It’s ridiculous. He was not drunk. End of story.
There are plenty of other reasons to call Jamie a douche nozzle; this is not one of them.
The law ruled it out. .06 is not drunk.
Would now be a good time to start speculating on Jamie’s steroid use? He is a bodybuilder, and fairly aggro…
And once we get there, can we start speculating on how teeny-tiny his balls must be at this point?
No fucking shit. I love how everyone in this thread’s putting on their stethoscopes and powdered wigs to play doctor and lawyer as if they were right there in surgery with him and then in the courtroom listening to the testimony. As if being right on this particular point (which they aren’t, and can’t be) even has fuck all to do with the discussion at hand.
Guys, this thread isn’t about whether he was a douche and therefore has a wheelchair.
This is a thread about a douche who happens to have a wheelchair. There’s a difference.
I think you’re missing the point. It’s not about whether or not he’s a douche, it’s about his decision making and his perspective. He may not have been found legally drunk, but without access to the court records or having been a witness, we cannot say with certainty how much contribution his BAC may have had on the accident. So, even if he wasn’t legally drunk, it’s not unlikely that the alcohol may have dulled his senses and reactions enough to have, in some way, contributed to the situation. At the same time, it’s also possible that he may have had the same accident even with zero alcohol in his blood.
IOW, he made a decision which may have led to his need for medical care which, in turn, led to his paralysis. As such, he likely bares more ownership of his own condition than, say, someone who was completely sober and hydro-planed or was rear-ended and fell into the same sub-par medical care. Or, to use an analogy, let’s say I decide to walk through the bad part of town late at night and I get mugged. I don’t in any way deserve to get mugged just for being there, but I also can’t argue that that was an unforeseeable consequence of that choice and though the criminal himself bares full responsibility for his choice to mug me, I also need to own my part of my circumstances for making the choice to put myself in that situation whereas, without that choice, I wouldn’t have been mugged at all.
So, sure, he’s not a douche for driving with 0.06% BAC, hell, I imagine a majority of people on this board have driven with alcohol in their systems at some point or another. But lack of legal responsibility does not provide moral absolution or remove the consequences of one’s choices. And this carries over into his other behavior wherein he acts in confrontational ways, like with the parking incidences, but doesn’t seem to understand how his confrontational behavior has resulted in negative consequences for his actions, like having his gym membership revoked.
As such, it is this series of events that establishes a pattern of behavior in which I believe demonstrates a lack of foresight and personal accountability. Lacking those attributes doesn’t directly make one a jerk, but it certainly makes it easier, as not being able to see one’s own contribution to a particular situation makes it easier to assign full blame to others, which in turn makes it easier to be aggressive and confrontational with those people. And the lack of foresight also means that one is more likely to put oneself in poor situations without fully considering the risks involved which, again, makes confrontational and aggressive behavior easier because the potential negative consequences are illconsidered.
So, sure, it isn’t direct evidence of jerkish behavior and it in no way justifies a consequence of life-long paralysis; however, to ignore it as a data point in establishing the pattern that contributes to jerkish behavior is also ridiculous.
Blaster Master, I see your point, but I just don’t agree.
Yes. Yes we apparently are.
For someone who supposedly likes to drink so much, jamie isn’t too much fun to be around.
Yeah, a .06 BAC is so much. 
Probably the equivalent of two beers.
Whooosh…
Well, I just meant there’s all this talk about him drinking…you get this image of him as this wild fun loving party animal when he probably gets more excited about the prospect of busting someone who doesn’t technically have their handicapped permit out than he does at the idea of doing body shots.
Ha, I agree. Actually a few drinks would probably do him a world of good.
Pipe down and get me some bourbon, ya young whippersnapper!
Kewl, it worked overnight!
Anyway, maybe we should get back to discussing more important matters. Like a few other episodes of Curb Your Wheelchair. I think jamie’s date where the waiters tried to take his wheelchair off to the side would be brilliant. Also, an episode where he goes to the animal shelter to adopt a pet and throws a tantrum because he wanted a dog with wheels for hind legs but an able body family got there first.
If Jamie, while driving with a BAC of .06, had hit someone else, who was then subsequently paralyzed while the doctor performed a life-saving operation that, in itself, can result in paraplegia, would y’all be saying “It’s OK, you weren’t legally drunk!” ?
:rolleyes:
As I tell my wife, legality != morality
Funniest fucking thing I’ve read on these boards in years. I’m still laughing me ass off.
I for one would endorse a crossover between *Curb Your Wheelchair *and Curb-stomp Your Nards.
I would not consider his drinking as the reason for the accident. Do you drive on Saturday nights? Half the people out there have a BAC of .06 if they had two glasses of wine with dinner.
People who get their panties in a wad about a .06 BAC don’t know much about drinking…
(Bolding mine)
His response was the same old wide-eyed passive-aggressive bullshit he pulls on the forums: You misunderstand my posts, I’m a well-meaning innocent and people either misunderstand me or gasp react in a hostile and baffling way to my polite, well-meaning questions.
Also he suggested that I no longer open any of his posts, since I was clearly prejudiced, had my mind made up about him before I even opened his thread, and misunderstood his poor innocent self.
I didn’t respond to his last whining little PM to me. His tone in his private messages to me was whining and predictable, with not a shred of acknowledgement that I was trying to make nice.
Really? I am commenting on the truthfulness of chiroptera’s characterization of my words, not her own. I told her I didn’t think her comment was rude or offensive. I don’t believe my responses were "passive-aggressive, “whining” or came across as making myself out as something “poor and innocent.”
I am truly finished defending myself in this thread. I didn’t join this message board for nastiness, pettiness and slander.
I confess I also want Millionaire Matchmaker’s Patti Stanger to show up and give Jamie tips about dating while rolling.