Drunk Driving or not?

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by darksidZz, Mar 15, 2010.

  1. darksidZz Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,924
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2010
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. darksidZz Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,924
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. sandy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,926
    I don't drink alcohol so my answers are:
    Tell me a time you were arrested for drinking and driving. Never
    Tell me about someone you knew that was too. A friend. Cost him $7,000, his license, his business, his dignity, his reputation, and his family.
    Let me know how often you drink and drive. Never
    What do you think about the laws around it, etc. No drinking/driving tolerated. Not even one drink. I, at 5'7" and 127 pounds would get buzzed off one glass of wine. I would be a danger to anyone else on the road.
    Do you drink at dinner? No.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    Wow, that DC law is outrageous. It only causes people to have less respect for the law and take "drunk driving" less seriously.
     
  8. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    No, it's simple and unambiguous, don't drink and drive. Don't test your limits, try to play the numbers, or take risks, just don't.

    Also, this seemed very fair;

    "Not many people fight the charge, said Richard Lebowitz, another defense lawyer, because the District offers a "diversion program" of counseling for first-time offenders.

    "If diversion is offered and accepted, there's a guarantee that the charges will be dropped,"

    Repeat offenders deserve prosecution, and let's face it, the stupid broad in the article was that dumb she hadn't noticed she didn't have her headlights on, which usually also means the dashboard isn't illuminated, which means she hadn't been checking her speedometer either, or she should have noticed it was a bit dark. She's a shit driver, no sympathy for her.
     
  9. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    Having a blood alcohol level of 0.01 (or even 0.03) would not impair you in any way. Punishing people for have a safe amount of alcohol in their system will only cause people to have less respect for the law (because it's stupidly punishing people for something that's not dangerous), and cause people to not take "drunk driving" seriously (because practices that are actually safe are being labeled as "drunk driving").
    It's unfair because they shouldn't be charged in the first place. Offering an easy way out of the entirely specious charges that you're pressing against them doesn't make the charges any less specious.
    Bullshit. Most cars will allow you to turn off the headlights while still leaving the dash lights on. If the parking attendant turned off her headlights and she had been driving in well-lit areas, it's entirely reasonable that she wouldn't have noticed that her headlights were out.
     
  10. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    I neither drink nor drive.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    How does someone know their BAC? They don't, simply. They guess what it may be from a variety of spurious data fed into a rule of thumb.

    How do people know what is 'safe'? Again, it's guesswork.

    I disagree. A zero tolerance policy makes more sense. I respect the law more for being absolute and clear cut.

    Semantics, spoken like a drink driver.

    You have a separate switch to turn on the dashlights in the USA? Every car I have ever owned, driven, or been driven in, the dash lights up when the headlights are turned on. Every single one. I have _never_ seen a car that had a separate switch for dash illumination. I think you are making poor excuses now.
     
  12. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    If someone correctly estimates that they are not impaired, then they shouldn't be punished because they aren't doing anything risky.
    The article linked to in the OP contains a quote from a medical doctor stating that it's medically impossible for a person with a BAC of 0.03 to be impaired by alcohol. Although I don't know his basis for saying this, I am willing to defer to his expertise.
    It's fine for the law to have zero tolerance for people being impaired. It makes no sense whatsoever to have a zero tolerance policy of people who drive with safe levels of alcohol.
    What the f*ck? A medical doctor states that a BAC of 0.03 couldn't impair a person, and I sound like a drunk driver because I believe him?
    Sorry, but you are simply ignorant about cars. Every model of Buick I have ever encountered has a multi-position switch that allows a driver to turn just the interior lights or interior lights+head lights. My 2004 Pontiac GrandAm also has this feature. Many cars will have both the headlights and dash lights come on by default, but have a selector switch or something that will allow people to turn off the headlights but leave the dash lights on. So you most certainly have seen a car with that capability, you just didn't realize it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2010
  13. desi Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,616
    All that law is is a tax. The drinking and driving laws are draconian. You don't even have to harm anyone or break anything and they will throw you in prison for consuming a legal product.
     
  14. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    How do people know they aren't impaired? They cannot test their own BAC, that's the point. The BAC is a red herring, people have no idea what theirs is, it's all just guesswork.

    But people do not know their BAC, do they? Simply, they intended to drink and drive, that is irresponsible.

    I keep saying this, people cannot judge what their BAC is. The only way to know they are safe, is to avoid alcohol when driving.

