors

Health?

 

 

On 20 Jun 2001 16:08:59 -0400, Thomas Griffin <tgriffin@uic.edu> wrote:

>"jj, curmudgeon and tiring philalethist" wrote:
>> In article <9gqpu4$tcg$1@SonOfMaze.dpo.uab.edu>,
>> Tracy P. Hamilton <chem013@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu> wrote:
>> >Of course one should not take the claims of MADD and their fellow travellers
>> >at face value,
>>
>> AMEN
>>
>> >but it is quite clear from the above that risk of fatal crashes rises
>> >dramatically above BAC of 0.10.  The *reasons* are well understood, and
>> >there are other co-factors.
>>
>> Also AMEN
>
>The whole point of this thread is that it is not at all clear what the
>relationship is between BAC levels and fatal accidents.

That is simply not true, see for example
http://www.raru.adelaide.edu.au/T95/paper/s9p2.html

>Not one piece of data has been cited that allows us to determine the correlation,
>let alone any sort causal relationship.

http://www.raru.adelaide.edu.au/T95/paper/s9p2.html and references
therin.

horizontal rule

"jj, curmudgeon and tiring philalethist" <jj@research.att.com> wrote in
message news:GHrGs2.FGG@research.att.com...
> In article <QGdc7.50213$A47.23938626@news1.rsm1.occa.home.com>,
> fm <johnknight@usa.com> wrote:
> >This is because you are a STUPID JEW who can't read a simple statistic.
>
> I'm not Jewish, I'm not stupid, and I can both read and evaluate
> statistis, as well as generate and validate them.
>
> >It's also abundantly clear that those drivers, by
> >every study ever done, are the ones who are the LEAST likely to have an
> >accident.  They are in fact 31% less likely to have an auto accident, an
> >airplane accident, than people with a BAC = 0.
>
> This, John, even if it was accurately extracted from data, is irrelevant.
>
> The fact remains that people who are heavily intoxicated are responsible
> for a gigantic number of traffic injuries and deaths, despite their
> small numbers.
>
> When will you cope with the truth?

The NHTSA data reports EXACTLY how many traffic fatalities "involved
alcohol".  It also reports exactly how many of those were pedestrians,
passengers, and "others".  It even reports exactly how many were "drivers".
It also reports exactly how many of those "drivers" who were in "alcohol
involved" accidents had a BAC of "zero".  And how many had a BAC between .01
and .06.  And how many had a BAC > .08, and .10, and .20.

You claim to have reviewed this data, and to be able to comprehend it.

So why don't you tell us EXACTLY how many people fall into each of these
categories in order to support your assertion that "people who are heavily
intoxicated are responsible for a gigantic number of traffic injuries and
deaths"?

Is this too much to ask?  Would you prefer to continue to repeat the
feminist mantra the rest of your life--or might it help your psyche to
grapple with the FACTS for a change?

The following urls are ONLY to give you the sources necessary to analyze the
problem.  Don't repeat or critique what's already at these urls--do your own
analysis by viewing the original sources.

http://fathersmanifesto.com/dui.htm

http://fathersmanifesto.com/duigerman.htm

http://fathersmanifesto.com/mvfr.htm

Put up, or shut up.  Either prove that you're right--or STOP repeating LIES.

horizontal rule

> In misc.education fm <johnknight@usa.com> wrote:
> > In this country, jews have more allegiance to Israel
> > than to the US.
>
> Alas, you seem to have been talking to the wrong people. I am more
> interested in doing something about people that kill in America by
> getting behind the wheel intoxicated than I am about what happens on the
> West Bank. Before one penny of my money goes to the UJA or to anything
> dealing with Isreal, MADD, RADD, SADD and other groups attempting to save
> innocent people on our roads will get it.
>
> So, there goes another falsehood...

horizontal rule

"Derek Bell" <derek_bell_ie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:340ab0a3.0108081033.6a790580@posting.google.com...
> "fm" <johnknight@usa.com> wrote in message
news:<d6cc7.50123$A47.23863464@news1.rsm1.occa.home.com>...
> > Strike three, you're out.  It's thanks to STUPID JEWS like you that we
have
> > MADD in the first place.  JUST because of this garbage, there are more
> > Americans behind bars JUST for drinking and driving (not even getting any
> > other ticket, or having an accident) than there are Japanese behind bars for
> > all crimes, combined.
>
> So "John Knight" thinks that drunk driving shouldn't be a criminal
> offence? I guess it doesn't surprise me that a bigoted thug like him
> would think that way.
>
> Here's a very simple explanation just for him: drunk drivers take
> longer to react and are worse than sober drivers. They cause
> accidents. Accidents are a bad thing.

Bow, wow.  Nice Pavlovian Dog reaction.  Here is your jewish doggie biscuit.

Certainly it will strain your imagination to the breaking point to even
consider that the jews LIED to you about this, right?  Certainly a casual
glimpse of the NHTSA data base which proves you WRONG is way too much to ask
of Pavlov's Dogs, right?

