Micheal Phelps arrested for DUI *Update* Suspended from US team for 6 months

[midwestfisherman]

Great, another ass hole driving drunk!

 

[Blackjack200]

Have you ever driven in a tunnel? That's normal posted speed limit.

You may be right, there's a tunnel on 29 in Trenton and the speed limit is 45. I don't drive in them frequently enough to notice.

 

[Brovane]

I wish I had access to the library the attorney I spoke to had on DUI stuff. He had an interesting video of like 100 people doing road side tests. 50 were drunk and 50 were not. Most people could not choose accurately who was drunk and not. The field side tests are merely used while being filmed because it makes convictions easier.

He also had a paper on most people from like Thursday at 5 pm until Sunday at 2am or something if stopped at night around local night club/party areas would fail DUI testing at the .08/.10 levels. Also that most DUI road blocks turn up many other things due to officers using the stops to do warrant-less searches of vehicles that they suspect may have been drinking.

I don't believe anyone should drive drunk, but I don't think someone having 1-2 drinks per hour or stopping at a happy hour for a couple drinks is who we should be targeting so heavily.

People think even a first time DUI should be jail time (and in most areas the judge can give jail time), but they don't understand just how expensive the process is and the impact of not being able to even drive to work for the first 30 days has.

I read someplace the best thing to do if you have been drinking alcohol and are stopped is to refuse a field sobriety test and just go for the breath test or blood even if it will cause a inconvenience and being temporarily detained. If you for example take a field sobriety test and of course it is all subjective by the officer and then for example you blow .04 the officer still might arrest you because he will say the field sobriety test shows you are impaired. However if you don't do the field and blow a .04 there is really no where for the officer to take it. He could arrest you and then you could fight it in court and the only evidence will be that you blew a .04 and this will probably get you off. It will cost you time/money but it is better than doing a field sobriety and then blowing a .04 because the Officer can testify that you where impaired from the field sobriety test he administered. Now if you know you have not been drinking, take the field sobriety because you will blow .00 and there will be no place for the officer to take it that you where drunk unless for some-reason you have some type of other drug in your system. Not saying that I am giving legal advice or anything. ()

 

[Brovane]

A article with some more information.

http://espn.go.com/olympics/swimming/story/_/id/11623784/michael-phelps-breath-test-was-14-charging-documents-say?fb_comment_id=fbc_690171917740431_690243184399971_690243184399971#f2bcd7818

Looks like he below .14 over the legal limit but not falling down drunk like a .2+ would be. He was still drunk and needed to get taken off the road but not the crime of the century. Not sure about legal advice expert on the ESPN video because apparently he hasn't read Maryland DUI law (took me 2 mins of Googling). A previous conviction to count for increased jail time etc has to be within 5-years. His previous DUI from almost 10-years ago shouldn't count against him legally in court of law but can count in the court of public opinion.

 

[jlee]

A article with some more information.

http://espn.go.com/olympics/swimming/story/_/id/11623784/michael-phelps-breath-test-was-14-charging-documents-say?fb_comment_id=fbc_690171917740431_690243184399971_690243184399971#f2bcd7818

Looks like he below .14 over the legal limit but not falling down drunk like a .2+ would be. He was still drunk and needed to get taken off the road but not the crime of the century. Not sure about legal advice expert on the ESPN video because apparently he hasn't read Maryland DUI law (took me 2 mins of Googling). A previous conviction to count for increased jail time etc has to be within 5-years. His previous DUI from almost 10-years ago shouldn't count against him legally in court of law but can count in the court of public opinion.

I've seen .36 walking and talking. BAC alone is not a definitive measurement of someone's ability to walk.

 

[jlee]

Not exactly, what I meant was Phelps arrest was a victim-less crime.

I personally feel the number of arrests to how many accidents/deaths there are is out of control. Most don't believe it's in the millions per year and any city may have 100's of people in holding (which they require you to remain in for 8 hours in I think almost all states with no bailing out) on an average Friday/Saturday night.

