Todd Bertuzzi DUI

[Gatorbait19]

To continue to seriously argue a .081 DUI is exactly the same as a .24 DUI is irrational.

No dog in this fight - I see/get both sides you’re arguing. Not sure if this adds anything to the debate - but in the US (Fla.), there are enhanced penalties when you blow above .15 OR refuse the breathalyzer. They aren’t much (increased fine, increased license suspension) but the distinction exists.

Also PSA/FYI for everyone - you CAN get a DUI if you blow below a .08. Just because you blew below .08 doesn’t mean you’re “under the influence.”

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Lol so now we are saying if I grab a couple beers after hockey with the guys I should leave my car 20 miles away, pay $30 for an Uber back, and $30 to go pick it back up the next day? Even though there is zero chance I'm over the limit.

What if you have kids to take some where the next day? What if you can't afford it? Etc.

Man, this place gets worse every week. Now you can't drive PERIOD if you have ANY alcohol.

Hope you apply the same standard to anyone taking prescription drugs that MAY impair ability to operate a motor vehicle. Roads are gonna be wide open baby. Let's go

Oh, I meant more in the context of Bertuzzu's (doubling down on this spelling BTW) BAC level. No excuse for that IMO. And yes, when I was young and stupid, I definitely drove over the limit but he's 46. Big difference in my experience and someone that age driving that drunk is likely in trouble. Not being preachy here, I was genuinely worried about Bertuzzu.

 

[Edmonton East]

No dog in this fight - I see/get both sides you’re arguing. Not sure if this adds anything to the debate - but in the US (Fla.), there are enhanced penalties when you blow above .15 OR refuse the breathalyzer. They aren’t much (increased fine, increased license suspension) but the distinction exists.

Also PSA/FYI for everyone - you CAN get a DUI if you blow below a .08. Just because you blew below .08 doesn’t mean you’re “under the influence.”

Correct on both accounts. Just have to "demonstrate impairment", so not required to fail breathalyzer.

The primary reason for that caveat is you can have other substances in your body that cause significant impairments when combined with minimal alcohol (or completely unrelated to alcohol period).

 

[LeafGrief]

Your argument is either very childish or you are simply too emotionally invested in this to have a rational conversation. Which is honestly ok. Many people have been negatively impacted by drunk drivers, obviously.

To continue to seriously argue a .081 DUI is exactly the same as a .24 DUI is irrational.

Of course it's irrational. Here's the line from my first post that you responded to: "Driving drunk is a huge danger to yourself and to other motorists, whether you'd blow a .081 or a .24." I never said they were "exactly the same".

They are both a huge danger. Why do you need to point out that one is more dangerous when the other? It's completely besides the point. They don't have to be "exactly the same" to both be f***ing stupid and dangerous. Why do I need to qualify that some dangerous behaviour is more dangerous than other dangerous behaviour when the point is, "don't do the dangerous behaviour". I understand math and I understand physiology. There is nothing to have a rational conversation about when my sum total of contribution to the discussion is "Drunk driving is bad, don't do it". I understand that getting rebuffed is irritating, but you're trying to start a fight where there isn't one.

@ManofSteel55

 

[Edmonton East]

Of course it's irrational. Here's the line from my first post that you responded to: "Driving drunk is a huge danger to yourself and to other motorists, whether you'd blow a .081 or a .24."

They are both a huge danger. Why do you need to point out that one is more dangerous when the other? It's completely besides the point. They don't have to be "exactly the same" to both be f***ing stupid and dangerous. Why do I need to qualify that some dangerous behaviour is more dangerous than other dangerous behaviour when the point is, "don't do the dangerous behaviour". I understand math and I understand physiology. There is nothing to have a rational conversation about when my sum total of contribution to the discussion is "Drunk driving is bad, don't do it". I understand that getting rebuffed is irritating, but you're trying to start a fight where there isn't one.

@ManofSteel55

Gonna keep doubling down on this laughable argument, eh? Again, you continue to argue blowing a .081 is EXACTLY THE SAME as blowing a .24. I concisely pointed out why that doesn't make sense, though I could probably write a mini essay.

I sure hope you don't drive 60mph in a 55. Because you are just as dangerous as the guy going 110mph, apparently.

Get it yet?

 

[Chris P Bacon]

Tudd Burtuzzu

That was him slurring his speech.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Todd Bertuzzi is a shitty human being

 

[moog35]

Todd Bertuzzi is a legend

 

[Kranix]

Mark Crawford put him up to it.

 

[Kranix]

I don't get all the people who seem gleeful about this. Bertuzzi was clearly not in a great place, coming from the team masseur's funeral. (He was *loved* in Detroit... Jeff Blashill flat out wept during his press time the day Tchekmarev died.) He spoke at the funeral, so clearly they were close.

But I'm glad we can celebrate alcoholism and pain like this

And that's why the judge threw out the charges

 

[Edmonton East]

Oh, I meant more in the context of Bertuzzu's (doubling down on this spelling BTW) BAC level. No excuse for that IMO. And yes, when I was young and stupid, I definitely drove over the limit but he's 46. Big difference in my experience and someone that age driving that drunk is likely in trouble. Not being preachy here, I was genuinely worried about Bertuzzu.

Oh yea, I figured. You were just collateral damage with me responding to the whole no driving after a drop of alcohol argument.

