You must log in or register to comment.
Everyone should have to retake the driving test (both written and practical) every five years. And if you don’t pass on the first try or are in a crash where you are found at fault, it should be bumped up to every year for the following five years.
People drive dangerously because they’ve forgotten rules, or rules have changed, or they’ve had a physical or cognitive decline. And yet we’re like “yep, you took a test once decades ago, good to go.”
Dangerous driving kills so many people.
I’m guessing they would do this if they could justify the cost to voters. I recall having to wait months for my driving test. Sadly, I have a feeling it’s easier to kick that problem (i.e. accidents) down to someone else’s department. But I’m totally with you. Yesterday I almost got ran over by someone that treated a stop sign like a yield sign.
DUI laws are too strict. It shouldn’t be all or nothing at .08 BAC but more severe punishments for more severe inebriation. .08 is pretty low and people who drink regularly can function fine at that level.
People hate this one but… hey, it’s my most unpopular opinion.
That’s one I used to hold until I went looking for studies on how smaller doses of alcohol impact a person’s driving ability. What I found was a linear, dose-dependent response with no real hard cutoffs. Driving is dangerous enough; there’s little benefit to making that worse by drinking beforehand.
I might be OK with a reduced penalty at .08, but I’d like to add a slap on the wrist at an even lower level.
deleted by creator
They used to be more lax, the current rules are more strict because it IS a problem and there are studies showing it to be. Hence the lower BAC limits.
Cognitive ability is a far better test. I used to be a raging alco, like real alco, not just daily drinker. The levels I functioned at would kill most people.
Of course I still have alcoholism, but I haven’t drank in 12+ years. While I don’t condone drinking and driving at all - in fact it makes no sense at all in this age of ride sharing - but if I were on a jury I could be swayed by a heavy drinker excuse. 🤷♂️
Mine are unpopular, but in the other direction.
I think your first DUI offense should be the last time you drive. Period. I feel like the fact it’s so lax is due to people knowing they won’t be severely punished.
Punishments are pretty severe… Night in jail, thousands in fines, possibility of losing your license… Justified when the person is actually inebriated but I don’t believe that is the case at .08… that’s a little buzz.
Not trying to change minds here though. I know it’s an unpopular opinion.
Votes should be inversely weighted by age. The vote of someone who’s going to clock out before the next election even rolls around shouldn’t be worth the same as the vote of someone who’s going to have to live with the consequences for half a century or more.
Or have the voting age be 18 years old to the average national life expectancy, although i really haven’t thought this through too much. I assume if such a situation were to exist, it would be much easier to cut Social Security and Medicare without losing the elderly vote, so that probably would backfire.
Ooooh dark. I like.
Vote 1! @Sordid
Nickelback is an alright band. Far from my favorite, I just don’t get what all the hate was about.
In fact, I’d go as far as saying that their first album is pretty good, and I like it. Except from that song which is severely overplayed and mediocre.
deleted by creator
I was in Middle School when they hit it big, and am Canadian to boot. They got overplayed to the point of frustration on the radio and TV.
Couple that with them being one of the last successful “butt-rock” bands, and my friend group had everything we needed to hate on them.
Onedrive is not that bad of a service*.
*
Using linux of course.
I kind of agree… I hated it at first but it grew on me.
Why would I post it here? I’d get mass downvoted, only mild unpopular opinions are popular.
We don’t have karma
Still, it would be buried at the bottom of the thread.
Oh no!
On toilets with two flush buttons for different flow rates, if there is a larger button and a smaller button (with no other singe), the larger button should correspond to the lower flow rate. Odds are more people are flushing for pee, and don’t need the extra flow, and the more common action should be represented by a larger button. For people who are unsure, lazy, or not looking, they’re probably pressing the larger button just for pee, and wasting water if that were to correspond to more water usage, which is wasteful.
Isn’t this how they actually are? I’ve only seen 2 of these in my life, but both had the big button for a piss rinse, and the smaller one for the shit shoot.
piss rinse … shit shoot
I actually LOL’d. Thank you.
The Beatles are highly overrated. I respect the impact they had, and I acknowledge that the music I like (metal) would not exist without them, but I’ll go out of my way to avoid listening to them.
It was easier to be a big fish in the pre-internet music pond. I would never said the Beatles are bad, they aren’t. But aside from understanding the historical significance, I would never ever put the Beatles on regularly.
Just as I don’t watch B&W films every night. Charlie Chaplin was great, for the time, just simpler than what I actually actually enjoy.
