If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   The NTSB issues a 'shelter in place' order for all FARKers   (cnn.com) divider line 231
    More: Strange, shelter in place, National Transportation Safety Board, United States, Transportation Safety Board, Mothers Against Drunk Driving  
•       •       •

15208 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 May 2013 at 4:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



231 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-14 05:13:12 PM

R.A.Danny: libranoelrose: Kibbler: .15 or higher. So drunk you can't even stand up.

Way to spread misinformation.

You're not helping.

I know a couple of women that can't keep their knickers up at .08.


I told you, stop buying my mom wine!
 
2013-05-14 05:14:42 PM
I thought you said "Making your mom whine"
 
2013-05-14 05:15:02 PM
Looks like magazine limit stupidity is being applied to blood alcohol, except blood alcohol actually has an effect on driving.

Looks like the government is coming after Fark's vices and all I can say is:
 
2013-05-14 05:15:45 PM

R.A.Danny: libranoelrose: Kibbler: .15 or higher. So drunk you can't even stand up.

Way to spread misinformation.

You're not helping.

I know a couple of women that can't keep their knickers up at .08.


I've known women who can't keep their knickers up at 0.00 after telling them that their Mountain Dew is a fancy Margarita.
 
2013-05-14 05:19:30 PM

jonny_q: R.A.Danny: libranoelrose: Kibbler: .15 or higher. So drunk you can't even stand up.

Way to spread misinformation.

You're not helping.

I know a couple of women that can't keep their knickers up at .08.

I've known women who can't keep their knickers up at 0.00 after telling them that their Mountain Dew is a fancy Margarita.


Stop giving my mom Mountain Dew!
 
2013-05-14 05:19:35 PM
I say make blood alcohol just one part of the test.  Improve the test for "impairment" and the results of that test should potentially supersede the bac.  One drink and a vicodin and you could be impaired.  Three beers and you might be fine to drive.  Colorado making efforts to determine chemical levels of impairment for THC and I think they really need to re-look at other tests of impairment.  Get stopped, play a "video game" in the back of a cop car.
 
2013-05-14 05:20:25 PM
At 1am your lack of sleep is a greater hazard than 0.08 BAC. So, everyone needs to get a disco nap in the early evening just to be safe.

/Failure to get a disco nap will result in fine or prison
//All for you, "Citizen"
 
2013-05-14 05:23:54 PM

kahnzo: I say make blood alcohol just one part of the test.  Improve the test for "impairment" and the results of that test should potentially supersede the bac.  One drink and a vicodin and you could be impaired.  Three beers and you might be fine to drive.  Colorado making efforts to determine chemical levels of impairment for THC and I think they really need to re-look at other tests of impairment.  Get stopped, play a "video game" in the back of a cop car.


Around here (DC/VA/MD) it seems like the real push should be a crackdown on "driving while being a moron."  I see some people do some incredibly stoooopid shiat, alcohol or no.
 
2013-05-14 05:24:38 PM
I like the new billboards popping up around here. Picture of a guy who registered .08 on a breathalyzer, captioned "YOU JUST BLEW $10,000"

it's insanely expensive to get one these days. Fines, missed work, DUI school, increased insurance costs, interlock device, license suspension & reinstatement fees, etc. Be a cheap bastard you drunks! Call a cab!

/Note to self included
 
2013-05-14 05:26:54 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

Virtually all countries inEurope has stricter standards for who can belong on the road.

We don't want to enact more sensible anti-drunk drivinglegislation and suffer the tyranny ofEurope do we?

No, real Americans drive inebriated and let G-D sort out the fatalities!
 
2013-05-14 05:29:50 PM

doofusgumby: I like the new billboards popping up around here. Picture of a guy who registered .08 on a breathalyzer, captioned "YOU JUST BLEW $10,000"

it's insanely expensive to get one these days. Fines, missed work, DUI school, increased insurance costs, interlock device, license suspension & reinstatement fees, etc. Be a cheap bastard you drunks! Call a cab!

/Note to self included


Which is why self-driving cars won't make a bit of difference. Hell, they'll slap  you with a DUI for sleeping in a parked car now, what makes you think they won't if you're in a self-driving car that's on the road?
 
2013-05-14 05:30:04 PM
Nezorf:  ...


I contend that after a few days or weeks in a submarine where you aren't drinking your resistance to alcohol is much lower than an acomplished alcoholic's daily training diet and perhaps 3 or 4 drinks might be a substantial buzz to you.  Our alcoholic has spent lots of time and money honing his system to consume much more than that amount.  I feel there should be some kind of reaction and skills test that would also weed out the senile or dangerously stupid drivers and not a pure % test.
 
2013-05-14 05:30:32 PM

TheTurtle: kahnzo: I say make blood alcohol just one part of the test.  Improve the test for "impairment" and the results of that test should potentially supersede the bac.  One drink and a vicodin and you could be impaired.  Three beers and you might be fine to drive.  Colorado making efforts to determine chemical levels of impairment for THC and I think they really need to re-look at other tests of impairment.  Get stopped, play a "video game" in the back of a cop car.

