Got a DUI back in September, costing me $$$ in insurance

[alkemyst]

MADD's statistics are worthless. Those on that gov site are dated and appear hand-selected. Anyway the latter numbers are a far cry from 40% more likely.

2/3 of all fatal accidents had no alcohol play a part.

Yeah though, because no one ever has known someone or themselves just running down the block or whatever after a few drinks.

At .08 many will be busted and not even realize they had that much if stopped.

 

[Zenmervolt]

MADD's statistics are worthless. Those on that gov site are dated and appear hand-selected. Anyway the latter numbers are a far cry from 40% more likely.

2/3 of all fatal accidents had no alcohol play a part.

Yeah though, because no one ever has known someone or themselves just running down the block or whatever after a few drinks.

At .08 many will be busted and not even realize they had that much if stopped.

So, basically, no actual criticism of the numbers, just a continuation of your previous unsubstantiated claims. As expected.

ZV

 

[alkemyst]

so you are under the belief that mostly everyone driving home from night spots is below a .08?

 

[Zenmervolt]

so you are under the belief that mostly everyone driving home from night spots is below a .08?

I am under the belief that most people who drink are not out at night spots.

ZV

 

[alkemyst]

if they are not out, how are they getting in accidents or are most people just getting smashed having their nightly dinner?

 

[StageLeft]

Alcohol is influencing a vast percentage of vehicle accidents.

I'm sure most drinks HAVE at some point driven at .08 or above and like I said above most won't be caught because they probably don't do it very often. Chances are incredibly high that you were caught at .08 it's not your first time doing it.

I would guess that most night spots drivers are .08 or above. I believe police should be mandating checking these people on the way out. It would almost instantly destroy business because, like many things in society, these places' customers actually are constantly breaking the law but the police look the other way.

Alk is right probably many caught right at .08 didn't know they were at that. Doesn't excuse it, though, there is a lot of information about there so people should be informed.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Unfortunately, the statistics support that assumption.

I know, I was trying to convey it without dragging the thread further off topic or insulting the OP, as enough have done that...

Edit:

Statistics actually state that almost anyone that drinks (ATOT seems to be the exception or liars) has driven at some point at .08 or worse...

These people aren't killing others left and right.

I wasn't going to mention my position but...

I personally think if you know you are going to be driving later, it is better to completely abstain from alcoholic drinks. That way you know you are below the limit.

 

[alkemyst]

I personally think if you know you are going to be driving later, it is better to completely abstain from alcoholic drinks. That way you know you are below the limit.

This is the same flawed logic as abstinance 'ideas'....those that don't do it think it's easy, those that have relationships think it's easy...the masses don't follow it.

The thing is if they did indeed checkpoint every bar/happyhour targeting the around after 9pm on the bars and whenever happy hour ends the trends say most would fail a breath test.

If DUI were a even a blip of a real problem they would indeed do this...however; it'd simply show they are over enforcing and that no one is killing people, destroying property at .08.

It's a sad thing that people aren't getting the facts, it's less that 12,000 fatalities and most of those are self-inflicted and also covers those wanted to commit suicide and at times if they had a coronary while driving but were still above the limits.

There is no way to know out of those <12000 fatalities what the alcohol directly contributed too.

DUI law is much like religion, people follow based on popular opinion, but no one does their own fact finding except in the 'bible/koran'.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

This is the same flawed logic as abstinance 'ideas'....those that don't do it think it's easy, those that have relationships think it's easy...the masses don't follow it.

Looks at own profile location...

In a pub in Ireland...

:hmm::hmm::hmm:

I definitely don't fall into the "those that don't" category... it's easy. You occasionally have to plan ahead and oh noes! take responsibility...

The thing is if they did indeed checkpoint every bar/happyhour targeting the around after 9pm on the bars and whenever happy hour ends the trends say most would fail a breath test.

While most would fail how many patrons come out of a bar after happy hour and intend to drive? How many of them wouldn't drive if they knew for certain they were over the limit?

