Should Mnangagwa Stop Making Jokes In Public

By Staff Reporter
|
50059
|
March 15, 2020

There is a question that is being discussed among President Mnangagwa’s legion of ardent supporters and loyalists; should the President abandon humour as a device for engaging his audience? Not everyone agrees with this sentiment.

The opposite group feels those that subscribe to this thinking are yielding to the whims of an uptight and tense clique of critics who will attack the President regardless of what he does or says. Even if he were to declare that God is good, this pack of detractors will find fault in it.

Therefore, this group of supporters doesn’t feel that it is right for President Mnangagwa to change his style of engaging just because some deliberately miss the essence of his jokes.

President Mnangagwa has been criticised for making a joke about vegetables. This was a joke replete with a serious message. But was he wrong? This writer does not believe that there was anything controversial about that joke. In fact, there was a very serious health message to the jocular delivery. Having heard and seen what’s trending about beef, today many are considering the options he was suggesting.

This is also in line with the worldwide dietary drift towards cutting down on the consumption of red meat. This writer has been on once a week red meat diet for the past seven years.

So in that vegetables and potato joke there was an underlying serious dietary message. Then there was the joke on hygiene enforcers/policemen which also had an underlying serious message about the need to exercise good domestic hygiene in order to get rid of disease-carrying domestic pests. If you go back a little bit one would find that President Mnangagwa employs levity as a device to engage his audience and sometimes to broach a difficult subject such as death. Levity is defined as the treatment of a serious matter with humour or lack of due respect.

It is a beautiful device. Sometimes he uses dark humour to drive a point home or even to debunk a hitherto taboo subject. Some define “dark humour” as a form of humour involving a twist or joke that is sometimes seen as offensive, harsh or even horrid. Yet the joke is still funny to those that get it.

Probably the most apt definition is the one that says dark humour is a more or less explicit and sacrilegious representation of humour that has its aim of making fun of situations usually regarded as tragic such as death, sickness or depression.

But some people take themselves too serious for nothing to the extent that they choose pettiness on the outside but their insides are very ugly. They are a pretentious and sanctimonious lot whose favourite pastime are dissecting jokes instead of laughing. Sad gits. So we have the same activists pushing very hard for freedom of speech on one hand and on another hand trying to curtail one of the artistic expressions of that freedom; humour.

Repressing laughter is dehumanising the human race. Laughter is one thing that separates us from animals in that most animals do all what human beings do except to laugh. Not even a hyena. It just makes a laughing sound but that is not a laugh. So those who want to repress the President’s humour, are you not trying to dehumanise him? If we followed your thinking, where will this end?

This will turn the whole world into a pensive order of monastic uptight monks. Thinkers like Descartes posited that laughter accompanies three of the six basic human emotions of wonder, love, (mild) hatred, desire, joy, and sadness. Should we then advocate for a wooden and scripted President with no sense of humour?

There is internal turmoil and psychological conflict within some in the

in that vegetables and potato joke there was an underlying serious dietary message. Then there was the joke on hygiene enforcers/policemen which also had an underlying serious message about the need to exercise good domestic hygiene in order to get rid of disease-carrying domestic pests. If you go back a little bit one would find that President Mnangagwa employs levity as a device to engage his audience and sometimes to broach a difficult subject such as death. Levity is defined as the treatment of a serious matter with humour or lack of due respe

Category:
News
Politics

Info News

DUI Defense Lawyer: Common Legal Defenses in Drunk Driving Cases

DUI defense lawyer, DUI defenses, drunk driving defense, DUI attorney, beat DUI charge, DUI case defense, DUI evidence

rnrn

DUI Defense Lawyer: Common Legal Defenses in Drunk Driving Cases

rnrn

A DUI arrest is not the same as a conviction. Prosecutors must prove the case, and the defense has the right to challenge the evidence.

rnrn

A DUI defense lawyer looks for legal, factual, and technical problems in the government’s case.

rnrn

Every DUI case is different. Some defenses focus on the traffic stop. Others focus on field sobriety tests, chemical testing, officer procedure, or whether the person was actually impaired.

rnrn

Defense 1: Illegal Traffic Stop

rnrn

Police usually need a legal reason to stop a driver.

rnrn

Possible stop reasons include:

rnrn

Speeding
rnSwerving
rnRunning a red light
rnExpired tag
rnEquipment violation
rnAccident investigation
rnReasonable suspicion of impaired driving

rnrn

If the stop was not legally justified, evidence gathered after the stop may be challenged.

rnrn

Defense 2: No Probable Cause for Arrest

rnrn

Even if the stop was legal, the officer must have enough evidence to make a DUI arrest.

