Drinking laws

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: Engineer
I'm not sure that .08 is low enough....these two little girls have no daddy - (my brother - RIP)

You drink, you drive...if you kill someone, I only hope it's yourself. If you are caught....lock em up and no license...period!

You drink, you drive...you kill someone...you're a bad driver to begin with. It's not that hard to drive after a few drinks trust me I've never seen ANYONE break a single driving law. If their reaction time is slowed down and some idiot punk is illegally crossing the street and they can't stop..it's the pedestrians fault.

It's sad to know that MADD has so much power as their judgement is clearly clouded with hatred and prejudice.

You're a complete stupid fool! :|

There's that trademark Republican 'personal responsibility' we keep hearing about (bolded)

"I didn't do nuthin--it's the other guy's fault"

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

I said illegally crossing the street. Meaning not at a street corner or cross walk.

Oh, so the drunk is going to stop for the pedestrian because he's in the crosswalk..got it :roll:

Or maybe the pedestrain is dressed in black like an idiot (I see this almost every night I have half a mind to just run em over the way they dart out into traffic ilegally).

Hey, go for it--another idiot (you) off the road is fine with me. :thumbsup:

Also, like i've mentioned before, the ones who really get punished are the sophisticated hard-working members of society (the ones who don't wreck) because they actually follow the laws and won't be able to drive and will have to pay fines whereas some low-life poor scum will get DUI after DUI after DUI and not care that he's driving without a license or because he's drunk. That's why the numbers haven't gone down.

So this "sophisticated hard working" person who's drunk is somehow above the law while the "low-life poor scum" who does the same thing deserves to have the book at him? Mmmm hmmm. Your bias isn't surprising but I wouldn't have expected you to be quite this blatant about it.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Uh, actually, it's always considered the driver's fault in areas where pedestrians are to be expected.

You are not as good a driver drunk as you are sober. Pretend and brag all you want, but you would never be able to prove it because it isn't true.

It's arrogant idiots like you who drink and drive like it's 1960 that help make the roads dangerous for the rest of us.

I said illegally crossing the street. Meaning not at a street corner or cross walk. Or maybe the pedestrain is dressed in black like an idiot (I see this almost every night I have half a mind to just run em over the way they dart out into traffic ilegally).

Just make sure to punish everyone for the actions of those who drink and drive irresponsibly (I.E. The ones that get into wrecks). That's always fair. There is a huge number of people who drink and drive (not completely plastered of course) twice a week and have been doing it for years without any sign of poor driving.

Also, like i've mentioned before, the ones who really get punished are the sophisticated hard-working members of society (the ones who don't wreck) because they actually follow the laws and won't be able to drive and will have to pay fines whereas some low-life poor scum will get DUI after DUI after DUI and not care that he's driving without a license or because he's drunk. That's why the numbers haven't gone down.

What you fail to understand is that most drunk drivers have been doing it for years with no sign of a wreck. Lots of people will be able to drive drunk their whole life wihtout being in a major accident. This is what's called a 'statistical accident'. Drunk drivers still crash at a much higher rate than sober ones.

 

[LumbergTech]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Uh, actually, it's always considered the driver's fault in areas where pedestrians are to be expected.

You are not as good a driver drunk as you are sober. Pretend and brag all you want, but you would never be able to prove it because it isn't true.

It's arrogant idiots like you who drink and drive like it's 1960 that help make the roads dangerous for the rest of us.

I said illegally crossing the street. Meaning not at a street corner or cross walk. Or maybe the pedestrain is dressed in black like an idiot (I see this almost every night I have half a mind to just run em over the way they dart out into traffic ilegally).

Just make sure to punish everyone for the actions of those who drink and drive irresponsibly (I.E. The ones that get into wrecks). That's always fair. There is a huge number of people who drink and drive (not completely plastered of course) twice a week and have been doing it for years without any sign of poor driving.

Also, like i've mentioned before, the ones who really get punished are the sophisticated hard-working members of society (the ones who don't wreck) because they actually follow the laws and won't be able to drive and will have to pay fines whereas some low-life poor scum will get DUI after DUI after DUI and not care that he's driving without a license or because he's drunk. That's why the numbers haven't gone down.