If DUI were a even a blip of a real problem they would indeed do this...however; it'd simply show they are over enforcing and that no one is killing people, destroying property at .08.

Or they could fit breath detectors to cars or numerous other things... the problem as with everything is cost and public opinion...

It's a sad thing that people aren't getting the facts, it's less that 12,000 fatalities and most of those are self-inflicted and also covers those wanted to commit suicide and at times if they had a coronary while driving but were still above the limits.

There is no way to know out of those <12000 fatalities what the alcohol directly contributed too.

There are ~18k alcohol-related (BAC >0.01) deaths, ~12k alcohol-impaired (BAC >0.08) deaths, and are 275k alcohol-related injuries in the US per year according to the NHTSA.

Sorry this is getting off topic again...

 

[StageLeft]

If DUI were a even a blip of a real problem they would indeed do this...however; it'd simply show they are over enforcing and that no one is killing people, destroying property at .08.

Alcohol involved in ONE THIRD of fatal accidents is not a real problem and not even a blip?

http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html

 

[rh71]

an '03 still financed? For how much longer?

 

[Linflas]

So, basically, no actual criticism of the numbers, just a continuation of your previous unsubstantiated claims. As expected.

ZV

While I have no issue with serious penalties for DUI the MADD stats are doctored to get the desired results and keep the cash flowing in. Candy Lightner, founding president of the organization is even critical of what they have become. One of the ways they pump up the statistics is to count as an "alcohol involved accident" any accident where anyone involved be it passenger or driver in any involved vehicle or pedestrian has had a drink.

 

[StageLeft]

While I have no issue with serious penalties for DUI the MADD stats are doctored to get the desired results and keep the cash flowing in. Candy Lightner, founding president of the organization is even critical of what they have become. One of the ways they pump up the statistics is to count as an "alcohol involved accident" any accident where anyone involved be it passenger or driver in any involved vehicle or pedestrian has had a drink.

That's ridiculous. Fvck I hate crap like that, it just makes all their stats questionable. I presume the CDC's stats are based on real numbers and not "If you know somebody who once had a drink this is an alcohol-related accident".

 

[alkemyst]

That's ridiculous. Fvck I hate crap like that, it just makes all their stats questionable. I presume the CDC's stats are based on real numbers and not "If you know somebody who once had a drink this is an alcohol-related accident".

He also brings up the point that the founder is pretty sad with what the 'lobby' has become.

 

[alkemyst]

Looks at own profile location...

In a pub in Ireland...

:hmm::hmm::hmm:

has nothing to do with really if you are a drinker or not. It's like the guy that claims to be a martial artist that took 2 years of TKD.

While most would fail how many patrons come out of a bar after happy hour and intend to drive? How many of them wouldn't drive if they knew for certain they were over the limit?

That's the problem. At .08 most don't feel unable to drive at all.

Or they could fit breath detectors to cars or numerous other things... the problem as with everything is cost and public opinion...

Ben Franklin and other founding fathers warned of these things..they are becoming reality as we are living in the midst of cowards today...freaking Patriot Act is about anti-patriot as you can get.

There are ~18k alcohol-related (0.01<BAC <0.08) deaths, ~12k alcohol-impaired (BAC >0.08) deaths, and are 275k alcohol-related injuries in the US per year according to the NHTSA.

Sorry this is getting off topic again...

yes...alcohol related injuries especially unless you want to feed the fire on prohibition.

Still most are still SELF-INFLICTED not this wantonly random mass destruction of life and property of others.

It's about money, not lives.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

has nothing to do with really if you are a drinker or not. It's like the guy that claims to be a martial artist that took 2 years of TKD.

Whatever floats your boat :beer:

That's the problem. At .08 most don't feel unable to drive at all.

However it has been shown time and time again that people are impaired at 0.08 BAC.

Ben Franklin and other founding fathers warned of these things..they are becoming reality as we are living in the midst of cowards today...freaking Patriot Act is about anti-patriot as you can get.

Governments seem to exist purely to line their own pockets and gain more power/control... but that is another story...

yes...alcohol related injuries especially unless you want to feed the fire on prohibition.

