• 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 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
mugs said:
Logic fail, seatbelts and airbags both protect the person who bears the cost.

This whole line of thinking is a non-starter for you, it only makes you look foolish. You know that installing breathalyzers in every car would be a stupid idea, so arguing that the government's unwillingness to do exactly that as evidence of anything is not going to prove anything.
Click to expand...

Headlights, blinkers, extend it every safety apparatus ever added to the original ford.

What is so stupid about it. Its hardly an inconvenience to blow into a tiny retractable dongle in your dashboard?

I think its hilarious I'm supporting an easily implemented no tolerance solution and getting ridiculed by the same people that have zero tolerance. Everyone must prefer more laws over better use of technology.
 
Last edited:
IceBergSLiM said:
Headlights, blinkers, extend it every safety apparatus ever added to the original ford.

What is so stupid about it. Its hardly an inconvenience to blow into a tiny retractable dongle in your dashboard?

I think its hilarious I'm supporting an easily implemented no tolerance solution and getting ridiculed by the same people that have zero tolerance. Everyone must prefer more laws over better use of technology.
Click to expand...

You can still start your car without your seatbelt on. You can still start your car without your headlights on. You can turn off secondary airbags.


I want nothing to do with your nanny state. I want my personal liberties.
 
yh125d said:
You can still start your car without your seatbelt on. You can still start your car without your headlights on. You can turn off secondary airbags.


I want nothing to do with your nanny state. I want my personal liberties.
Click to expand...

Ok well how bout you can turn it on but can't put it into gear? :hmm:

And you complain about a nanny state yet condone dui checkpoints? really? really? Reealllllly??????
 
Does Colorado have party tags?

Here is Ohio, judges can hand out Yellow license plates after the first DUI.
They usually reserve them for repeat offenders though.

Man... that would suck.
 
skull said:
You didn't use the numbers OP provided. He said he had 6 coors lights. Thats 4.2% alcohol not 5%.

So if you do the equation with the right numbers it comes out to 0.06524867

Which means the OP is lying or the breathalyzer test is that inaccurate.

Either way who cares that he blew a 0.081 I just think its funny that the same douche in one of those other threads arguing that you can't get a DUI if your under 0.08. Is the same douche that got one.

If someone else got one the same way he did. He would probably be on here calling shens. Saying theres no way they gave you a dui without giving you a blood test. They can't just give you a DUI without the cop doing anything. I know the law blah blah I'm a douche.

I guess you got your first reality check. Cops can do whatever they want doesn't mean it wil stick but they can still send you through the court system.
Click to expand...

Ah, good catch with the alcohol percentage of the beers. Then again, I realize that the equation could be off because the amount of time is not exactly 4 hours, or because the rate he metabolizes alcohol is more or less than the average for males.

That's why he was stupid to try to drink as close to the legal limit as possible without going over. It's too difficult to predict.

And yea, he got owned here. Ha 😀.
 
IceBergSLiM said:
Ok well how bout you can turn it on but can't put it into gear? :hmm:

And you complain about a nanny state yet condone dui checkpoints? really? really? Reealllllly??????
Click to expand...

I don't condone DUI checkpoints. I never said I did or implied that I did. I -oppose- DUI checkpoints. Hell, half of them in my area are performed illegally (out of jurisdiction, non-LEO).

They always have one on the major holidays on the road leading up to my house (literally 300ft from my driveway). Whenever they do it and I get stopped I point out to them how they are holding this checkpoint illegally (city employees conducting checkpoint on county road out of city limits without county permission/oversight), DONT give them my license, and drive off home.
 
yh125d said:
I don't condone DUI checkpoints. I never said I did or implied that I did. I -oppose- DUI checkpoints. Hell, half of them in my area are performed illegally (out of jurisdiction, non-LEO).

They always have one on the major holidays on the road leading up to my house (literally 300ft from my driveway). Whenever they do it and I get stopped I point out to them how they are holding this checkpoint illegally (city employees conducting checkpoint on county road out of city limits without county permission/oversight), DONT give them my license, and drive off home.
Click to expand...

your in the minority then most people in this thread live dui check points and insane enforcement of dui laws.
 
