dculberson wrote: I kept playing with it and never got above a .10 but I was trying not to have a hangover the next day. Hangovers and racing don't mix.
Dragway 42 has a no-matter-the-weather bracket race every January 1st called the Hangover National or somesuch. The year that I went, the track was mostly ice for the first 1/8th. Fun "times". The interesting part was when someone with an STI got annoyed at the 15 second breakout and slammed down a low 13 second pass... again, on ice.
z31maniac wrote:aussiesmg wrote:Like getting pulled over and given a field sobriety test because the cop can smell alcohol in the car?..................Because you just picked your wife up from a night with the girls? This has disaster written all over it. If me drinking 2 beers over an hour lunch could now possibly end with a life and job crushing DUI conviction, guess who won't be going out to dinner or brunch anymore. Yay for the nanny state! I bet there are people in this thread who still think over the last 20 years that gun violence has increased!!! /flounder.Appleseed wrote: As a diabetic, this scares the E36 M3 out of me.It shouldn't, common sense is out there, cops smell your breath first and if not just get a blood test.
where I worked, if you came back from lunch with alcohol on your breath, you'd be given the chance to go to rehab .... without pay, at your own expense, if you refused, you'd be fired
I'm talking about the weekend's, you lush. 
We typically go to a dinner on Fri night, then a nice brunch on Sunday. But many places nowadays, a DUI outside can jeopardize your employment.
I have never participated in "drinking lunches" when I have to go back to work.
Mitchell wrote: DUIs are life ruiners. When I drive, I have a maximum of one beer a few hours prior. I see these new regulations as a slippery slope: DUIs can already be issued to individuals with a BAC under 0.08. Will a BAC of 0.03 become grounds for DUI charges that after thousands in legal fees get reduced to reckless driving? Will driving after taking a dose of Nyquil subject a driver to more scrutiny?
I couldn't agree more on both thoughts. The moral dilemma is this: In a politically correct society, we issue driver's licenses to people over an insane range of driving ability. They say that a driver's license is a privilege and not a right, but in a society that relies on automotive transportation so heavily, the qualifications are pathetic. We've all seen people who can't drive perfectly sober. We've all ridden in cars driven by friends when we were thankful for shoulder belts and airbags.
I do NOT advocate driving under the influence, but I wish there were a more accurate measurement of driving ability.
For instance. Just today, I had my cherry 96 Impala SS banged up. On a two-lane road, I signaled to turn left into a parking lot. I waited for a break in oncoming traffic. Once it was clear, I turned across the road toward the parking lot. Unknown to me, the last car that had passed me in the oncoming lane realized he missed his turn, put his car in reverse, backed up in his lane and lightly impacted my car. Upon exchanging information, I discovered he was born in 1928. This guy could hardly walk or make a coherent sentence. He was confused and thought I was his son. He started driving when we were storming the beach at Normandy. He's been driving a while. He has experience. He began driving when cars were basically tractors with headlights. He can control a Cavalier. The fact that he reversed in a line of traffic on a state highway and caused an accident might indicate that he's past his driving prime.
This old guy has a valid license and my collision today was an "accident," but if (for instance) Jeff Gordon has a beer and a kid runs out in front of his truck, suddenly he's a felon because he had 0.00001% BAC?
Traffic laws (and laws in general) piss me off for this reason. Once a person has a DL, they are all perfectly equal regardless of the fact that anyone with a pulse could pass a driving test. I agree that driving drunk is STUPID and should be punishable by a hammer to the testicles, but for cripes sake I know people who could drive better at 1.0 BAC than some 50-year-old veteran sober drivers.
Think the rule change is silly, but I'd like to see data on how the low tolerance limits in Canada and the uk have worked before passing judgement. When I was in the uk, I thought the laws were good for the taxi business, but mostly that.
I also work in an FAA licensed repair station. We are all in a drug and alcohol covered pool. Meaning random drug tests all the time and any person, if behaving weird is taken down and pissed immediately. If you fail, there is no rehab. You're fired on the spot. It changes how you think about drinking when it is tied to your livelihood.
z31maniac wrote: I'm talking about the weekend's, you lush.
all kidding aside, going back to my earlier employment days .... we could actually have a beer or glass of wine with our lunch ...
ahhhhh ... those were the days ..
and shamefully, I probably did qualify as a lush back then 
Fueled by Caffeine wrote: I also work in an FAA licensed repair station. We are all in a drug and alcohol covered pool. Meaning random drug tests all the time and any person, if behaving weird is taken down and pissed immediately. If you fail, there is no rehab. You're fired on the spot. It changes how you think about drinking when it is tied to your livelihood.
that is the work I did ... (FAA licensed repair station, and manufacturing facility ) the random test, the immediate test for cause .. but we did go the route of rehab, before firing ...
we had one employee that, somehow, always found out when they were going around picking up the, to be tested workers... he would go to his supervisor and say he was sick and go home ... got away with it for more than 5 yrs 
I quit drinking and driving because my life would be a complete disaster if I got a DUI. I mean, really, that's all I would need to have happen. Several years back I met a guy who drove for Southeastern Freight Lines who had just been picked up for DUI; he lost his job because they had zero tolerance even when off the clock. That's the kind of thing that makes it just not worthwhile.