Not every drink driver kills themselves or kills someone else alky... granted proper stats (BAC >0.08 at time of accident) would be useful. How many of those accidents could have been avoided if the person hadn't been impaired? We'll never know...

Still most are still SELF-INFLICTED not this wantonly random mass destruction of life and property of others.

Even self-inflicted deaths still affect others (family, EMT, LEO etc.)

It's about money, not lives.

It's certainly not about making money, but yes everything is about money...

 

[StageLeft]

It's about money, not lives.

It might be for some, it obviously is for lobbyists, but it's not for those who, well, don't care about the money about it (like me). I think society should take a sledgehammer to DUI, come down on it fvcking harsh as hell personally, including--at least definitely for a repeat offender--colored license plates so that you can truly show your neighbors and co-workers what a total asshole you are. And if you want to sell it as some way for cops to be more on the lookout for you--ie some safety--sure, whatever, if that gets it passed. Or something else like a GPS when you're driving that constantly sends back to some central location your driving habits (speed, acceleration, etc.). It should be such that the last thing in the world you want to do is get behind the wheel after boozing it up.

 

[alkemyst]

However it has been shown time and time again that people are impaired at 0.08 BAC.

as well as at .01, if you are tired, angry, sad, on a phone, have kids in the car, etc...

Governments seem to exist purely to line their own pockets and gain more power/control... but that is another story...

It's not just the government though...many private organizations have their hands in this cash cow.

Not every drink driver kills themselves or kills someone else alky... granted proper stats (BAC >0.08 at time of accident) would be useful. How many of those accidents could have been avoided if the person hadn't been impaired? We'll never know...



Even self-inflicted deaths still affect others (family, EMT, LEO etc.)

Right...but not something we need to be writing laws on.

 

[alkemyst]

It might be for some, it obviously is for lobbyists, but it's not for those who, well, don't care about the money about it (like me). I think society should take a sledgehammer to DUI, come down on it fvcking harsh as hell personally, including--at least definitely for a repeat offender--colored license plates so that you can truly show your neighbors and co-workers what a total asshole you are. And if you want to sell it as some way for cops to be more on the lookout for you--ie some safety--sure, whatever, if that gets it passed. Or something else like a GPS when you're driving that constantly sends back to some central location your driving habits (speed, acceleration, etc.). It should be such that the last thing in the world you want to do is get behind the wheel after boozing it up.

I take it you speed which kills more than DUI's...

why not just brand the individual for whatever crime they commit?

Perhaps Canada was a better country for you.

 

[StageLeft]

I take it you speed which kills more than DUI's...

why not just brand the individual for whatever crime they commit?

Perhaps Canada was a better country for you.

Two can play at that game but I'm not feeling in the mood.

Regarding speed, I do like quite literally almost everybody else because there is a tacit acknowledgement that posted speed limits are not really intended to be followed, not pedantically.

 

[Zenmervolt]

if they are not out, how are they getting in accidents or are most people just getting smashed having their nightly dinner?

Huh? So now you're claiming that most people who drink do have accidents? Make up your bloody mind.

Let's follow your chain of "logic"...

Statement #1: "...almost anyone that drinks has driven at some point at .08 or worse... These people aren't killing others left and right."

I request support for this claim, which leads to...

Statement #2: "so you are under the belief that mostly everyone driving home from night spots is below a .08?"

Now, as a response to a request for support for statement #1, statement #2 requires a few assumptions, it requires that we assume that most people coming home from a night spot are driving themselves, it requires that we assume that most people who go to a night spot drink heavily, and it requires that we assume that anyone who drinks goes to night spots.

Naturally the combination of these requires assumptions is a bit specious since there are large numbers of drinkers who don't go out to "night spots" or who use cabs or designated drivers. Because of this, I point out that I do not believe that persons going to "night spots" are representative of all drinkers as you have claimed.

This leads to...

Statement #3: "if they are not out, how are they getting in accidents or are most people just getting smashed having their nightly dinner?"