What you fail to understand is that most drunk drivers have been doing it for years with no sign of a wreck. Lots of people will be able to drive drunk their whole life wihtout being in a major accident. This is what's called a 'statistical accident'. Drunk drivers still crash at a much higher rate than sober ones.

some people refuse to acknowledge the reality that they are increasing the possibility of killing someone...even if it is only 5% more likely it still isnt worth it..i lost my sister due to a person who thought they could drive drunk, im not saying that everyone who drives after a drink is dangeorus, but with alcohol it just isnt one of those things that you should take a risk with.....

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: ntdz
Drinking and Driving should absolutely be enforced like it is. Thousands of people die each year because of drunk drivers, and it can all be avoided by just not driving drunk.

I completely agree. Dont be a moron and you dont have to worry about it.

A TON of people die every year because of drunk driving, and if the morons were only killing themselves, id be all for it.

Edit: Yeah alcohol does nothing if youre responsible...

NHTSA

"NHTSA estimates that alcohol was involved in 39% of all fatal crashes and in 7% of all crashes in 2004."

ANYONE that drives impaired is stupid, even if you think youre fine 1. its not worth anyones life, 2. The penaties for getting caught are too high, we only need #2 if you really are too stupid to realize #1.

 

[piasabird]

I say if you get a dui or dwi that the car just gets repossessed and sold at auction. Makes it harder to drive with no car.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: piasabird
I say if you get a dui or dwi that the car just gets repossessed and sold at auction. Makes it harder to drive with no car.

:thumbsup:

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Tab
Nobody is drunk at .08 but you're driving is impaired, trust me. There is a reason many states have gone form .1 to .08.

Yes there is. It's called Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

It's not based on any kind of science. I read an article a few weeks ago that made an interesting observation. After the national limit was set at .10 drunk driving accidents and deaths went down. They dropped every year until the limit in most states was set at .08. Once .08 became the norm DUI deaths started increasing again.

The theory generated from this data was this: If you can have one or two beers and not get a DUI you are more likely to stop before you've had too many and go home. When you lower the limit such that two beers will get you a DUI... well... why not have a few more? After all a DUI is a DUI whether you're at .08 or .12.

Actually I take a different look at that information. Lowering the limit just increased the amount of crashes due to drunk driving because the limit is lower, not because people are drunk.

Lower it to .01 and watch the cases sky rocket.

 

[Genx87]

My take on these laws is at what point does it stop serving the public? If we lower it to .06 will it save anymore lives? I heard the avg drunk driving fatality was when the drunk had a BAC of .16. An avg of .16 is twice the legal limit. If we lower it to .06 will that really affect the drunks driving around at .16 or higher? Or will it start to turn the screws on your avg casual drinker who has a couple of beers at the bar while watching the game?

I think the BAC has been .12, then .10 and now .08. I expect the MADD lobby to push for .06 or .04 eventually where if you even look at a drink you are legally drunk.

Drunk driving is a huge problem in this country with many thousands hurt or killed each year. But lets start throwing the repeat offenders in the klink instead of turning the screws on people who are out with the family having a glass of wine.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Drunk driving is a huge problem in this country with many thousands hurt or killed each year. But lets start throwing the repeat offenders in the klink instead of turning the screws on people who are out with the family having a glass of wine.

I agree on throwing repeat offenders into jail, or even taking their car (as pissabird suggested).

However, if the studies show that having that glass of wine impair your driving, then I'm not for lowering the punishments or raising the limits.

Also, if you drink, drive and KILL someone, I'm for the punishment of 2nd degree murder (at least)...period. None of this manslaughter bullcrap....

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Engineer
I'm not sure that .08 is low enough....these two little girls have no daddy - (my brother - RIP)

You drink, you drive...if you kill someone, I only hope it's yourself. If you are caught....lock em up and no license...period!

I feel for your loss.

I lost one of my 2 life-long best friends and his wife to a drunk DUI defense attourney 6yrs ago, literally 3 minutes after leaving the parking lot of the place we just had dinner. The grim irony of a man who defended offenders killing himself, his passenger, and both my friends because he was himself an offender, was/is not lost on me. He was going over 100mph when he lost control flipped upside down, and slammed into my friend's car so hard, that it ejected their Sabaru Impreza over the guard rail of the and 30ft into the river. His wife died on impact, but he was alive and unconcious we were told, because they found salt water in his lungs.