I'm probably among the most strict in my friend group regarding drinking and driving. But I'm still gonna argue against people who overreact and make hyperbolic, nonsensical arguments. Like that there is no difference in the severity of drunk driving. Or that you shouldn't drive a car after 1 beer.

These are folks just trying to feel morally superior. Like you even said, that stuff comes off as preachy.

 

[Kamaya Painters]

He was just on the Cam and Strick podcast.

Pretty good interview if you ask me.

Yeah and he mentioned he was attending the funeral of the Red Wing's masseuer.

The story about Milbury making them skate from A to Z is something Söderström has told as well.

 

[LeafGrief]

Gonna keep doubling down on this laughable argument, eh? Again, you continue to argue blowing a .081 is EXACTLY THE SAME as blowing a .24. I concisely pointed out why that doesn't make sense, though I could probably write a mini essay.

I sure hope you don't drive 60mph in a 55. Because you are just as dangerous as the guy going 110mph, apparently.

Get it yet?

Dude go back and read my post again. I don't think you absorbed a single word of it. Doubled down? I agreed that it was irrational.

Here, I'll say it for you. THEY ARE NOT EXACTLY THE SAME. THEY ARE DIFFERENT. THEY ARE STILL BOTH BAD. ARE YOU HAPPY NOW?

 

[CascadiaPuck]

I'd wager nearly every single person here has a friend or family member that has a DWI, DUI or alcoholism that they'd love and defend tooth and nail.

No. Love and support someone like that, maybe. Defend? Hell no. Driving drunk cannot be defended or minimized. And for those who say they would do this, let them try to actually defend those loved ones to the faces of people who've had their loved ones killed or maimed by drunk drivers. So, so many of them would fold before even having to start trying. It's not defensible.

Re: Bertuzzi, he can rot. I guess he should've followed through on his (total non sequitur) threat to move back back to Canada if Trump lost.

 

[Shakey Rustie]

I thought Bertuzzi moved back to Canada?

 

[Rodgerwilco]

Is anyone really surprised that Bertuzzi is still doing dangerous and reckless shit with no regard for someone else’s safety??

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

Should've got a BertUber.

 

[CascadiaPuck]

So many new judges have been appointed since the early 2000's.

It's nice that you guys took the time to step down from your pedestal to pronounce judgement outside of your regular court hours.

You should print out your take and tape it to the gravestones of my friends. Or better yet, pitch it to their mom.

I'm all for support of people having troubles with substance abuse, but pretending judgment isn't warranted in clear cut cases of criminality is off base.

 

[Dakota Sioux]

Tearful remorse press conference in 3..2..1....

Yep. Sorry I made a poor decision to drive after drinking. Poor judgment on my part. It won’t happen again

 

[Hasbro]

No. I hope that nobody in here needs to hear this, but driving drunk is unacceptable regardless of your level of inebriation. Driving drunk is a huge danger to yourself and to other motorists, whether you'd blow a .081 or a .24. Don't do it for f***'s sakes.

And should have plenty of money available to take an Uber.

 

[ManofSteel55]

Of course it's irrational. Here's the line from my first post that you responded to: "Driving drunk is a huge danger to yourself and to other motorists, whether you'd blow a .081 or a .24." I never said they were "exactly the same".

They are both a huge danger. Why do you need to point out that one is more dangerous when the other? It's completely besides the point. They don't have to be "exactly the same" to both be f***ing stupid and dangerous. Why do I need to qualify that some dangerous behaviour is more dangerous than other dangerous behaviour when the point is, "don't do the dangerous behaviour". I understand math and I understand physiology. There is nothing to have a rational conversation about when my sum total of contribution to the discussion is "Drunk driving is bad, don't do it". I understand that getting rebuffed is irritating, but you're trying to start a fight where there isn't one.

@ManofSteel55

Seems like you are the one trying to start a fight here. And to be fair, your sum total of contribution is not "Drunk driving is bad, don't do it", so I'm not sure why you are picking fights on it as literally nobody has disagreed with drunk driving being bad. Seems like an interesting hill to die on.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

I don't get all the people who seem gleeful about this. Bertuzzi was clearly not in a great place, coming from the team masseur's funeral. (He was *loved* in Detroit... Jeff Blashill flat out wept during his press time the day Tchekmarev died.) He spoke at the funeral, so clearly they were close.

But I'm glad we can celebrate alcoholism and pain like this

I don’t see anyone “gleeful“. Millions go through death of their loved ones without Driving drunk. No one is happy that Bertuzzi went through losing someone close to him. I just think no one really feels bad for him that he chose an unhealthy way to handle it. It’s 2021. There’s just no excuse for it.

 

[ManofSteel55]

Should've got a BertUber.

Yep. Instead he is getting a Bertu-ZUI

 

[Hasbro]

Dumb choice gets rewarded, but before the high and might get on their horses for the day one should probably consider that every day people that others would consider quality human beings get DUI’s all the time.

Clearly not the case here.

 

[Matty Sundin]

I don’t support driving drunk and it’s a stupid choice but I don’t know Todd personally or what’s going in his life enough to judge him on why he would a make such dumb choice.

I will point it out it’s very easy to slam a player that doesn’t exactly have the best track record on ice and is inactive when someone like Ryan O’Rielly who’s gets forgotten for his mistakes like driving a vehicle drunk through a tim Hortons and tried to flee and gets acquitted cause Canadian courts are a joke