Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Tornado_Wind_of_Love t1_j5v770l wrote

Reply to comment by AssistantPretty5947 in Drive Free or Die? NH considers restricting pets in cars by DietCokeMachine

Sounds like she doesn't have a brain

Makes sense.

As someone else pointed out, it's already covered in existing laws.

−5

BelichicksBurner t1_j5vghat wrote

Trust me, if it's not a specific law its not covered. The post with the reckless driving thing is a stretch at best. Good luck arguing that in a courtroom. Even if the judge accepts it (which I'm not so sure they would) unless you have it on film the person could say just about whatever they want in terms of where the pet was at the time. Also for some of these kinds of people it's a "service animal" and a lot of people think that means they can do whatever they want with them. I'm no Republican...but this is a reasonable law.

6

[deleted] t1_j5vhj8g wrote

[deleted]

1

Azr431 t1_j5wb6eo wrote

You really think republicans are about less control?? Hahaha

2

[deleted] t1_j5y03ow wrote

[deleted]

0

otiswrath t1_j6bloll wrote

Horse shit.

Who do you think keeps holding up marijuana legalization. Hint: it isn't the Democrats.

Who keeps advocating for banning books they don't like? Hint: it isn't the Democrats.

Who keeps trying to push their god into every political decision because they think it is what is the best for other people? Hint: it isn't the Democrats.

The Democratic party isn't perfect by any means and I have plenty of gripes with them too but don't drink the Kool aid of "Republican means freedom".

They want the freedom to do what they want not freedom for others to make their own decisions.

2

BelichicksBurner t1_j5vhsg8 wrote

Pretty sure it I read that it came from one didn't it?

0

[deleted] t1_j5vikef wrote

[deleted]

0

BelichicksBurner t1_j5vj8z5 wrote

It's not covered by previous laws. One person posted that and they're incorrect. Also side note: there's no such thing as libertarians. Just Republicans who try to convince kids they're cool. Cops also get a TON of money from Dems and GOP here, so idk what you mean. Seatbealt law was bipartisan because it was fucking stupid not to have one in place to begin with.

1

vexingsilence t1_j5vzi1l wrote

Unless you can show us a court case where the charge was rejected, I stand by it being reckless driving. All the cop has to say is that he observed the driver being distracted by the animal. A judge isn't going to care about where you say the animal was at the time. They'll take the cop's word over yours. As for service animals, they're well trained, they wouldn't be sitting in the owner's lap or doing anything to distract them.

1