I wish I had access to the library the attorney I spoke to had on DUI stuff. He had an interesting video of like 100 people doing road side tests. 50 were drunk and 50 were not. Most people could not choose accurately who was drunk and not. The field side tests are merely used while being filmed because it makes convictions easier.

He also had a paper on most people from like Thursday at 5 pm until Sunday at 2am or something if stopped at night around local night club/party areas would fail DUI testing at the .08/.10 levels. Also that most DUI road blocks turn up many other things due to officers using the stops to do warrant-less searches of vehicles that they suspect may have been drinking.

I don't believe anyone should drive drunk, but I don't think someone having 1-2 drinks per hour or stopping at a happy hour for a couple drinks is who we should be targeting so heavily.

People think even a first time DUI should be jail time (and in most areas the judge can give jail time), but they don't understand just how expensive the process is and the impact of not being able to even drive to work for the first 30 days has.

There appears to be confusion between driving while "drunk" and driving while "impaired." You don't have to be tripping over your own feet in order to be impaired to a level at which you shouldn't be driving.

Regarding the accuracy of field sobriety tests - the one I valued most was horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN): http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/enforce/ The standard physical tests are fine (walk and turn, one leg stand) and are also more involved than most people may realize (i.e. it's more than walking in a straight line without falling over), but HGN has a bit more science behind it.

Not once has HGN given me results that were out of line with subsequent breath/blood testing. DUI arrests are a pain in the ass...definitely was not my favorite activity.

Re: Phelps being .14 (also, you can be impaired under .08; that's just the point where someone determined that's sufficient alone, without other proof of actual impairment), a random internet calculator says that's ~8 beers over a 3 hour period for an 180lb male.

NH has no jail time for first offense DUI (barring other situations such as aggravated DUI, etc). State law if anybody is super bored and wants to look.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Not exactly, what I meant was Phelps arrest was a victim-less crime.

Tell you what...

I'm gonna put this 44 mag slug in my revolver, give the cylinder a spin, point it at your head and pull the trigger.

You don't get to object until it actually goes off.

 

[alkemyst]

Tell you what...

I'm gonna put this 44 mag slug in my revolver, give the cylinder a spin, point it at your head and pull the trigger.

You don't get to object until it actually goes off.

Not the same thing, bro. Good game attempt though.

 

[alkemyst]

There appears to be confusion between driving while "drunk" and driving while "impaired." You don't have to be tripping over your own feet in order to be impaired to a level at which you shouldn't be driving.

Regarding the accuracy of field sobriety tests - the one I valued most was horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN): http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/enforce/ The standard physical tests are fine (walk and turn, one leg stand) and are also more involved than most people may realize (i.e. it's more than walking in a straight line without falling over), but HGN has a bit more science behind it.

Not once has HGN given me results that were out of line with subsequent breath/blood testing. DUI arrests are a pain in the ass...definitely was not my favorite activity.

Re: Phelps being .14 (also, you can be impaired under .08; that's just the point where someone determined that's sufficient alone, without other proof of actual impairment), a random internet calculator says that's ~8 beers over a 3 hour period for an 180lb male.

NH has no jail time for first offense DUI (barring other situations such as aggravated DUI, etc). State law if anybody is super bored and wants to look.

Problem with HGN tests is they are not given properly most of the time. One they work best in well lit areas. A flashlight to the face isn't ideal. Neither are flashing police lights and passing vehicles all which cause some nystagmus.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Don't take my post the wrong way.

Phelps didn't hurt anyone and more than likely wouldn't.

It's treated as a minor offense with a huge fine because it's not a serious problem.

There are millions arrested for DUI each year just to save those 10k lifes. There is about the same for murdering people, but our forces aren't kicking down doors to arrest those because mostly there is no revenue.

You seem to underestimate how many people actually drink and drive.