Perhaps you can review the NHTSA site and tell us *exactly* how many of
these drunk drivers you "think" CAUSED an accident?  Would that be too much
to ask--or are the jewish doggie biscuits too tasty for you?
http://fathersmanifesto.com/dui.htm

horizontal rule

"Philip Nicholls" <pnich@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:p843ntgccvs056ieimlso1lo9b245d1tcf@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:40:27 -0500, "Joel Rosenberg"
> <joelr@winternet.com> wrote:
> >
> >"fm" <johnknight@usa.com> wrote in message
> [crap deleted]
> >
> >I don't think that's fair to give the Jewish people credit for strict drunk
> >driving laws, or their enforcement -- but, shit, boy, if you're going to go
> >ahead and do that, I'll certainly be happy to accept the compliment.  Me, I
> >think that drunk driving laws are too loose, and too loosely enforced in the
> >US, and I'd much rather we switch to the Scandinavian model, where you go to
> >jail the first time you're caught driving drunk.
> >
> >I know that this'll be difficult to get into your alchohol-soaked brain, but
> >drunk driving is a crime that nobody ever has to commit.  If you're going to
> >drink, go ahead -- just don't drive.  If you're going to have to drive,
> >don't drink until after.
> >
> >Simple, really.
> >
> >
>
> John is not interested in being fair.  He is a crank, a netloon.  He
> doesn't listen, facts roll off him like water off a duck.  Arguing
> with him is like arguing with a drunk.
>

Nice little Pavlovian Dog response, Phillip.  This is just the response your
jewish trainers expect of Pavlovian Dogs.  Say "bow wow" and you'll get
another jewish doggie biscuit.

Why don't YOU go to the NHTSA data base and PROVE to this forum that you're
right?  Are you at all capable of that, or would you prefer to eat jewish
Pavlovian Doggie Biscuits?
http://fathersmanifesto.com/dui.htm

horizontal rule

"jj, curmudgeon and tiring philalethist" <jj@research.att.com> wrote in
message news:GHrJvE.GyE@research.att.com...
> In article <dDfc7.50251$A47.24018023@news1.rsm1.occa.home.com>,
> fm <johnknight@usa.com> wrote:
> >So why don't you tell us EXACTLY how many people fall into each of these
> >categories in order to support your assertion that "people who are heavily
> >intoxicated are responsible for a gigantic number of traffic injuries and deaths"?
>
> Do your own homework. This ought to be interesting.

NOBODY expected you to do that simple little thing.  Do you know why?  TIMSS
demonstrated for the world that American 12th graders are the WORST math
students who ever participated in this international test.  To be able to do
this simple thing would require you to have a score more like Switzerland
(who scored 138 points higher at the 12th grade level) or Japan (who scored
105 points higher at the EIGHTH GRADE level).

So as you guessed, we will do this simple little thing for you, we will
summarize the NHTSA data for you--so that you can whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine like
a little girl in a sand box "he haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaates me":

102,382 people were involved in fatal accidents in 1998
42,020 were fatalities.
9,925 or 9.7% of those in fatal accidents are classified as "alcohol
involved".
1,514 of those who are "alcohol involved" are passengers.
1,474 are pedestrians.
118 are bicyclists.
63 are other non-drivers.
3,673 or 3.6% of those in fatal accidents are drivers classified as "alcohol
involved".
456 of those drivers had a BAC = 0%.
39 of those drivers refused the test.
599 of those drivers were never tested.
815 of those drivers were tested but the tests were nonconclusive.
609 of those drivers were tested but the results of the test were unknown.
1,155 of those drivers had a BAC greater than 0% but less than .10%
3,083 or 3% were drivers whose BAC was known to be greater than 0.10%.
http://fathersmanifesto.com/dui.htm

NO percentage of those drivers are KNOWN to have had an accident BECAUSE of
alcohol.

At no place in this data base does anyone DARE sign his name to this data
and suggest that a BAC greater than .10% is PROOF that alcohol was the CAUSE
of the accident.

Can you at least tell us why?

horizontal rule

"Joel Rosenberg" <joelr@ellegon.com> wrote in message
news:769567bf.0108081842.5ad6f068@posting.google.com...
> "fm" <johnknight@usa.com> wrote in message
news:<RChc7.50287$A47.24097626@news1.rsm1.occa.home.com>...
> > --
> > "Philip Nicholls" <pnich@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:p843ntgccvs056ieimlso1lo9b245d1tcf@4ax.com...
> > > On Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:40:27 -0500, "Joel Rosenberg"
> > > <joelr@winternet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >"fm" <johnknight@usa.com> wrote in message
> >  [crap deleted]
> > > >
> > > >I don't think that's fair to give the Jewish people credit for strict drunk
> > > >driving laws, or their enforcement -- but, shit, boy, if you're going to go
> > > >ahead and do that, I'll certainly be happy to accept the compliment.   Me, I
> > > >think that drunk driving laws are too loose, and too loosely enforced in the
> > > >US, and I'd much rather we switch to the Scandinavian model, where you go to
> > > >jail the first time you're caught driving drunk.
> > > >
> > > >I know that this'll be difficult to get into your alchohol-soaked brain, but
> > > >drunk driving is a crime that nobody ever has to commit.  If you're going to
> > > >drink, go ahead -- just don't drive.  If you're going to have to drive,
> > > >don't drink until after.
> > > >
> > > >Simple, really.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > John is not interested in being fair.  He is a crank, a netloon.   He
> > > doesn't listen, facts roll off him like water off a duck.  Arguing
> > > with him is like arguing with a drunk.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Nice little Pavlovian Dog response, Phillip.  This is just the response your
> > jewish trainers expect of Pavlovian Dogs.  Say "bow wow" and you'll get
> > another jewish doggie biscuit.
> >
> > Why don't YOU go to the NHTSA data base and PROVE to this forum that you're
> > right?
>
> You're claiming that the NHTSA data base has you listed as a "crank, a
netloon"?