But I also agree with an earlier post in that that I think I can drive better at .10 than the majority of the population does stone cold sober. That's not the point, though; if I said that in court a judge would call me a smartass and throw the book at me.
Then again just because I think that doesn't make it so, either. For instance, my older brother is convinced he's a perfect driver when drunk, I have ridden with him and strongly disagree with his assessment so maybe, just maybe, I could be wrong.
With all this, the simplest solution is to not drink and drive. Takes a lot of heat off me.
I'm not really for dropping the maximum, but I give up well before .08. On those medication bottles, when it says, "may caused dizziness, alcohol may increase these effects," its not a lie.
Curmudgeon wrote: But I also agree with an earlier post in that that I think I can drive better at .10 than the majority of the population does stone cold sober.
The problem is not always the actual driving, it's the impaired reaction time. I watched a guy who was almost too drunk to walk washing his car at a self-serve place. He got in it, drove out of the bay and through the lot with no problem. Waited patiently for a hole in traffic, pulled out fine, you'd never know he'd had a drink.
Drove half a block and directly into the side of a car that was pulling out of another parking lot. Never even touched the brakes.
Curmudgeon wrote: But I also agree with an earlier post in that that I think I can drive better at .10 than the majority of the population does stone cold sober.
The problem being... that is what every drunk driver thinks too. Odds are, none of you are right.
To settle this matter - I suggest a karting nite. The first hour is sober laps. Then happy hour. Then drunk laps. No one is allowed on track until they blow a 1.5 so they don't sober up before the hour is over.
Even if we prove nothing... atleast it will be a great time.
<--------------- Here's my ticket, I'll get on this flounder fishing trip now.
I was almost killed by a drunk driver who was a repeat offender. That's my leg in my avatar, the shoulder didn't need any hardware thank goodness. When I heard about this idea I laughed out loud. Fine, drop the BAC but unless there are finally real consequences to a DUI nothing will change. Our DUI laws are a joke and so are the punishments.
That's the problem with so many laws in this country. We have no appetite for punishment. As it is they run these sap stories on the radio about some poor family who is being thrown out in the street because the mean judge took away daddy's license after a wedding and now we need to have a fundraiser for them. He knew what the consequences were when he did it, too bad. Just like many others on here I don't do it because I know I will lose my job. For a normal person losing you job, house, freedom ect should be motivation enough to follow the law and if it's not you should expect to get whatever punishment results.
In reply to slefain:
I completely agree. Will a .03 drop really effect anything? Doubtful, but until politicians think so, that won't matter. Doubt we'll see a change anyway.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:Curmudgeon wrote: But I also agree with an earlier post in that that I think I can drive better at .10 than the majority of the population does stone cold sober.The problem being... that is what every drunk driver thinks too. Odds are, none of you are right. To settle this matter - I suggest a karting nite. The first hour is sober laps. Then happy hour. Then drunk laps. No one is allowed on track until they blow a 1.5 so they don't sober up before the hour is over. Even if we prove nothing... atleast it will be a great time.
A couple of years ago at the National Convention we had a karting night. The shuttle was to pick us up at 7:00. $2 tequila happy hour was from 4-7.
The dude at the karting place asked if I was OK to drive. 
slefain wrote: <--------------- Here's my ticket, I'll get on this flounder fishing trip now. I was almost killed by a drunk driver who was a repeat offender. That's my leg in my avatar, the shoulder didn't need any hardware thank goodness. When I heard about this idea I laughed out loud. Fine, drop the BAC but unless there are finally real consequences to a DUI nothing will change. Our DUI laws are a joke and so are the punishments.
I totally agree with you. They crush and destroy cars for street racing.. why not for repeat DUIs?
I can understand getting one... even if it means you probably drove a hundred times or more drunk before getting caught.. but two? If you didn't learn the first time, you are a really slow learner.
So, Iggy and WB, you guys up on this?: http://www.testosteronepit.com/home/2013/5/9/when-flight-safety-gets-outsourced-to-china.html
Welcome to the club. I wonder if they have random pee tests and fired/rehab for wet lunches?
mad_machine wrote:slefain wrote: <--------------- Here's my ticket, I'll get on this flounder fishing trip now. I was almost killed by a drunk driver who was a repeat offender. That's my leg in my avatar, the shoulder didn't need any hardware thank goodness. When I heard about this idea I laughed out loud. Fine, drop the BAC but unless there are finally real consequences to a DUI nothing will change. Our DUI laws are a joke and so are the punishments.I totally agree with you. They crush and destroy cars for street racing.. why not for repeat DUIs? I can understand getting one... even if it means you probably drove a hundred times or more drunk before getting caught.. but two? If you didn't learn the first time, you are a really slow learner.