The problem (which even the founder of MADD claims) is we have lowered the BAL limits that puts those just having a few cocktails and not more dangerous than someone with a flu or overly-tired in harm's way for getting thousands of dollars in fines.

Even insurance companies mostly have stopped increasing premiums for single DUI's with no property damage/deaths.

The people that end up killing those 10,000 people are those that are fall down sloppy drunk usually and sadly never get stopped.

It's people blowing .08 usually rounded up in a roadblock that are getting stopped who would have never harmed anyone.

I don't agree with getting DRUNK and driving at all and I value every life. However; the DUI laws and media have turned this into a very successful lobby with other agendas than saving lives.

I didn't take your post the wrong way. I took it that you're the biggest idiot in the history of ATOT and every word that dribbles forth from whatever lump of sludge that you pretend is a brain proves it.

The FACT is that a person who has 1 drink and blows about .04 is TWICE as likely to crash as an unimpaired driver. At .08 it's SEVEN times higher than a sober driver and at .14 it's approaching TWENTY-FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY to crash. Are you truly so monumentally stupid that you don't understand that getting drunk drivers off the road as quickly as possible prevents them from killing even more innocent people that they already do? Are you so monumentally stupid that you believe that drunk drivers are not a serious problem UNTIL they run into somebody and that getting them off the road is a cash grab for the police? Even you, the king of ATOT idiocy, can't possibly try to make those arguments.

C'mon, grow a brain cell and try to come up with something better.

 

[alkemyst]

I didn't take your post the wrong way. I took it that you're the biggest idiot in the history of ATOT and every word that dribbles forth from whatever lump of sludge that you pretend is a brain proves it.

The FACT is that a person who has 1 drink and blows about .04 is TWICE as likely to crash as an unimpaired driver. At .08 it's SEVEN times higher than a sober driver and at .14 it's approaching TWENTY-FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY to crash. Are you truly so monumentally stupid that you don't understand that getting drunk drivers off the road as quickly as possible prevents them from killing even more innocent people that they already do? Are you so monumentally stupid that you believe that drunk drivers are not a serious problem UNTIL they run into somebody and that getting them off the road is a cash grab for the police? Even you, the king of ATOT idiocy, can't possibly try to make those arguments.

C'mon, grow a brain cell and try to come up with something better.

Wow, personal attacks makes one correct. It's clear on your many other posts you don't really understand much especially statistics.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Not the same thing, bro. Good game attempt though.

Sure it is. Until the gun goes off there is no victim, right? Playing Russian roulette with my gun and your head is victimless.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Here is what I don't get w/ DUIs: with any other offense, criminal or traffic, you get your bail back if you prevail - why not with DUIs?

A friend of mine was charged over $500 for impounding fees when he was arrested for a DUI (it was a Friday night and he did not get out to retrieve the car on the following Saturday, lot was closed Sunday, so they charged him for three nights of storage when he got to the car on Monday).

His BAC was below the legal limit and charges weren't even filed.

Yet, he took a nice $500 hit for it.

 

[alkemyst]

Sure it is. Until the gun goes off there is no victim, right? Playing Russian roulette with my gun and your head is victimless.

It's pointless to debate this with you.

 

[alkemyst]

Here is what I don't get w/ DUIs: with any other offense, criminal or traffic, you get your bail back if you prevail - why not with DUIs?

A friend of mine was charged over $500 for impounding fees when he was arrested for a DUI (it was a Friday night and he did not get out to retrieve the car on the following Saturday, lot was closed Sunday, so they charged him for three nights of storage when he got to the car on Monday).

His BAC was below the legal limit and charges weren't even filed.

Yet, he took a nice $500 hit for it.

Not to mention even if you are parked they MUST tow your car to the impound and at a much higher tow rate.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

It's pointless to debate this with you.

There hasn't been any debating. There has only been my point, remaining un-refuted, and you gainsaying it without any argumentation or substantiation.

