So I was driving through the ghetto yesterday.....

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

So anyone who drinks water while driving has a water dependancy? How about soda? Coffee? Tea?

Anyone in their right mind would know that a reasonable person can, and does monitor their alcohol intake and does not drive impaired.

It's not the drinking that's bad, it's how much and the impairment that goes with too much.

HAHAHAHA. do you even think before you make these analogies? water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt cause dependecy. there is no such thing as wateric, sodaic, coffeeic, and teaic...like there is alcoholic. also water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt impair judgement or reflexes. what im saying is that if that person who is drinking while driving, cant wait to get home to crack open that beer and HAS to HAVE it right then, then id say there is a pretty good chance that person has an alcohol problem.

if you are so damn thirsty, why not drink water or soda while in the car?

So wait, anyone who drinks beer has an alcohol dependency? Or is your definition of dependency only predicated on WHERE they drink it?

Do you even think before accusing people of having monkeys on their backs?

Maybe they ENJOY beer? Maybe that's what they WANT to drink?

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: SampSon
You people have thrown any idea of personal responsibility out the door.

What do you have against starving dogs?

Fried chicken and sh!tty beer make a great afternoon.

Preaching to the choir man.

i think its been proven that people, in general, cant be responsible. there wouldnt be so many alcohol related traffic accidents if we lived in your world

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: lancestorm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lancestorm
. Who's the one lacking common sense and reason even on this topic? Proves your common sense and reason might be lacking in other areas (including the d&d part of this thread).

Um, no. I'm not the one claiming a single beer impairs the average person too much to drive safely. That would be you.

And with the exception of the open container law, the BAC limit law, as ridiculously low as it is, agrees with ME, not you. A single beer will not take the average person anywhere near .08.

It is not ridiculously low. The only reason you are arguing is because you are pissed off you can't get trashed and drive home. Every weekend someone is driving you home or you are passed out on a couch with a hand in a warm bowl and piss in your pants. All because the law sticks it to you....right?

Wow!

Who's out on a limb here? Who's being irrational? Who said (most notably Amused) anything about getting trashed and driving in this thread?

As a matter of fact, his whole point is about being reasonable.

Well... I'm going to go out on a limb myself and assume you have no idea how low .08 is.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: SampSon
You people have thrown any idea of personal responsibility out the door.

What do you have against starving dogs?

Fried chicken and sh!tty beer make a great afternoon.

Preaching to the choir man.

i think its been proven that people, in general, cant be responsible. there wouldnt be so many alcohol related traffic accidents if we lived in your world

People in general CAN be responsible.

The people who drive drunk are a TINY MINORITY of the general population.

 

[rsd]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

So anyone who drinks water while driving has a water dependancy? How about soda? Coffee? Tea?

Anyone in their right mind would know that a reasonable person can, and does monitor their alcohol intake and does not drive impaired.

It's not the drinking that's bad, it's how much and the impairment that goes with too much.

HAHAHAHA. do you even think before you make these analogies? water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt cause dependecy. there is no such thing as wateric, sodaic, coffeeic, and teaic...like there is alcoholic. also water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt impair judgement or reflexes. what im saying is that if that person who is drinking while driving, cant wait to get home to crack open that beer and HAS to HAVE it right then, then id say there is a pretty good chance that person has an alcohol problem.

if you are so damn thirsty, why not drink water or soda while in the car?

So wait, anyone who drinks beer has an alcohol dependency? Or is your definition of dependency only predicated on WHERE they drink it?

Do you even think before accusing people of having monkeys on their backs?

Maybe they ENJOY beer? Maybe that's what they WANT to drink?

What I believe he is trying to say is that if someone can't wait to have a beer until they get home and they HAVE to crack one open IN the car, despite knowing the open container laws, then yes they just might have some issues. Seems clear to me.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: rsd

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

So anyone who drinks water while driving has a water dependancy? How about soda? Coffee? Tea?

Anyone in their right mind would know that a reasonable person can, and does monitor their alcohol intake and does not drive impaired.