IceBergSLiM said:
Why shouldn't this be a top priority step 1 as I said above?
Click to expand...

Scenario 1:
I'm having dinner with my family, enjoying 1 glass of wine. Right after dinner, my 2 year old cuts his head when he falls down. I have to go to the ER. I hop in the car....blow into the tube....uhoh, 1 glass of wine, I can't start my car for another 30 minutes. I hope my kid doesnt die in the meantime. Or I have to call the ambulance and pay $3k for a ride to the hospital.

Beathalyzers in cars for everyone is a HUGE fail, plus a giant "big brother" move and just plain annoying.
 
IceBergSLiM said:
your in the minority then most people in this thread live dui check points and insane enforcement of dui laws.
Click to expand...

Other people =/= me. I'm a libertarian, so I am very vehemently against such things as mandatory breathalyzers in all vehicles. Plus it's just a dumb idea.
 
Man, you're pretty fucked.
My little brother got busted for the same thing a few months ago, and he won't be able to drive again until Late summer....

Usually a good idea to try and stay under 1/2 the legal limit, that way, if you misjudge, you've got a wide margin...
 
alkemyst said:
You would, because how could anyone ever know anything that actually went through the process.

Sorry if I live life and don't rely on google to show me it.

If I show my court sheet how about a full nude on ATOT with your face...I already had to post my acceptance letter to Pharmacy school for some tool here.
Click to expand...
You putting goggle down is ridiculous. Like there is no legitimate info to be found on the internet. You can find tons of articles on how car ins. rates increase in response to a dui/dwi conviction and you are going to dispute them all????

I am not questioning the fact you got a dui. You've related to that story many many times here. I am saying insurance companies don't give you a pass for that conviction.
 
TheNinja said:
Scenario 1:
I'm having dinner with my family, enjoying 1 glass of wine. Right after dinner, my 2 year old cuts his head when he falls down. I have to go to the ER. I hop in the car....blow into the tube....uhoh, 1 glass of wine, I can't start my car for another 30 minutes. I hope my kid doesnt die in the meantime. Or I have to call the ambulance and pay $3k for a ride to the hospital.

Beathalyzers in cars for everyone is a HUGE fail, plus a giant "big brother" move and just plain annoying.
Click to expand...

So your only ok with drinking and driving when it suits you. Its not big brother because as we have established driving isn't an inherent right.
 
yh125d said:
Other people =/= me. I'm a libertarian, so I am very vehemently against such things as mandatory breathalyzers in all vehicles. Plus it's just a dumb idea.
Click to expand...

I would argue its no more dumb than the current level of MADD driven over enforcement, given my previously stated fact that the probability of being involved in a drunk driving accident/death/injury is infinitesimal
 
IceBergSLiM said:
So your only ok with drinking and driving when it suits you. Its not big brother because as we have established driving isn't an inherent right.
Click to expand...

No, my point is that a "no tolerance" breathalyzer in a vehicle could be a potential problem for many reasons....emergency, safety, it could fail....then I'm stuck and can't go anywhere in my car, etc. 1 glass of wine with dinner is not drinking and driving.

Now if you are a repeat offender, then putting a no limit, or a .08 limit breathalyzer in a car is reasonable. But come on, do you honestly think it's right and good to put a no limit breathalyzer in cars? You can't have 1 beer with a buddy or 1 glass of wine with a nice meal? You're as bad as those who claim they can drive fine at a .15....just on the other end of the spectrum.
 
TheNinja said:
No, my point is that a "no tolerance" breathalyzer in a vehicle could be a potential problem for many reasons....emergency, safety, it could fail....then I'm stuck and can't go anywhere in my car, etc. 1 glass of wine with dinner is not drinking and driving.