Originally posted by: Harvey
I think you have a very poor understanding of the physics of a ton, give or take, of rolling mass loaded with volitile fuel. I don't believe your20% number, but assuming, for the moment, that it's anywhere near reality, that's still far too many vehichles in motion with less than full control.

Only a moron or an alcoholic in denial would advocate loosening restrictions on driving while intoxicated. :|

Exactly! I care not what profit results from these laws, so long as the drink&drive offenders, including those with the rainman complex "I'm a very good driver" are the victims of it! Johnnyfirstoffender, is sometimes Johnnylastoffender who took others with him! So Johnny can pay the price for being an irresponsible, egocentric, a-hole who puts his warped perception of his capabilities before his and others safety.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Genx87

Drunk driving is a huge problem in this country with many thousands hurt or killed each year. But lets start throwing the repeat offenders in the klink instead of turning the screws on people who are out with the family having a glass of wine.

I agree on throwing repeat offenders into jail, or even taking their car (as pissabird suggested).

However, if the studies show that having that glass of wine impair your driving, then I'm not for lowering the punishments or raising the limits.

Also, if you drink, drive and KILL someone, I'm for the punishment of 2nd degree murder (at least)...period. None of this manslaughter bullcrap....

I would like to see the studies first.
Looking at a bac calculator I found it interesting if a 120 pound person drank 8 beers in 8 hours they would be 50% higher than the legal limit @ .13.

A beer an hour isnt what I would consider enough to get smashed off of.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
20% of people who blow .08 are actually impaired.

First, unless you reply to the contrary, I'll assume you're talking about laws against drunk driving..

Second, where do you get your specs? You've given us nothing to back up your assertion.

What's everyones opinions on this? I think we're using way too much police resources.

I think you have a very poor understanding of the physics of a ton, give or take, of rolling mass loaded with volitile fuel. I don't believe your20% number, but assuming, for the moment, that it's anywhere near reality, that's still far too many vehichles in motion with less than full control.

Only a moron or an alcoholic in denial would advocate loosening restrictions on driving while intoxicated. :|

Only a moron or an alcoholic in denial would advocate loosening restrictions on driving while intoxicated:thumbsup:

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Genx87

Drunk driving is a huge problem in this country with many thousands hurt or killed each year. But lets start throwing the repeat offenders in the klink instead of turning the screws on people who are out with the family having a glass of wine.

I agree on throwing repeat offenders into jail, or even taking their car (as pissabird suggested).

However, if the studies show that having that glass of wine impair your driving, then I'm not for lowering the punishments or raising the limits.

Also, if you drink, drive and KILL someone, I'm for the punishment of 2nd degree murder (at least)...period. None of this manslaughter bullcrap....

I would like to see the studies first.
Looking at a bac calculator I found it interesting if a 120 pound person drank 8 beers in 8 hours they would be 50% higher than the legal limit @ .13.

A beer an hour isnt what I would consider enough to get smashed off of.

Smashed vs Impaired are two different things.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I've drank and drive many times, but I know my limit.

Here's hoping that you end up in jail for this sometime soon :thumbsdown:

 

[BlancoNino]

You're a complete stupid fool! :|

Road rage is more dangerous than having a couple drinks.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

You're a complete stupid fool! :|

Road rage is more dangerous than having a couple drinks.

Both are dangerous. You have stats showing that drinking and driving is just as safe as NOT drinking and driving? Put up or shut up.

In this country, you don't have a "right" to drink...but you do have a "right" to life and those that drink, drive and kill (or severly injure) others have taken those others "rights" away from them.

You drink and drive...YOU SHOULD PAY....period.

 

[BlancoNino]

I don't have a scanner and I don't have time to get official government records. The internet sucks for statistics.

My only point is that .08 is too low and people who wreck from drinking and driving are irresponsible sober drives to begin with and shouldn't be on the road anyway. To classify everyone in the same group as irresponsible drivers because they drink and drive is an insult to those who have driven home safely from bars for the past 40 years. You have to be EXTREMELY trashed to just put the pedal to the metal and run stop signs and swerve through lanes or just a plain idiot.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I don't have a scanner and I don't have time to get official government records. The internet sucks for statistics.

My only point is that .08 is too low and people who wreck from drinking and driving are irresponsible sober drives to begin with and shouldn't be on the road anyway. To classify everyone in the same group as irresponsible drivers because they drink and drive is an insult to those who have driven home safely from bars for the past 40 years. You have to be EXTREMELY trashed to just put the pedal to the metal and run stop signs and swerve through lanes or just a plain idiot.