It's not the drinking that's bad, it's how much and the impairment that goes with too much.

HAHAHAHA. do you even think before you make these analogies? water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt cause dependecy. there is no such thing as wateric, sodaic, coffeeic, and teaic...like there is alcoholic. also water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt impair judgement or reflexes. what im saying is that if that person who is drinking while driving, cant wait to get home to crack open that beer and HAS to HAVE it right then, then id say there is a pretty good chance that person has an alcohol problem.

if you are so damn thirsty, why not drink water or soda while in the car?

So wait, anyone who drinks beer has an alcohol dependency? Or is your definition of dependency only predicated on WHERE they drink it?

Do you even think before accusing people of having monkeys on their backs?

Maybe they ENJOY beer? Maybe that's what they WANT to drink?

What I believe he is trying to say is that if someone can't wait to have a beer until they get home and they HAVE to crack one open IN the car, despite knowing the open container laws, then yes they just might have some issues. Seems clear to me.

Not to me. The debate was over the usefulness of the law itself. Not if it is reasonable or not to break the law, but reasonable to allow someone to responsibly drink a beer in a car.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

So anyone who drinks water while driving has a water dependancy? How about soda? Coffee? Tea?

Anyone in their right mind would know that a reasonable person can, and does monitor their alcohol intake and does not drive impaired.

It's not the drinking that's bad, it's how much and the impairment that goes with too much.

HAHAHAHA. do you even think before you make these analogies? water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt cause dependecy. there is no such thing as wateric, sodaic, coffeeic, and teaic...like there is alcoholic. also water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt impair judgement or reflexes. what im saying is that if that person who is drinking while driving, cant wait to get home to crack open that beer and HAS to HAVE it right then, then id say there is a pretty good chance that person has an alcohol problem.

if you are so damn thirsty, why not drink water or soda while in the car?

So wait, anyone who drinks beer has an alcohol dependency? Or is your definition of dependency only predicated on WHERE they drink it?

Do you even think before accusing people of having monkeys on their backs?

Maybe they ENJOY beer? Maybe that's what they WANT to drink?

no, im not saying that whoever drinks beer is an alcoholic. you can enjoy that beer at home. but if you enjoy it so much that you neglect the consequences (hefty fine and maybe suspension of liscense) of drinking while driving, then id say you have an alcohol problem

 

[CVSiN]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lancestorm
driving with an open container? drinking and driving? what a winner we have here ladies and gents...

Oh yeah, because one beer makes a person sooooo drunk, right?

:roll:

In the fight against drunk driving, we have lost all reason.

Amused this is your fvcking dumbest post of all time...
yes 1 beer depending on the person can impare you...

not to mention he was literally drinking WHILE driving... which is very illegal in any state.

and yes its still just as freaking illegal..

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

So anyone who drinks water while driving has a water dependancy? How about soda? Coffee? Tea?

Anyone in their right mind would know that a reasonable person can, and does monitor their alcohol intake and does not drive impaired.

It's not the drinking that's bad, it's how much and the impairment that goes with too much.

HAHAHAHA. do you even think before you make these analogies? water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt cause dependecy. there is no such thing as wateric, sodaic, coffeeic, and teaic...like there is alcoholic. also water, soda, coffee, and tea doesnt impair judgement or reflexes. what im saying is that if that person who is drinking while driving, cant wait to get home to crack open that beer and HAS to HAVE it right then, then id say there is a pretty good chance that person has an alcohol problem.

if you are so damn thirsty, why not drink water or soda while in the car?

So wait, anyone who drinks beer has an alcohol dependency? Or is your definition of dependency only predicated on WHERE they drink it?

Do you even think before accusing people of having monkeys on their backs?

Maybe they ENJOY beer? Maybe that's what they WANT to drink?

no, im not saying that whoever drinks beer is an alcoholic. but you can enjoy that beer at home. if you enjoy it so much that you neglect the consequences (hefty fine and maybe suspension of liscense) of drinking while driving, then id say you have an alcohol problem

Wait, I thought we were talking about someone who would have a beer i the car in the absence of OC laws.