    Not in the UK. Dashlights come on when you turn on your headlights. It's possible to drive with only exterior sidelights and dash illuminated, but there is no way of illuminating the dash, and not having some exterior lighting. Either way, she was a dumbass for not noticing she hadn't turned her lights on, it's a basic procedural error, demonstrating her terrible driving skills.
     
  15. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    People might not know exactly what their BAC is, but most people know that a single drink won't be enough to impair them. The fact that they don't know their exact BAC is a red herring. I don't know exactly how long it would take me to run a mile, but I know for sure it's under 15 minutes. Similarly, I don't know for sure what my BAC would be after one beer, but I know it would be well below 0.03.
    Who said anything about "some exterior lighting"? The relevant thing here is the headlights. Many, many cars will let you have the dash lights on but the head lights off.
    If the cop had issued her a ticket for not having her headlights on, I wouldn't have a problem with it. The issue is whether or not she should have been cited for being intoxicated when it was medically impossible.
     
  16. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    Bullshit, a single pint of beer DOUBLES your reaction time from about 1/10th a second, to 1/5th. THAT is impairement.


    The fact that they intentionally drink and drive is the point. If you are driving, don't drink alcohol, it's really that simple.

    For me, under eight minutes. Given that variation, ie, you taking nearly twice as long, do you also see how self assessing BAC could also lead to a variety of results? People are different, one drink could have more of an effect on some than others.

    Are you headlights on the exterior, or interior, of your car? You know what sidelights are yes?

    No single car I am aware of in the UK allows such. IF US models do, it's hardly a useful feature.

    She wasn't cited for being intoxicated, just that he had the power of arrest for her having the BAC she did. Let's face it, she failed to engage her headlights, but you maintain she wasn't impaired.

    Why would you defend drink driving anyway?
     
  17. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    Source? Given the claim from the medical doctor in the linked article that a BAC of 0.03 could not possibly result in impairment, this seems very doubtful to me. Unless perhaps you are talking about a midget, or a 12 year old child. It's easy to find anti-drinking web pages with all sorts of hysterical, inaccurate "fact," but many of them are not scientifically accurate.
    There is a certain threshold below which alcohol is not dangerous, as has already been discussed at length. You have apparently been brainwashed into believing that any non-zero amount of alcohol can cause impairment, which is simply false.
    Wow, way to miss the point. I too could run a mile in under 8 minutes. I don't know exactly how long it would take me, but I know for sure it's under 8 minutes. Similarly, I don't know exactly how many drinks it would take for me to get a BAC of 0.08, the legal limit in my state - but I know with certainty that a single drink won't do it.
    I suppose it's possible that they don't include this feature in UK cars, but it seems far more likely that they do and you simply don't know about it.
    Read the article again. She was arrested for having a BAC that could not possibly have resulted in intoxication.
    The vast majority of people who get traffic tickets are not impaired by alcohol. You keep trying to use the fact that her headlights were off as some kind of evidence that she was drunk, despite the fact that a medical doctor stated she couldn't possibly have been impaired given her BAC. Perhaps she's just an idiot, or a really shitty driver.
    I would never defend someone who drives impaired. I do, however, think it's very stupid to cite someone for it who isn't impaired.
     
  18. CutsieMarie89 Zen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,485
    No drinking and driving, no exceptions. People who drink make poor choices. If there is the slightest chance you might be impaired you should not drive. My bac is under .08 after taking nyquil, but I would never drive after taking it. And anyone who does should be arrested.
     
  19. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    I've never seen one either. In fact, I never heard of it before it was mentioned here. Perhaps this is something unique to US cars..
     
  20. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    That is the dumbest thing i have ever read.
     
  21. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,231
    Do they not sell the Ford Focus in the UK??? Here is the 2010 Focus owners manual. Look on pg. 45. http://www.focusplanet.com/downloads/focusmanuals/2010/2010_focus_owner_guidemanual.pdf

    What about Cadillacs? Look in section 3-34 http://www.dryjapat.com/sts1.pdf

    Those are just two random cars that I googled for the owner's manual, and they both have the ability to turn the dash lights on while leaving the headlights off.
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2010
  22. Pinwheel Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,424
    They do but I've not seen one with the features you are talking about. Must be an American thing.
     
  23. darksidZz Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,924
    I agree the laws are draconian, good term for it :>

    If drinking and driving is illegal why do bars have parking lots?

    Why do restaurants serve alcohol and not ask if you'll be driving? It would be preventative maintenance!

    Does drinking alcohol really impair judgment?
     

Share This Page