 

[alkemyst]

There hasn't been any debating. There has only been my point, remaining un-refuted, and you gainsaying it without any argumentation or substantiation.

With russian roulette assuming the most capable of revolvers, you out of 10 times doing it a guaranteed success rate (assuming no cylinder spins between rounds).

In DUI there is a very high chance that the drivers will never have an accident in their lives due to it.

Also a high majority of deaths are just the driver and single vehicle to begin with.

Also not all DUI accidents can be guaranteed impairment was the main reason.

The numbers are VERY SMALL for the amount of fines and arrests it produces.

 

[xaeniac]

dumb move PHelppie baby

 

[Brovane]

Here is what I don't get w/ DUIs: with any other offense, criminal or traffic, you get your bail back if you prevail - why not with DUIs?

A friend of mine was charged over $500 for impounding fees when he was arrested for a DUI (it was a Friday night and he did not get out to retrieve the car on the following Saturday, lot was closed Sunday, so they charged him for three nights of storage when he got to the car on Monday).

His BAC was below the legal limit and charges weren't even filed.

Yet, he took a nice $500 hit for it.

Well the Towing company needs there cut to..... Yeah it is such a racket.

 

[natto fire]

No, you and your friends are trying to P&N life.

It is unreasonable to hate drunk drivers so much.

-John

What are you talking about? I have barely been politically active my entire life, save for voting a few times. I don't debate politics on the internet and very rarely in person. You don't even know my political affiliation, and are just assuming because I don't like drunk driving that I hate them for no reason?

Had you read my post, you might have extrapolated that my reason for disliking drunk driving, as in the act of it. My friend killed himself and another friend while drunk behind the wheel. I wouldn't say I dislike my late friend, and he was a drunk driver.

So please, take the P&N vitriol back to the forum it belongs, we are trying to discuss the larger picture of DUI charges, and apparently, Russian Roulette...

 

[smackababy]

I come back to the this thread and we have our resident drunk driver defending drunk driving again? Oh snap!

 

[Phanuel]

With russian roulette assuming the most capable of revolvers, you out of 10 times doing it a guaranteed success rate (assuming no cylinder spins between rounds).

In DUI there is a very high chance that the drivers will never have an accident in their lives due to it.

Also a high majority of deaths are just the driver and single vehicle to begin with.

Also not all DUI accidents can be guaranteed impairment was the main reason.

The numbers are VERY SMALL for the amount of fines and arrests it produces.

You still should not be allowed to do it, full stop.

But then again, this is Alky so...

 

[alkemyst]

You still should not be allowed to do it, full stop.

But then again, this is Alky so...

What you don't understand is those just having a few drinks are not killing people, yet we arrest them and charge them $1000's of dollars.

So instead of our police looking for murdering type folks (which equal about the same numbers, but oddly no one really knows someone being murdered often); they are doing road blocks for DUI and those violating HOV lanes and the like.

It's not about saving lives. It's about revenue.

The limits should be higher and you should have to have a vehicle in motion. That's my argument.

Most of you have no clue.

 

[alkemyst]

Well the Towing company needs there cut to..... Yeah it is such a racket.

The sad part is most tow companies can charge double or more for the tow since it's DUI related. Also in the morning when you go get your car (even if you were towed because of parking in the wrong spot and nothing with DUI), prepare to have cash and they don't usually have ATM's nearby.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

With russian roulette assuming the most capable of revolvers, you out of 10 times doing it a guaranteed success rate (assuming no cylinder spins between rounds).

In DUI there is a very high chance that the drivers will never have an accident in their lives due to it.

Also a high majority of deaths are just the driver and single vehicle to begin with.

Also not all DUI accidents can be guaranteed impairment was the main reason.

The numbers are VERY SMALL for the amount of fines and arrests it produces.

But that isn't a difference in principle, just a difference in degree. Gambling is still gambling, no matter if you're just betting heads or tails, or picking 5 numbers on a lottery ticket.

In other words, the analogy is perfectly apt in principle.