rnrn

A lawyer may review:

rnrn

Driving behavior
rnOfficer observations
rnSpeech
rnBalance
rnOdor of alcohol
rnField sobriety tests
rnStatements
rnVideo evidence
rnMedical conditions

rnrn

If probable cause was weak, the arrest may be challenged.

rnrn

Defense 3: Field Sobriety Test Problems

rnrn

Field sobriety tests are not always reliable.

rnrn

A person may perform poorly because of:

rnrn

Medical conditions
rnAnxiety
rnFatigue
rnAge
rnInjury
rnPoor footwear
rnUneven ground
rnWeather
rnBad instructions
rnLanguage barriers

rnrn

A DUI lawyer may compare the officer’s report to body camera or dash camera video.

rnrn

Defense 4: Breath Test Issues

rnrn

Breath testing can be challenged if the machine or procedure was flawed.

rnrn

Potential issues include:

rnrn

Improper calibration
rnLack of maintenance
rnOfficer certification problems
rnMouth alcohol
rnVomiting or burping before test
rnMedical conditions
rnImproper observation period
rnRadio frequency interference claims
rnTesting outside required time windows

rnrn

A breath result is only as strong as the procedure behind it.

rnrn

Defense 5: Blood Test Problems

rnrn

Blood tests may be challenged based on:

rnrn

Improper blood draw
rnContamination
rnChain of custody
rnStorage problems
rnLab errors
rnFermentation
rnTesting delays
rnDocumentation gaps
rnQualified person requirements

rnrn

A lawyer may request lab records and review whether the sample was handled properly.

rnrn

Defense 6: Rising Blood Alcohol

rnrn

A rising blood alcohol defense argues that the person’s BAC was lower while driving and rose by the time of testing.

rnrn

This may be relevant when there is a delay between the stop and the chemical test.

rnrn

The defense depends on drinking timeline, food intake, body weight, test timing, and expert analysis.

rnrn

Defense 7: Medical Conditions

rnrn

Some medical conditions can affect DUI evidence.

rnrn

Examples may include:

rnrn

Diabetes
rnAcid reflux
rnNeurological disorders
rnBalance disorders
rnEye conditions
rnInjuries
rnFatigue
rnAnxiety
rnMedication side effects

rnrn

A medical issue does not automatically defeat a DUI charge, but it may explain certain observations.

rnrn

Defense 8: Not Actually Driving

rnrn

Some cases involve people found in parked vehicles.

rnrn

Legal issues may include:

rnrn

Was the person driving?
rnWas the engine on?
rnWhere were the keys?
rnWas the vehicle operable?
rnWas the person sleeping?
rnDid anyone witness driving?

rnrn

State laws vary on what counts as driving or actual physical control.

rnrn

Defense 9: Police Report vs. Video Evidence

rnrn

Police reports sometimes make a case look stronger than video shows.

rnrn

A DUI lawyer may review:

rnrn

Body camera footage
rnDash camera footage
rnBooking video
rnRoadside testing video
rnAudio recordings
rnJail observation video

rnrn

Video can confirm or contradict officer claims.

rnrn

Defense 10: Constitutional Violations

rnrn

A DUI case may involve constitutional issues such as:

rnrn

Unlawful stop
rnUnlawful search
rnImproper questioning
rnViolation of rights
rnImproper detention
rnLack of warrant where required

rnrn

A lawyer may file motions to suppress evidence if legal rights were violated.

rnrn

Final Thoughts

rnrn

A DUI defense lawyer does not rely on one-size-fits-all arguments. The defense depends on the evidence.

rnrn

Traffic stop, arrest procedure, field sobriety testing, chemical testing, video evidence, and constitutional issues all matter.

rnrn

If you are charged with DUI, get the evidence reviewed before deciding what to do next.

Spinal Cord Injury Lawyer: Compensation After A Life-Changing Injury

A spinal cord injury can change every part of a person’s life. Victims may face paralysis, chronic pain, limited mobility, surgery, rehabilitation, and major lifestyle changes. A spinal cord injury lawyer helps victims pursue compensation.

rnrn

These injuries may result from car accidents, truck crashes, falls, workplace accidents, medical errors, or violence.

rnrn

The cost of care can be extremely high. Victims may need wheelchairs, home modifications, personal care assistance, therapy, medication, and future surgeries.

rnrn

A lawyer can calculate both current and future damages. This is important because spinal injuries often require lifelong care.

rnrn

Compensation may include medical bills, lost income, future care, pain and suffering, disability, and loss of independence.

rnrn

Strong legal claims require medical records, expert testimony, accident evidence, and proof of negligence.

rnrn

A spinal cord injury is serious. Victims should not accept quick settlements without understanding long-term costs.