I’m also on this camp. I get the significance, but I think I just didn’t resonate with what they wrote, and the “old” production.
Here and there I found a great version someone else performed and was surprised to find it’s a Beatles song, then I heard the OG and went “yup, still not for me”.
Linux will never come close to replacing Windows.
deleted by creator
Graveyards are a disgusting waste of space. Their existence communicates to society that many dead people are more entitled to space on this Earth than some living people will ever have.
ADHD is massively over diagnosed in the US. No shit stimulants make you concentrate better, that doesn’t mean you had ADHD. Concentration is like a muscle, you have to actively invest effort into making it better. It’s hard to concentrate and scrolling through posts and flicking through shorts is atrophying this ability. It’s like someone who doesn’t work out or eat well thinking they have a muscle development disorder, taking anabolic steroids, and since they gained muscle it confirms their suspicions that they had a disorder. Concentrating is difficult, it takes active effort, and you will hit walls when your brain is tired. It can be trained, however. This should be the focus and stimulants should be the absolute last option and only for people who truly meet the definition of disorder, i.e. it greatly impairs their relationships, work, or daily life.
I’m not saying it doesn’t exist at all, but I do think it’s way over diagnosed. Doctors want those high patient satisfaction scores, which is another issue in medicine in general.
Your opinion is unpopular because it’s clear you don’t know what ADHD is. It’s not just “trouble concentrating”. It’s not even primarily that. It’s a slew of issues, physical, mental, and emotional.
I know the DSM isn’t perfect but inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity are the main criteria, and those are all issues that I believe stem from poor concentration or focus.
My opinion still remains the same; I think many have these traits but few have it to a level which is appropriately classified as a disorder. Stimulants are performance enhancing drugs for your brain and they have side effects. People hear from a friend or post online that it helped someone and go get evaluated - by a for profit industry that stands to make money by getting more patients. Pretty easy to cut someone a script and bill that CPT code.
I’m not saying this disorder doesn’t exist, or that some people have no option but medication. I do think it’s over diagnosed by an industry relying on patient satisfaction scores.
This is my unpopular opinion. I don’t believe taking a medication for life as the first line treatment is appropriate, especially when they’re directly affecting reward pathways. ADHD is just one of many areas in medicine I see this happening.
You’re right, but I think it’s also massively underdiagnosed in certain groups like women, immigrants from countries with shit views on mental health.
A lot of my opinion also hinges on that last D, disorder. For example, many people have autistic characteristics, but few have autistic spectrum disorder that severely impairs their normal functioning in life. Likewise with ADHD; just because you can’t concentrate well doesn’t mean you have a disorder. Pills shouldn’t be the first line response.
In general I see this as an issue with healthcare in general; few want to put in the hard work, everyone wants pills or injections. This is also seen in fat loss (GLP-1 drugs rather than a healthy diet and being active) or how the VA treats disabled servicemembers (pills first, skimp on the mental health treatment or physical therapy). I’m not sure where to place the crazy rise of testosterone replacement therapy but I also believe it fits in this general “drugs first” approach. We love our drugs.
The fact doctors rely heavily on patient satisfaction scores exacerbates the issue. Sometimes the best medicine is not at all what the patient wants to hear.
I would not lay it on the patients. My wife is on GLP-1 but she begs my doctor to raise her thyroid supplement instead. Her tests come back as the bottom of normal and she has thinning hair, dry skin, constipation, and feels cold all the time. She does have other medical issues but I mean common lets use a little common sense and factor in symptoms along with the blood test. I firmly believe there is some sort of kickback scheme going like with the opiods because thyroid is super cheap.
Absolutely 100%
The St. Anger snare is fine.
No idea. I can’t sort by up down votes.
The purpose of government is to take care of the people. I’d rather pay more taxes to make sure my fellow men are fed, clothed, sheltered, educated and cared for because it improves security for my loved ones.
It should also keep us from trying to exploit or attack each other
The question of ‘What is the purpose of government?’ is simultaneously deeply important to society and yet rarely, if ever, addressed in a useful context. I have watched people argue about multiple policies, speaking past each other the whole time, just because they had different baseline assumptions as to the purpose of government and couldn’t even see their opponents had a different definition.
I find it difficult to respect the way we exist in society. Most of us in the west enjoy what we have because someone elsewhere is being exploited. The general pride and vanity we have is unjustified and we should be using that power for good instead. We are focused on the
rightwrong things.You could say that this opinion isn’t unpopular, but just try bringing it up in conversation. Many don’t want to know.
