Tenn. Rep. Rob Briley Charged with DUI, Leaving Scene of Accident

September 11, 2007

  • September 11, 2007 at 5:43 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The good congressman just wanted to make sure the current laws weren’t adequate – so he decided to test them himself. Well ‘ol boy, they work!

  • September 12, 2007 at 9:45 am
    Claim Gal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Did the arrest take place on Briley Parkway in Nashville? That would be priceless…

  • September 12, 2007 at 12:01 pm
    gettmadd.com says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Current DUI laws do nothing to save lives and everything to line pockets. I’m sure the comprehensive bill being pushed by terrorist organizations like MADD, that profit from everyone charged, is the best approach? NOT. Take the gorilla (MADD) out of the process and write laws that are 1) FAIR and 2) just. I believe our fine Rep is about to find out about MADD vengeance and justice. He should be treated just like the pervert in the Minnesota bathroom. http://www.ridl.us / http://www.duiblog.com / http://www.gettmadd.com

  • September 12, 2007 at 12:45 pm
    Mr. Obvious says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Why would anyone fight FOR drunk driving?
    Have you killed a few brain cells from over-indulgence?

  • September 12, 2007 at 12:52 pm
    Claims Guy says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This clown has lost credibility. How can his committee address the issue of drunk driving laws when he himself is the poster boy for DUI? He should be censured by his peers, reprimanded, and tossed off this committee.

  • September 12, 2007 at 1:53 am
    Nobody Important says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’m sorry Gettmadd, that’s a rediculous statement. My father was an alcoholic who should have been off the road 40 years before he died. The laws 20 years ago were far too lax and allowed him to drive and hurt himself and others. We couldn’t stop him from driving and the law wouldn’t. Even the death of his own brother in an accident he caused didn’t change his driving, maybe it made it worse. Why is it so hard to some of you to believe that tougher laws are needed? It’s not just a matter of personal responsibility. We need these to protect all of us from these people. I certainly am no liberal so don’t accuse me of that crime. To say it’s being done just to make money sounds just stupid to me.

  • September 12, 2007 at 1:57 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Gee, I was going for sarcasm.

    I do agree we need to figure out a way to keep drunks out of cars. I’m all for impounding the car on the first offense. It’s not like people don’t know it’s illegal to drive while intoxicated. There are other things I’d like to see – one of which is that comprehensive bill the good Congressman was pushing to see if it is up to snuff.

  • September 12, 2007 at 2:03 am
    LLH says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Never Happen…he’s a demmy – or is that dummy?

  • September 12, 2007 at 6:05 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I’ve found that party lines tend to blur around most issues. Democrats and Republicans have both shown themselves to be human and politicians. This is not a party thing – more of an integrity thing.

  • September 13, 2007 at 4:35 am
    johnny says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What’s wrong with checkpoints, especially on a holiday weekend when the level of drunk drivers on the road(s) in drastically higher? If you are not drinking and driving, what’s it to you as they will just wave you through. What are you trying to hide? Dope in your car or smuggling people? Just curious.

  • September 13, 2007 at 6:09 am
    getmadd.com says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Being anti-MADD does not = pro drunk driving. Get a clue. Unreasonable search is protected under the Constitution? Why do we have checkpoints if search without cause is protected? Thanks MADD. Due process is protected under the constitution. Thanks again MADD for being able to trample on the Constitution as far as duep process. I feel safe on the roads because I drive defensively. I don’t need some special interest group getting laws passed that violate our constitutional protections so people that post here can feel “safe” on the roads. Those that give up freedom for safety have neither.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*