The guy that hit me was out on bail before I regained consciousness the next day. I spent months learning to walk again while he got picked up on another DUI plus a burglary charge. He got bumped up to felony DUI for hitting me but last I heard he hadn't served a single day of jail time, nor had he paid any of the court ordered restitution.
Hell, here he is: http://mugshot-catalog.com/booking/631791/MIGUEL-LOPEZ-HERNANDEZ
I've come to peace with the situation, but before that happened I found myself parked outside his apartment one night with a metal baseball bat. In my mind the judicial system had failed miserably, so I was going to give him my best Inigo Montoya impression and breaks his legs. I stopped when I realized that I'd be punished far more harshly than him since I'd be doing it premeditated. How ironic.
I'm a big fan of mind-berkeley justice in these cases. Get busted for a DUI? Go spend a few weeks working in the county morgue helping process dead bodies. Or maybe spend some time as an assistant to a crime scene photographer that processes car crashes. Picking up trash on the side of the road does nothing for punishment. Make them work at a physical rehab clinic where people have to re-learn to be human again and see what that does to them.
Aside from that, I hear caning is quite effective.
slefain wrote: .....The guy that hit me was out on bail before I regained consciousness the next day.....
Had a similar, but less extreme experience. The guy who hit me (while stopped to make a left turn) was at over .40 BAC (which is enough to kill some people) and I later learned he had already been convicted of vehicular manslaughter. I escaped with only a serious wiplash.
The kicker was when I went to the police impound yard to get stuff out of what was left of my car (64 Ghia) I saw the F%ck'r DRIVING OUT IN HIS TRUCK!!!
I always wondered how many more he killed after hitting me....
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:Curmudgeon wrote: But I also agree with an earlier post in that that I think I can drive better at .10 than the majority of the population does stone cold sober.The problem being... that is what every drunk driver thinks too. Odds are, none of you are right.
That's why I had this in there as well:
Then again just because I think that doesn't make it so, either. For instance, my older brother is convinced he's a perfect driver when drunk, I have ridden with him and strongly disagree with his assessment so maybe, just maybe, I could be wrong.
With all this, the simplest solution is to not drink and drive. Takes a lot of heat off me.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: To settle this matter - I suggest a karting nite. The first hour is sober laps. Then happy hour. Then drunk laps. No one is allowed on track until they blow a 1.5 so they don't sober up before the hour is over. Even if we prove nothing... atleast it will be a great time.
Put me down for a spot. 
dculberson wrote: Is there an enormous problem with drivers below .08 being impaired and causing accidents? I've not heard of it being an issue, and would not support a law like this unless extensive - and I mean non-MADD funded and very thorough long term - research showed it to be a problem. My belief at this point is that it's a Puritan based "zero tolerance" idiot idea. I'm willing to have my mind changed but I bet the evidence isn't out there to change it. Because I bet the facts do not support it.
Apparently there is a lot of data from Europe that showed .05 resulted in a lower death rate. At least according to NBC last night.
I agree that if they really want to cut down on fatalities, punishing repeat offenders is the way to go.
Back in a former life I was a bartender. (for 8 years) One of my regulars had 4 DUIs but continued to drive drunk. He even served 30 days in jail for DUI. Thankfully to my knowledge he never ran into, or hurt anyone. I also had a regular who was a horrible drunk who I physically stopped from getting in her car. (wrestled the keys out of her hand) I had a sober friend drive her home, as she could barely walk. About a 1/2 hour later I'm taking out the trash, and I see her in the parking lot, trying to get her key in the car door---- she had walked back to the bar to get her car, and this time refused to let me stop her. 
Fortunately, she drank herself to death before she was able to take anyone else out.
People won't stop unless you up the penalties for multiple offenses greatly.
That said, I don't see lowering the limit having any benefits at all--- besides feeding the coffers of local (and state) municipalities. The problem isn't the guy who has 3 beers at happy hour after work......it's the guy who drives blind drunk..... over and over again.
Joe Gearin wrote: That said, I don't see lowering the limit having any benefits at all--- besides feeding the coffers of local (and state) municipalities. The problem isn't the guy who has 3 beers at happy hour after work......it's the guy who drives blind drunk..... over and over again.
yup
That said, I don't see lowering the limit having any benefits at all--- besides feeding the coffers of local (and state) municipalities. The problem isn't the guy who has 3 beers at happy hour after work......it's the guy who drives blind drunk..... over and over again.
What about the guy who has 3 beers before he leaves work? You got a problem with that guy? HUH!? Come at me bro!
Oh E36 M3. It's 5:30. Later taters.
In reply to poopshovel:
Dude, that's like nine minutes early. What, are you on bar time? I'm tellin' your boss!
You'll need to log in to post.