I say someone who drinks a beer in their car in the absence of OC laws is no more an addict than someone who has a soda or water.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: CVSiN

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lancestorm
driving with an open container? drinking and driving? what a winner we have here ladies and gents...

Oh yeah, because one beer makes a person sooooo drunk, right?

:roll:

In the fight against drunk driving, we have lost all reason.

Amused this is your fvcking dumbest post of all time...
yes 1 beer depending on the person can impare you...

not to mention he was literally drinking WHILE driving... which is very illegal in any state.

and yes its still just as freaking illegal..

Read the entire thread, first.

And one beer is no more going to impair a person than OTC cold meds, or simply having a cold or flu. Less, in fact.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: Amused

Wait, I thought we were talking about someone who would have a beer i the car in the absence of OC laws.

I say someone who drinks a beer in their car in the absence of OC laws is no more an addict than someone who has a soda or water.

what? when did the topic change to a hypothetical situation? regardless, im talking about reality. in reality, there are OC laws. and if you get caught drinking while driving, then your ass is gonna be in big trouble. if a person's thirst for alcohol causes him to overlook that fact, then he has a problem.

 

[Legendary]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: CVSiN

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lancestorm
driving with an open container? drinking and driving? what a winner we have here ladies and gents...

Oh yeah, because one beer makes a person sooooo drunk, right?

:roll:

In the fight against drunk driving, we have lost all reason.

Amused this is your fvcking dumbest post of all time...
yes 1 beer depending on the person can impare you...

not to mention he was literally drinking WHILE driving... which is very illegal in any state.

and yes its still just as freaking illegal..

Read the entire thread, first.

And one beer is no more going to impair a person than OTC cold meds, or simply having a cold or flu. Less, in fact.

I've literally banged my head against a wall because of this thread.

FWIW, I lost a good friend of mine in HS to DD (walking on the street, hit by a driver) but I'm with Amused on this one. While I agree the OP was stupid for having an open container, I only think so because he should think about how much money he'd potentially lose to insurance and fines.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

Wait, I thought we were talking about someone who would have a beer i the car in the absence of OC laws.

I say someone who drinks a beer in their car in the absence of OC laws is no more an addict than someone who has a soda or water.

what? when did the topic change to a hypothetical situation? regardless, im talking about reality. in reality, there are OC laws. and if you get caught drinking while driving, then your ass is gonna be in big trouble. if a person's thirst for alcohol causes him to overlook that fact, then he has a problem.

Well, yeah, he's an idiot for breaking the law.

That wasn't my point, though. My point was the act of drinking a beer in a car if the law did not exist.

Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Legendary]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Amused

Wait, I thought we were talking about someone who would have a beer i the car in the absence of OC laws.

I say someone who drinks a beer in their car in the absence of OC laws is no more an addict than someone who has a soda or water.

what? when did the topic change to a hypothetical situation? regardless, im talking about reality. in reality, there are OC laws. and if you get caught drinking while driving, then your ass is gonna be in big trouble. if a person's thirst for alcohol causes him to overlook that fact, then he has a problem.

Problem = stupidity, not alcoholism/dependency.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lancestorm
I"m sure that the open container law has saved lives.

Beyond all the insults and bullsh!t, It all boils down to this.

Prove it.

The problem is, you have a religious kind of belief in this. Not one based in fact.

you prove it. you prove that it hasn't saved lives.

Burden of proof is on the claimant not the disclaimer. Thus, you and lancestorm have to PROVE that open container laws have saved lives.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: preslove

what the OP did was illegal. do you dispute that?

This argument is the last refuge for assholes and idiots. Things often are made illegal because of hysteria. Add sex, drugs, drunk driving, terrorism, immigration, guns, etc. to any legislative docket and you'll see some fvcked up laws spew forth. If you rely on our legal system for you ethical cues, there's no hope.