Now if you are a repeat offender, then putting a no limit, or a .08 limit breathalyzer in a car is reasonable. But come on, do you honestly think it's right and good to put a no limit breathalyzer in cars? You can't have 1 beer with a buddy or 1 glass of wine with a nice meal? You're as bad as those who claim they can drive fine at a .15....just on the other end of the spectrum.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't think it's a good idea to put breathalyzers in every car. He's only arguing that point because he thinks it proves that the goal of DUI laws is to raise revenue, and therefore they are unjust.
 
BudAshes said:
I'm usually one for a good conspiracy, but I think you are off on this one. I'm not saying cops won't take advantage of this for added revenue, of course they will. But, a lot of good laws are taken advantage of by cops. Cops are a necessary evil. I slightly agree that the OP got screwed, but then again this isn't 1950. The roads are packed, everyone is driving 70-80mph on the highway on the road with 20 ton semi's and one small mistake can spell doom for a lot of people.

When I was a kid my dad drove me off a small cliff, luckily no one was hurt. But being a kid I was totally oblivious to what was going on. When the cops came and we got pulled out they asked me if my dad had been drinking. I was shocked that they would ask me, and told them there was no way he had. Turned out he was wasted. He proceeded to tell the cops that we were fine because the crash had been in slow motion, woops. He should have just smoked pot, we would have gotten to the video store extremely slow, but at least the car wouldn't have gone off a cliff.

He could have easily killed someone, and should not have been driving(we didn't realize he was dying rapidly from liver failure at the time and was incapable of making good decisions) but this goes for a lot of people out there. Their brains are messed up from prescription drugs, disease, illegal drugs or mental illness and just a few drinks can completely scramble their brains. This may suck for the rest of us, but we have to keep these people off the road at all costs. Huge DUI consequences are really the only way to make people think twice. Although installing breathalyzers in all cars might be a decent backup step.
Click to expand...

so you agree checkpoints are ok?
 
moshquerade said:
You putting goggle down is ridiculous. Like there is no legitimate info to be found on the internet. You can find tons of articles on how car ins. rates increase in response to a dui/dwi conviction and you are going to dispute them all????

I am not questioning the fact you got a dui. You've related to that story many many times here. I am saying insurance companies don't give you a pass for that conviction.
Click to expand...

You keep attacking me.

I didn't say google is bad, I said you just using google to try and trump everyone else is.

Your articles are part of the whole problem. Both lawyers and the MADD/SADD team...in reality most will not find their premiums raised by a simple DUI arrest.

Kill someone or wreck your car, then yes; expect a rate increase.
 
tyler811 said:
Shens post the police report. I think your just trolling.
Click to expand...

I'll post it when I get a copy of it. Jesus i'm gone for 1 day and I have a whole novel to read.

EDIT: I really have no idea how to get a copy of a police report since i've never had any kind of record.
 
Last edited:
iamanidiot said:
never heard of a checkpoint. They make everyone take a Breathalyzer?
Click to expand...

They have have to follow a pattern of doing it. Its like every car, every other car, or every third car, ect, has to stop and pull over and take a breathalizer. That night it was every car was required to stop and pass a sobriety test. They can't randomly subject people to a breathalizer at a check point in colorado, they are required to follow a strict pattern.
 
skull said:
You didn't use the numbers OP provided. He said he had 6 coors lights. Thats 4.2% alcohol not 5%.

So if you do the equation with the right numbers it comes out to 0.06524867

Which means the OP is lying or the breathalyzer test is that inaccurate.

Either way who cares that he blew a 0.081 I just think its funny that the same douche in one of those other threads arguing that you can't get a DUI if your under 0.08. Is the same douche that got one.

If someone else got one the same way he did. He would probably be on here calling shens. Saying theres no way they gave you a dui without giving you a blood test. They can't just give you a DUI without the cop doing anything. I know the law blah blah I'm a douche.

I guess you got your first reality check. Cops can do whatever they want doesn't mean it wil stick but they can still send you through the court system.
Click to expand...

Did I say that? I recall calling bullshit on the guy who said he got a dui with a beer on his workbench washing his car, and calling bullshit that i can get a dui when sleeping in my back seat with the car off and keys in my pocket. Since the law says the keys have to be in the ignition....and if i did say that, I was probably drunk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top