Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (2939)	10/16/2006 9:15:13 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

I completely agree with you about defining abuse as an ongoing problem with only one occurence as a reference. But I have no problem with saying that in the strictest sense alcohol was abused the night I said goodnight to my guests after we threw a law school graduation party, turned to my husband and said, I am going to throw up and I don't remember where our bathroom is.

To: TimF who wrote (2939)	10/16/2006 10:51:57 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 10087

I know more than I would rather know about the jargon of alcoholism from my days representing DUI defendants. Counseling DUI defendants is very jargonistic profession (I mean the alcohol counsellors). But I did observe that the people who kept driving drunk after multiple DUIs were a lot worse off than the ones who stopped after one. Eventually the judges max them out just to keep them off the road, because they just don't care who they hurt. But that's a tiny percentage, maybe one in a hundred? Not a scientific sample, but I think I handled about 200 DUIs and saw two, no more than three, like that, after I started getting assigned felonies. The "control" group would be other traffic cases and the guy has a DUI years ago and no recidivism.