• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Dui ffffuuuuuuu

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
mattpegher said:
The record in my ER was held by a homeless woman who routinely had blood levels over 500mg/dl (0.5). She came in once with a level of 745mg/dl (0.7). Obtunded but arrousable and breathing on her own.
Click to expand...

We had a few career drinkers that would walk (by walk, of course I mean stumble, but they were able to get from point A to point B) in with .45-.55's. The highest I can remember seeing myself was something in the neighborhood of .67. .745 .. damn.. she's a pro. 😛
 
IceBergSLiM said:
are you backtracking here, strawman, and ad hominen all in one? My reply was against your judge of him having a drinking problem.

you backtrack and start arguing he shouldn't drink and drive at all then question my position by accusing me of being guilty of the same!?!?:thumbsdown::thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

2 different issues:

I suggested he has a drinking problem. Not because he wanted to have a few drinks, or get drunk on a holiday. He was charged with a DUI, and as I said, most people would not want to touch alcohol so soon after a bad experience with alcohol.

I already expressed my opinion on drinking and driving: one drink and you're done. If he knows in advance that he'll be consuming more than that at the bar, he should not drive. I used his own numbers to back up the assertion that he was drunk and therefore should not be driving.

And yes, I feel your personal experience with this issue colours your perception of it. I'm sure I can find your thread if you really want.
 
Just visited Hungary last year, Zero-tolerance on drinking and driving. Any alcohol at all and you get dui, and they don't mess arround esp with tourists. If your going to drink you either have a designated driver or take a cab. Interesting cause they sure could drink.
 
It's amazing that this can even be argued. People if you want to drink don't drive. END OF MOTHERFUCKING THREAD! Even a single drink can impair ones judgment. For those who still want to drink and drive you might as well be playing Russian roulette with a loved one. Take your mother, father, child, wife, husband, or anyone else you love and imagine putting a revolver, that has say a hundred chanbers, to their head and pulling the trigger. If you are willing to drink and drive that's what you are effectively willing to do.
 
Locut0s said:
It's amazing that this can even be argued. People if you want to drink don't drive. END OF MOTHERFUCKING THREAD! Even a single drink can impair ones judgment. For those who still want to drink and drive you might as well be playing Russian roulette with a loved one. Take your mother, father, child, wife, husband, or anyone else you love and imagine putting a revolver, that has say a hundred chanbers, to their head and pulling the trigger. If you are willing to drink and drive that's what you are effectively willing to do.
Click to expand...

Ehh there's way too much to take apart here....

Not that I condone DUI but one drink in a night's time will have no effect by the end of that night. OP was in a bad position and got unlucky but he should not have been aiming for .079 to begin with.

Was it already covered? Why did he get pulled over?
 
iamanidiot said:
Ehh there's way too much to take apart here....

Not that I condone DUI but one drink in a night's time will have no effect by the end of that night. OP was in a bad position and got unlucky but he should not have been aiming for .079 to begin with.

Was it already covered? Why did he get pulled over?
Click to expand...

Ok I'll agree that one drink isn't likely to affect you over the course of a party. However driving immediately after one drink can have an effect. What I was referring to though was the idea of drinking and driving in general. There is little doubt that you're sense are impaired at 0.79 and attempting to drink as much as possible yet stay JUST under the limit is nothing short of stupid.
 
iamanidiot said:
never heard of a checkpoint. They make everyone take a Breathalyzer?
Click to expand...

I believe they are passing a law here that would make it very unwise to not take a breathalyzer if asked to. Also I believe that they won't need to suspect that you are drinking, that is that could ask anyone. Similar to this I think:

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/n...-aims-to-force-more-to-take-Breathalyzer-test

Also people who drink and drive will be forced to have a breathalyzer starter installed in their cars and their car won't start if they blow over. This is probably only for repeat offenders.
 
iamanidiot said:
never heard of a checkpoint. They make everyone take a Breathalyzer?
Click to expand...

At least in California, they ask how many drinks you've had. Based on your answer and the way you look/act in your response, they'll ask you to do a breathalyzer or sobriety test. Last time I got asked I said I had had a drink three hours previously, he looked at me for a couple of seconds with his flashlight and then waved me on. I knew I was OK but that didn't stop the adrenaline from getting worked up.
 
Rudeguy said:
so I'm not a true alcoholic?
Click to expand...
I don't know, are you?

Realistically, that becomes a semantic debate. I was taught - by a state run course on alcohol abuse in Pennsylvania (no I was not there because I'm an alcoholic or anything like that) - that "true" or chronic alcoholism is of the physical dependence variety. Again though, which semantic you choose to use is really up to you and not worth arguing over.

The difference between the two is very large, though. Physical addiction to alcohol is bad news. Its one of the dependencies that you can actually die from a severe withdraw....so I would say its important to discern the difference, regardless of which term you use to describe the two conditions.
 
Last edited:
Deeko said:
I don't know, are you?

I'm not going to sit here while you have some emo whiny pissing match over semantics. My point was simple - very few people are physically dependent on alcohol, despite what some would have you believe. If you want to cry about whether or not a mental alcoholic vs a physical alcoholic are apt uses of the terms, well, do it by yourself. I really don't care.
Click to expand...

Hey brah.. we like this should stick toghether just in case ones of sus fallds down. you know what I mean?
 
iamanidiot said:
Hey brah.. we like this should stick toghether just in case ones of sus fallds down. you know what I mean?
Click to expand...

Not entirely sure what that means, no...however, seems you caught the momentary "angry reply" while I was on hold with Verizon. See my above edit for the calm one 😉
 
moshquerade said:
You are wrong.



http://dmvanswers.com/questions/833/Will-DUI-convictions-increase-my-car-insurance-rate





That doesn't excuse a DUI. Ask Anthony Torsell if your reasoning worked for him.
Click to expand...

That site is an attorney's...

you are fucking wrong. I blew a .168 (which was impossible based on what I drank).

My rates did not change at all and continue to get better anytime I shop them.

Out of all the companies I told I have a prior DUI, none qualified a 1st time offense as a premium increase.

I love how people think google is the answer to everything.
 
HybridSquirrel said:
.081 ..... .001 more than the legal limit. i had 6 drinks over 4 hours and i weigh 170. i did the math and figured i was ok to drive.
Click to expand...

rule of thumb:
one drink per hour since you started drinking, you're safe... unless you drank, like, one at hour 1 and then, like, four at the same time at hour 4.
 
RbSX said:
If you're .79, you're at the maximum, but not technically drunk.

So play that back to me again please.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true.

A lot of states have two laws:

for example, in CA:

23152. (a) It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to drive a vehicle.

23152 (b) It is unlawful for any person who has 0.08 percent or more, by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood to drive a vehicle.

You can be convicted under 23152(a) even if your BAC is .01 if it's impairing your driving.
 
alkemyst said:
That site is an attorney's...

you are fucking wrong. I blew a .168 (which was impossible based on what I drank).

My rates did not change at all and continue to get better anytime I shop them.

Out of all the companies I told I have a prior DUI, none qualified a 1st time offense as a premium increase.

I love how people think google is the answer to everything.
Click to expand...
I love how YOU think you are the answer to everything.

And I believe you are FOS most of the time. This being one of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top