Georgia State Rep. Kip Smith, alleged drunk driver who lives on the taxpayer's dime, wants to make sure people who live on the taxpayer's dime don't smoke pot.
Georgia State Representative John Andrew (“Kip”) Smith was arrested last Friday in Buckhead on a charge of driving under the influence. According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the Republican legislator was pulled over by police after allegedly running a red light after leaving a local restaurant.
The police officer who pulled over Rep. Smith smelled alcohol and asked Smith if he’d been drinking. First he said “no,” then claimed he’d had one beer 45 minutes earlier. When the officer asked Smith to blow into a breathalyzer, he refused, asking instead to be tested at a hospital. When the officer explained that only happens after an arrest, Smith relented and blew into the device, registering a blood-alcohol content of .091, over the per se limit of .080.
Smith again changed his story to say he’d had the beer 15 minutes, not 45 minutes, earlier. Police then say Smith failed two field sobriety tests. After being placed under arrest, Smith blew twice more into the breathalyzer, measuring .099 and .100.
According to most DUI tables, a 180 lb. man would need three beers and a 240 lb. man would need four beers to register a .100. That’s a figure that decreases by .01 for every forty minutes after drinking, by the way. Even a 100 lb. woman after one beer would only be at a .070.
If the name “Rep. Kip Smith” rings a bell for readers of this blog, it is because he was one of six who co-sponsored House Bill 464, “to require random drug testing for recipients of certain public assistance.” The sponsor, Republican Rep. Jason Spencer, had said of the proposed testing, “Georgia taxpayers have a vested interest in making sure their hard-earned tax dollars aren’t used to subsidize drug addiction.”
Wait, aren’t hard-earned Georgia tax dollars paying Rep. Smith’s salary? What will Georgians think of subsidizing drunk drivers who lie to the police? Or is drug addiction only reprehensible when it’s poor people using non-liquid drugs?
I don’t imagine they’ll fall anywhere but into some other cushy government job when we re-legalize marijuana. But at least they’ll stop gnawing on us.
I’m a believer and in that regard I would say, “Pride commeth before the fall;)”
Sometimes, I almost wish I were a “believer” instead of an agnostic. – Then I would derive some comfort from knowing that all these would-be rulers who delight in persecuting people for choosing a FAR less harmful recreational drug than they themselves consume, would roast in hell for eternity.