The op was impaired by the fact that he was EATING AND DRINKING, not drinking alcohol. The reactionaries on this board get their panties all in a wad about cell phone drivers, but probably don't care about distractions like this one. Of course, he was driving 25 mph, so who cares. Sounds fun.

Excuse me, I don't give a sh!t if he had an open container, I just wouldn't feel sorry for him if he was ticketed for it. It's his choice not to follow the law so he can deal with the consequences if he is caught. Obviously he wasn't so there is no consequences for him to deal with. Was it smart of him? I don't think so because it wasn't worth the risk in my opinion and he shouldn't push his luck because he will get caught and even if he isn't drunk a ticket for an open container will cause his insurance rates to go up dramatically (if it isn't canceled)

BTW, the thing that brought me into this debate was Amused's proposition that open Alcoholic Containers be allowed in moving vehicle's which I think is ridiculous.

Open container infractions/tickets rarely if ever have an effect on insurance. They are not moving violations in most states.

 

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: SampSon
You people have thrown any idea of personal responsibility out the door.

What do you have against starving dogs?

Fried chicken and sh!tty beer make a great afternoon.

Preaching to the choir man.

i think its been proven that people, in general, cant be responsible. there wouldnt be so many alcohol related traffic accidents if we lived in your world

I cannot accept that I need some government intervention in my life in order to protect everyone else that can't handle themselves. Natural selection will occur on its own, and YES there will be margins of error that will hurt innocent people. Guess what, you gotta live with the margin of error, no amount of legislation is ever going to change that.

I have personally lost a family member and good friend to an alcohol related accident.
I was 13 when it happened, and it took the life of my 14 year old cousin and two of our friends.

They were out on the weekend drinking and getting high. I'm not sure if they were driving around the whole time, or that they just decided to go joy riding half way through.
Well they decided to take the car down one of the utility access roads that run along the power lines. It was dark, they were probably inebriated fairly well, and they wrapped the car around a pole at around 80 mph. Three of them, including my cousin, died nearly instantly. The one survivor walked/crawled about 2-3 miles on a broken ankle to get help.

Seeing one of your best friends and family members in a casket before they hit 16 was very painful for the family to say the least. Even after that not a single person in my family got up in arms about drinking and driving, or drugs or anything else related with this accident. We all knew that thoes people made a decision and were responsible for their actions. It is very unfortunate that personal responsibility led to their deaths.

No amount of legislation or government intervention would have ever prevented this from happening. No amount of legislation will ever stop things like this from happening in the future. Personal responsibility rests solely on the PERSON and never the government. When you begin to rely on the government for your personal responsiblity and safety you give up everything that comes with being human, and that is mostly free will and the ability to make choices, regardless of how dumb they are.

The last thing I ever need to hear from people is that I don't know how it is to lose someone to drinking and driving. I don't need people telling me how I should run my life.
The accident affected a LOT of people in many families, but there is nothing that will change that or that could have prevented this tragedy.

What are you going to do, ban everything? In the end it all boils down to personal choice, the government has absoltely zero say in that.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Woops....wrong thread. That will teach me to have multiple atot tabs in firefox

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_alpha.asp

Longhorn alpha preview

Get lost much? 😛

Here:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=38&threadid=1579417&enterthread=y

 

[captains]

should of bought a 40

 

[fenrir]

Since nobody brought it up...

The OC law helps the police and public. How? With the OC law, if an officer sees it he can pull you over. Odds are you will also be checked to see if you are driving drunk. If this law was not in place, how does the officer know if you have had only "one"? There are some people who are pretty damn good at driving drunk. They are still a huge danger on the road, but they can drive their car straight.

This would also be why your passengers cannot have OC's. How does the officer know that you haven't been drinking while driving?

Matt

 

[Red Dawn]

Amused states that the OC laws only prevents those who are not inclined to drive drunk from drinking a Beer in the car, that's not true. There are a lot of people who go home at night and get over their mundane jobs by drinking themselves silly at night. What's to keep them from getting started on the way home instead of waiting to get home? OC laws, that's what.

