OMG, I would pay to see this. Ratings gold.
Did you join so you could revel in your tales of handicapped parking heroics, and we would pat you on the back and throw a big party for your bravery like you seem to want everyone to do? Also, am I the only one that finds it ironic that you’re so preoccupied with passive aggression, when your commentary on your parking lot escapades amounts to no more than sneak bragging?
ETA: above directed at jamie, obviously.
Are you tired of trying to explain this to us?
Right, why would you have joined for that when you always bring your own?
Troll.
Or maybe more appropriately… tRoll.
But, by your own admission, you’re an, ‘aggressive asshole’! What do you expect from the world when that’s what you put out?
More importantly, how can you be surprised that you get nothing but push back, when all you do is push? Baffling.
And what’s to defend? You are bitter. You do groove on battling and you are deaf to any other opinion.
I don’t think Jamie is such a terrible guy; I think he goes a bit too far in his crusade, but I applaud the cause of his crusade, and maybe if more people were willing to challenge all the assholes we see doing asshole stuff all the time, they’d be shamed into acting like decent members of society instead of assholes.
Maybe.
Jamie, I don’t want to pile onwhat has been said.
However maybe you could take stock of virtually all your posts have been about a whiney entitled prick.
And, for my own benefit, I can’t visualise any circumstances where I would poduce a private message. That is infra dig.
Sounds like we need a companion thread to ‘using your bra as a purse.’. Anyone want to pop over to IMHO and start that? 
It really is perfect Larry David territory. Regardless of whether the restaurant did the wrong thing, Jamie still managed to come off as a jerk and embarrassed his date.
Bolding mine:
So you understand the purpose of this thread?
It’s sad that Jamie doesn’t realize that everything he’s posted here describes himself to a T…
I don’t think that is correct. The law says that blowing a .08 (or whatever the current number is) is prima facie evidence of DUI, and your ass is grass.
It’s more of a hill to climb, but I’m pretty sure that you can be convicted of DUI with a lower number, based on field sobriety tests, observed driving weaving, etc.
Not in my state. If you are driving badly, and you blow less than .08, you might get a reckless driving charge or something like that. But you won’t get a DUI.
Yeah. If jamiemcgarry didn’t exist, Larry David or Jerry Seinfeld would have to invent him.
Stop it - you’re killing me!
Michigan’s Zero Tolerance laws say that you’ll be charged with an OWI if you are under 21 and have a BAC over .02 but less then .08.
In every state, province, and territory where I’ve lived, one can be prosecuted successfully for DUI if one has a greater than 0.0% BAC if one is under the legal age to imbibe. Just as with the term insane, there’s a popular meaning for the term DUI and a legal definition. Unsurprisingly, the police, prosecutors, and courts tend to adhere to the legal definition.
Is it DUI or underage drinking? Regardless, I stand by my assertion that a BAC of .06 did not contribute to or cause Jamie’s accident.
The thing is, none of us were in that car with Jamie the night he had his accident* so there is no earthly way of knowing if his drinking contributed to it or not.
Admittedly there’s a difference between being buzzed and being completely in the bag, but I’ve been in enough cars with tipsy people to know that they can and do take risks they normally wouldn’t, go faster than they should, their reactions aren’t as swift. Can anyone definitively say he got in the accident because he was drinking? Nope. Can it be ruled out with any certainty? Nope again.
*unless by some unearthly coincidence the friend who was with Jamie that night is a member of the boards and reading along.