TexasCHLforum.com

Grillmark55 wrote:Drunk, ram a car at 50 MPH which then hits a bicyclist; slap on the wrist and be on your way - probably to do it again (hopefully without actually KILLING anybody).
But if you own a GUN: OH MY GOD! What kind of sick, psychopathic killer are you! Why do you need a gun?! How many people have you blown away?! You need to be locked up and all of your guns taken away before you decide to shoot somebody!

Killing some one in car accident, max is like 4 to 10 yrs. Use a firearm and you get the needle or life in cage. Driving License has privileges.

Based on all the reading I've done on her in the past few hours, I am led to believe that she would be against Campus Carry.
Perhaps she was so frustrated at all the pro campus carry stuff going on yesterday in the committee, she went out drinking to forget it.

Beiruty wrote:

Grillmark55 wrote:Drunk, ram a car at 50 MPH which then hits a bicyclist; slap on the wrist and be on your way - probably to do it again (hopefully without actually KILLING anybody).
But if you own a GUN: OH MY GOD! What kind of sick, psychopathic killer are you! Why do you need a gun?! How many people have you blown away?! You need to be locked up and all of your guns taken away before you decide to shoot somebody!

Killing some one in car accident, max is like 4 to 10 yrs. Use a firearm and you get the needle or life in cage. Driving License has privileges.

Actually, it is a second degree felony with a 20 year max sentence.

Beiruty wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Suspicion of DWI = she refused all testing but articulable probably cause existed that the person met the elements of DWI.

If they refused testing, I hope they got a blood warrant.


Suspicion of DWI == DWI

Would not refusal of testing results in automatic suspension of DL?

Yes but that is a civil proceeding in ALR court.

eureka40 wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Suspicion of DWI = she refused all testing but articulable probably cause existed that the person met the elements of DWI.

If they refused testing, I hope they got a blood warrant.


Suspicion of DWI == DWI

They got blood.........

According to the arrest affidavit, her blood-alcohol level was measured at 0.164 — more than twice the legal limit.

Also failed all field sobriety tests. She was hammered!!

Good to go - that bumps it to an MA and she will take a (probably harsh) plea. If the other person in the accident went to the hospital that got them a mandatory blood draw on Gonzalez so it's open and shut so long as they can wheel her as the driver.

New info this morning.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/loca ... t-b/nWs9r/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


When Gonzalez was asked to count from 67 to 42 backward, she replied, “I don’t think I can,” the affidavit said.

The investigating officer concluded that Gonzalez “was too impaired to be operating a motor vehicle safely” and took her into custody, the document said.

“Never once did Ms. Gonzalez ask how the other people involved in the crash were doing,” the affidavit said. “But she cried about how she had worked so hard to get to where she was.”

It's all about me!! It's all about me!! I don't care about the "little people".

eureka40 wrote: “Never once did Ms. Gonzalez ask how the other people involved in the crash were doing,” the affidavit said. “But she cried about how she had worked so hard to get to where she was.”

It's all about me!! It's all about me!! I don't care about the "little people".

I'm not surprised

I'm sure there is a perfectly logical reason a republican is a fault here. I'm sure we failed to provide some kind of tax funded entitlement service that would have prevented it and if that is not the case by all means she should get to work drafting the gonzalez aid for drunks bill.

The next time she makes gun control statements, I'd love to see someone challenge with the analogy, "Just because some people drive drunk doesn't mean banning and confiscating cars from law-abiding drivers makes any sense.

Jumping Frog wrote:The next time she makes gun control statements, I'd love to see someone challenge with the analogy, "Just because some people drive drunk doesn't mean banning and confiscating cars from law-abiding drivers makes any sense.

+10000

Is she anti-gun?

"Just because some people drive drunk doesn't mean banning and confiscating cars from law-abiding drivers makes any sense

Quite worth repeating.

Perhaps, she could be emailed this wisdom...

RHenriksen wrote:Is she anti-gun?

She's a democrat.

Jumping Frog wrote:

RHenriksen wrote:Is she anti-gun?

She's a democrat.

I know the odds, but decided against making an assumption. At least in the old days, in the South & MidWest, the two didn't always go in lockstep.

I read an article on WFAA where she claimed that she only had one Bud Light and one Tom Collins then tested at .169 BAC.....she must only weigh about 35 pounds.

steve817 wrote:I read an article on WFAA where she claimed that she only had one 64oz Bud Light and one pitcher of Tom Collins then tested at .169 BAC.....she must only weigh about 35 pounds.

There, I fixed it for you.

Could she be disbarred for this or does drunken vehicular assault count as good moral character now?