On top of that it also helps the Cop's nab drunken drivers as sometimes the only thing that gives them away is their carelessness in handling an OC in the car which a Cop will spot giving them probable cause to pull them over and check for impaired driving.

I know if I were Amused and I was cruising down the road on my new Put the last thing I would want is to come across some Teenage/Early Twenties Fscktard sucking down a 40 of Old English while driving his Ricer/SUV/'Bling Bling Beemer.

 

[Scarpozzi]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Amused states that the OC laws only prevents those who are not inclined to drive drunk from drinking a Beer in the car, that's not true. There are a lot of people who go home at night and get over their mundane jobs by drinking themselves silly at night. What's to keep them from getting started on the way home instead of waiting to get home? OC laws, that's what.

On top of that it also helps the Cop's nab drunken drivers as sometimes the only thing that gives them away is their carelessness in handling an OC in the car which a Cop will spot giving them probable cause to pull them over and check for impaired driving.

I know if I were Amused and I was cruising down the road on my new Put the last thing I would want is to come across some Teenage/Early Twenties Fscktard sucking down a 40 of Old English while driving his Ricer/SUV/'Bling Bling Beemer.

Agreed. BTW...I really was ghetto-cruising. I drive a buick. 😉

 

[BigJ]

Well here's my $0.02.

I feel it shouldn't necessarily be illegal for a person to have an OC in the car, but if they do and in the case that it was legal, the cops have every reason to pull them over then and there, with an automatic breathalyzer test regardless of visible impairment. Possibly even lower the limit for circumstances involving an OC to 0.05.

What the OP did was illegal. We all know that. But I don't think he should personally be fvcking bashed for it. He's a 230lb guy drinking a 22oz beer. Where I come from it takes quite a bit more than that to give a guy that size a buzz, and Scarp has even confirmed it takes him a lot more than that to give him a buzz. What's the difference between if he had slammed the beer in the parking lot and proceeded to drive home and drinking it in the car? As far as impairment is concerned, he'd be better off drinking the beer in the car because hes also eating, and the alcohol isn't hitting his system as quickly because theres none there before he starts driving. I'm sorry but it was not drunk driving. I really don't have a problem with a person having one or two beers and driving if they know they can handle it, and they are legally under the maximum BAC the state has. This is why there is a max BAC, and not a 0.00000....1 BAC maximum.

And what the fvck ever happened to personal responsibility. There have been countless times where my friends and I have driven to a bar, or to somebodies house, and gotten ripped. But none of us have EVER driven drunk. Even absolutely sh!tfaced we still know enough to make a conscious decision not to drink and drive. It's a taxi or crashing at their place for us. Maybe it's because it was drilled into our heads so much at home and school, but for whatever reason, we never do it.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Amused states that the OC laws only prevents those who are not inclined to drive drunk from drinking a Beer in the car, that's not true. There are a lot of people who go home at night and get over their mundane jobs by drinking themselves silly at night. What's to keep them from getting started on the way home instead of waiting to get home? OC laws, that's what.

On top of that it also helps the Cop's nab drunken drivers as sometimes the only thing that gives them away is their carelessness in handling an OC in the car which a Cop will spot giving them probable cause to pull them over and check for impaired driving.

I know if I were Amused and I was cruising down the road on my new Put the last thing I would want is to come across some Teenage/Early Twenties Fscktard sucking down a 40 of Old English while driving his Ricer/SUV/'Bling Bling Beemer.

Again, you are assuming that a person not inclined to drive drunk and break the law would suddenly be so inclined because he can have an open container in the car.

The person already actively avoids driving while impaired, but suddenly will abandon that because they can have an OC is the car?

That really makes no sense, no matter how many "what ifs" a person can pull out of their ass.

And of course I don't want drunk drivers on the road. I simply do not believe that OC laws significantly decrease the number of people who drive while impaired.