▲ 433 ▼ Cyberattack on vehicle breathalyzer company leaves drivers stranded across the US (techcrunch.com) submitted 7 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 88 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] plz1@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (6 children) Nice straw man. Murder != drunk driving. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] quiltstimuli@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago Killing someone with your car = murder Fuck drink drivers! permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (3 children) Interlock devices are the bare minimum if you insist on allowing people who have proven they will drive drunk to continue to drive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] plz1@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (2 children) I was arguing with the point of "repeatedly" being a determining factor for having to have this device. It's not reality, once is enough. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago Yes, once is enough. Repeatedly should get you banned from driving. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago When you consider that most people get away with a crime dozens of times at least before getting caught, then yes being caught once is enough. permalink fedilink source parent [–] cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago sure its not the same, but it gets really close, really fast permalink fedilink source parent
[–] quiltstimuli@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago Killing someone with your car = murder Fuck drink drivers! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (3 children) Interlock devices are the bare minimum if you insist on allowing people who have proven they will drive drunk to continue to drive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] plz1@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (2 children) I was arguing with the point of "repeatedly" being a determining factor for having to have this device. It's not reality, once is enough. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago Yes, once is enough. Repeatedly should get you banned from driving. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago When you consider that most people get away with a crime dozens of times at least before getting caught, then yes being caught once is enough. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] plz1@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (2 children) I was arguing with the point of "repeatedly" being a determining factor for having to have this device. It's not reality, once is enough. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago Yes, once is enough. Repeatedly should get you banned from driving. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago When you consider that most people get away with a crime dozens of times at least before getting caught, then yes being caught once is enough. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago Yes, once is enough. Repeatedly should get you banned from driving. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago When you consider that most people get away with a crime dozens of times at least before getting caught, then yes being caught once is enough. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago sure its not the same, but it gets really close, really fast permalink fedilink source parent