Sorry. Risking my life or someone else's life just because EVERYBODY that has a blood alcohol content of .08 isn't a risk isn't worth it to me. If studies show that .08 has NO effect on impairment, then fine, but I doubt you'll find it.

By the way, it's ironic that someone who says that EVERYBODY shouldn't be lumped into a category because some are effected does exactly that (lumps them all into that category) when it comes to FREE LUNCH and WELFARE threads, eh? :roll:

 

[homercles337]

In another time, on another forum. I should dig it up post a link, but *sigh*

More than 50% of highway fatalaties are the result of someone falling asleep.
0.08 is an arbitrary number and says nothing about impairment (ever hear of the word tolerance).
Tolerance is not static for even non-drinkers on a day to day, not to mention hour to hour basis. One person's 0.08 is anothers 0.15.
Lowering the BAC limit was a HUGE revenue generator for the state and for "state sanctioned" DUI schools.
DUI fatalaties/accients are inflated unnaturally, since ANY accident with ANY level of alcohol is labeled as an "alcohol related accient" regardless of fault.
DUI accidents have not dropped in more than 20 years, just the clever use of statistics has changed.

With all those numbers i will probably have to dig up that thread all my sources. *damn*

Disclaimer, i DO NOT drink and drive. Hell, i dont even have a car. City designers created the problem--people HAVE to drive to get home. In general, public transportation is only adequate in metro areas. Would YOU pay $40 for a cab after 2x$3 beers? Yup, the system works just fine...:roll:

[edit] Added disclaimer and removed charlie's quote[/edit]

 

[BlancoNino]

Oh please you can't compare the two. A better comparison would be guns. Punishing everyone who drinks and drives is the same as punishing everyone who buys a gun. Gun accidents CAN happen and they wouldn't happen if we punished everyone for owning them to the point where nobody bought them anymore (but then the liberals would regain power and take over the defenseless american people, but that's a different story).

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
What you fail to understand is that most drunk drivers have been doing it for years with no sign of a wreck. Lots of people will be able to drive drunk their whole life wihtout being in a major accident. This is what's called a 'statistical accident'. Drunk drivers still crash at a much higher rate than sober ones.

In another time, on another forum. I should dig it up post a link, but *sigh*

More than 50% of highway fatalaties are the result of someone falling asleep.
0.08 is an arbitrary number and says nothing about impairment (ever hear of the word tolerance).
Tolerance is not static for even non-drinkers on a day to day, not to mention hour to hour basis. One person's 0.08 is anothers 0.15.
Lowering the BAC limit was a HUGE revenue generator for the state and for "state sanctioned" DUI schools.
DUI fatalaties/accients are inflated unnaturally, since ANY accident with ANY level of alcohol is labeled as an "alcohol related accient" regardless of fault.
DUI accidents have not dropped in more than 20 years, just the clever use of statistics has changed.

With all those numbers i will probably have to dig up that thread all my sources. *damn*

Everything is a huge revenue. That's what fighting crime has become. Instead of taking punk-ass kids out back and beating em up they'd rather write them some stupid ticket.

THe police can even write tickets for old laws. My friend was ticketed for not having a license plate on the front of his car even though it's not illegal in this state and his court date was on a day he couldn't make it so he just had to pay (besides the old judge here thought it was still the law as well).

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I don't have a scanner and I don't have time to get official government records. The internet sucks for statistics.

My only point is that .08 is too low and people who wreck from drinking and driving are irresponsible sober drives to begin with and shouldn't be on the road anyway. To classify everyone in the same group as irresponsible drivers because they drink and drive is an insult to those who have driven home safely from bars for the past 40 years. You have to be EXTREMELY trashed to just put the pedal to the metal and run stop signs and swerve through lanes or just a plain idiot.

From your complete lack of logic or evidence to support your rant, I can only conclude you must be one of those who is extremely trashed, or at least, you would be if you didn't have to worry about your next DUI violation.

How many have you had? :roll:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Tab
Nobody is drunk at .08 but you're driving is impaired, trust me. There is a reason many states have gone form .1 to .08.

Yeah, and that reason is $$$, not to protect other drivers.

Well over half of AT'ers have admitted to D&D'ing