This statement has no connection to the previous chain and directly contradicts your claim in statement #1. Furthermore, it doesn't contradict any of the claims about the recidivism rates of persons who are arrested for DUI because the number of people who are arrested for DUI represents only a tiny fraction of the number of people who drink, so even though most drinkers don't drive, the few who do are extremely likely to be repeat offenders.

ZV

 

[PlasmaBomb]

as well as at .01, if you are tired, angry, sad, on a phone, have kids in the car, etc...

It's not like there are laws about driving while using the phone, or driving without due care and attention... oh wait...

It's not just the government though...many private organizations have their hands in this cash cow.

It's called capitalism alky, you too are free to start a business doing what you want and are free to profit from the hard work you put in... isn't that the American Dream?

If you don't like that feel free to go to China...

Right...but not something we need to be writing laws on.

That's plain stupid...

So by your own reasoning as long as I don't kill you, your cool? So a couple of broken ribs, broken arm, broken legs and maybe a skull fracture too for good measure? Glad to know that's fine with you. I'm glad there aren't laws against that... although I sure wouldn't like to be assaulted and receive that kind of grievous bodily harm...

*Damn*

 

[alkemyst]

Huh? So now you're claiming that most people who drink do have accidents? Make up your bloody mind.

Let's follow your chain of "logic"...

Statement #1: "...almost anyone that drinks has driven at some point at .08 or worse... These people aren't killing others left and right."

I request support for this claim, which leads to...

Statement #2: "so you are under the belief that mostly everyone driving home from night spots is below a .08?"

Now, as a response to a request for support for statement #1, statement #2 requires a few assumptions, it requires that we assume that most people coming home from a night spot are driving themselves, it requires that we assume that most people who go to a night spot drink heavily, and it requires that we assume that anyone who drinks goes to night spots.

Naturally the combination of these requires assumptions is a bit specious since there are large numbers of drinkers who don't go out to "night spots" or who use cabs or designated drivers. Because of this, I point out that I do not believe that persons going to "night spots" are representative of all drinkers as you have claimed.

This leads to...

Statement #3: "if they are not out, how are they getting in accidents or are most people just getting smashed having their nightly dinner?"

This statement has no connection to the previous chain and directly contradicts your claim in statement #1. Furthermore, it doesn't contradict any of the claims about the recidivism rates of persons who are arrested for DUI because the number of people who are arrested for DUI represents only a tiny fraction of the number of people who drink, so even though most drinkers don't drive, the few who do are extremely likely to be repeat offenders.

ZV

It's you that is doubting...no matter what I respond with it will not sway you.

These facts are easily googled both in proof and due to MADD and DUI lawyers reverse propanganda in refute.

You are assuming people don't learn from the process. I don't know of any DUI offenders that risk it anymore. I don't take chances myself either.

 

[alkemyst]

It's not like there are laws about driving while using the phone, or driving without due care and attention... oh wait...



It's called capitalism alky, you too are free to start a business doing what you want and are free to profit from the hard work you put in... isn't that the American Dream?

If you don't like that feel free to go to China...

I think you have your economics confused. Seriously...I have no problem with Capitalism. Government mandated profiteering though is not really what citizen's were signing on for.

It falls into that whole unfair taxation thingie, ya know...now called fines/fees.

So by your own reasoning as long as I don't kill you, your cool? So a couple of broken ribs, broken arm, broken legs and maybe a skull fracture too for good measure? Glad to know that's fine with you. I'm glad there aren't laws against that... although I sure wouldn't like to be assaulted and receive that kind of grievous bodily harm...

*Damn*

at .08 this is much like because one is carrying a gun.

at .15+ it's much like discharging a firearm in public...which is dangerous.

You are letting fear not reality set your beliefs.

 

[alkemyst]

Two can play at that game but I'm not feeling in the mood.

Regarding speed, I do like quite literally almost everybody else because there is a tacit acknowledgement that posted speed limits are not really intended to be followed, not pedantically.

*tsk tsk*...now you get to choose which laws apply to you, but those that drink do not?