You jews are even STUPIDER than we thought.

Why even bother to try to explain this to you?  You need more than a fifth
grade understanding of statistics to grasp the concepts, and you just don't
have such a high understanding, do you?  You could at LEAST read the cited
url before  asking such a STUPID question.

horizontal rule

> In misc.education fm <johnknight@usa.com> wrote:


>
> > Strike three, you're out.  It's thanks to STUPID JEWS like you that we have
> > MADD in the first place.  JUST because of this garbage, there are more
> > Americans behind bars JUST for drinking and driving (not even getting any
> > other ticket, or having an accident) than there are Japanese behind bars for
> > all crimes, combined.  And guess what--the NHTSA data reveals that it didn't
> > save ONE life.  You jews
> > are too STUPID to even suggest a simple cost/benefit analysis before you
> > blast off supporting stupid government spending schemes like this that most
> > honest observers know won't work from the get-go.
>
> You are so sad. People who drink and stay at home are no problem, they
> hurt only themselves and they should be allowed to do that without
> penalty. People that drink and then get behind the wheel of a moter
> vehicle impared are risking the lives of everyone they come into contact
> with, with everyone who crosses their path. After one of these idiots
> kills some kid, you want to punish him? That will do the kid a whole lot
> of good. You want to kill yourself, go do it. You put a child in harms
> way by your use/abuse, then you should pay the cost of putting their
> lives at risk.

 

horizontal rule

> On Fri, 06 Jul 2001 09:40:39 -0400, "Raymond E. Griffith"
> <rgriffit@vnet.net> wrote:
>
> >in article 2obbktk3cf9pr1eoparbr7l0ft1bp44sbu@4ax.com, Racqueteer@hvc.rr.com
> >at Racqueteer@hvc.rr.com wrote on 7/06/2001 8:30 AM:
>
> >> The real question in my mind is whether John actually believes all the
> >> nonsense he posts (in which case he should be the poster child for
> >> nutcases at large), or this is all a gigantic personal put-on (which
> >> I'd like to think is more likely).  In any event, his positions do not
> >> reflect those of anyone I would consider a Christian.  Even Satan can
> >> quote scripture for his own purposes.
> >
> >I have asked myself that question several times. Unfortunately, I have come
> >to the conclusion that he believes the things he says, despite their
> >internal and external contradictions.
> >
> >Very often a person's "crusades" are not the motivational factors. There
> >probably are underlying hatreds or hurts that have pushed John into this
> >unprofitable direction. And I don't think that he *can* change unless those
> >hidden issues are resolved.
> >
> >Apparently, John's FathersManifesto sites and affiliates have been
> >mushrooming. The great underlying theme seems to be a hatred for women. His
> >signatories to his petition are full of divorced men, many of whom object to
> >paying child support (I won't comment on this issue at this time). John
> >wants to take personal and civil liberties away from women and have them
> >regarded as little more than property. He views the women's right to vote as
> >a disaster for America.
> >
> >Dissatisfied people find each other quite easily, don't they?
> >
> >Etc. Ad nauseum.
> >
> >And yes, he will flame me for this, too. But you can do a web search for
> >fathersmanifesto yourself and judge for yourself. Please do.
>
> Thanks, but no thanks.  I get enough exposure to senseless,
> aggravating, assinine ideas as it is without seeking out more on
> purpose - I'll pass <g>!

 

TRAITOR McCain

jewn McCain

ASSASSIN of JFK, Patton, many other Whites

killed 264 MILLION Christians in WWII

killed 64 million Christians in Russia

holocaust denier extraordinaire--denying the Armenian holocaust

millions dead in the Middle East

tens of millions of dead Christians

LOST $1.2 TRILLION in Pentagon
spearheaded torture & sodomy of all non-jews
millions dead in Iraq

42 dead, mass murderer Goldman LOVED by jews

serial killer of 13 Christians

the REAL terrorists--not a single one is an Arab

serial killers are all jews

framed Christians for anti-semitism, got caught
left 350 firemen behind to die in WTC

legally insane debarred lawyer CENSORED free speech

mother of all fnazis, certified mentally ill

10,000 Whites DEAD from one jew LIE

moser HATED by jews: he followed the law

f.ck Jesus--from a "news" person!!

1000 fold the child of perdition

 

Hit Counter

 

Modified Saturday, March 11, 2017

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party