Around here (DC/VA/MD) it seems like the real push should be a crackdown on "driving while being a moron."  I see some people do some incredibly stoooopid shiat, alcohol or no.


Yesterday, I was sitting in a left turn lane, at a red light, waiting to turn across two lanes of traffic. 4:30 in the afternoon, stone-cold sober, just watching the road.

There was a break in the oncoming traffic, probably about 10 seconds of space. Before I'd even given it a bit of rational thought, I'd made my turn and was going down the road. It took me a little while to even realize I'd just made a left on red. If a cop had been anywhere around me, it would have been the most well-deserved ticket in history.

Sometimes, "moron" happens.
 
2013-05-14 05:30:58 PM

super_grass: [upload.wikimedia.org image 680x520]

Virtually all countries inEurope has stricter standards for who can belong on the road.

We don't want to enact more sensible anti-drunk drivinglegislation and suffer the tyranny ofEurope do we?

No, real Americans drive inebriated and let G-D sort out the fatalities!



Give America the same public transit options, drop the drinking age to match Europe, and get rid of the puritanical attitudes and I'm right there with ya.
 
2013-05-14 05:31:50 PM
Drunk driving deaths has steadily declined over the years.  They need more money.

http://www.centurycouncil.org/drunk-driving/drunk-driving-fatalities -n ational-statistics
 
2013-05-14 05:34:29 PM

timujin: Not sure what this is supposed to accomplish.  What percentage of drunk driving deaths are caused by people at .08?


The real problem is that 0.08 is notoriously hard to gauge without an actual test. The level SHOULD be 0.02 - that way it's real simple: if you had a drink, you don't drive. One or the other. No more "I only had 2 beers, officer".

Trying to decide whether you're over 0.08 or not is ridiculous, especially after you've had a few and your perception is already altered.
 
2013-05-14 05:35:52 PM

dittybopper: factoryconnection: dittybopper: Neoprohibitionists.  They are working, slowly, gradually, towards zero tolerance.  They know they can't ask for it all at once, because they will be laughed at.  So they exploit the mechanisms of the slippery slope to achieve their goals.

MADD does fall under this category, and they seem to have all the free time in the world to bother legislators.  God knows they don't have a social life.

And I say this as someone that is deeply committed to road safety and responsible drinking: dem b*tches be crazy.

Even the founder of MADD thinks they've gone too far towards the neo-prohibitionist side, though she does support ignition interlocks for those convicted of drunk driving.

The interesting things about organizations, though, is that like organisms, they don't like to die.  MADD was founded with one goal:  To reduce drunk driving deaths.  By any rational measure, they've succeeded fantastically:

[www.centurycouncil.org image 500x375]

They've cut the raw numbers of deaths due to drunk driving in *HALF*.

The problem is, what do you do when you've won?

Well, you advocate for that one extra step to reduce it even further.  The alternative is irrelevance or even death as an organization.  And organizations like that don't like to die.

Did you know that the  Woman's Christian Temperance Union is still around?  Yes, 80 years after the repeal of their signature legislation, they are still around.




Air bags
Traction control
Disc brakes
Crumple zone

Thank you technology gods.
 
2013-05-14 05:38:31 PM

PowerSlacker: Throw the book at the people who exceed .08 instead.


Not the point. It should be the same level as commercial drivers. You drunken louts cause much more death and mayhem than domestic terrorism. If DHS crawls up my ass before I board a plane, the least you can do is drive sober. Besides, it is cheaper than a war on terror.
 
2013-05-14 05:42:19 PM

StoPPeRmobile: Air bags
Traction control
Disc brakes
Crumple zone

Thank you technology gods.


Plus: Better trauma centers, better paramedic responses, Good Samaritan laws...seat belt laws, child seat laws...

Drunk driving deaths have declined in part for the same reason gun homicides have gone down: Fewer people die from injuries that would have killed them even 40 years ago.
 
2013-05-14 05:44:25 PM
 
2013-05-14 05:44:32 PM

buzzcut73: doofusgumby: I like the new billboards popping up around here. Picture of a guy who registered .08 on a breathalyzer, captioned "YOU JUST BLEW $10,000"

it's insanely expensive to get one these days. Fines, missed work, DUI school, increased insurance costs, interlock device, license suspension & reinstatement fees, etc. Be a cheap bastard you drunks! Call a cab!

/Note to self included

Which is why self-driving cars won't make a bit of difference. Hell, they'll slap  you with a DUI for sleeping in a parked car now, what makes you think they won't if you're in a self-driving car that's on the road?


Not just for sleeping in it. For being anywhere near it with keys. Even at home. Know 2 people who got DUI s AT HOME. And didn't drink until after they got there.
 
2013-05-14 05:47:26 PM

Walker: Pretty soon if any alcohol is detected in your system you will be charged with DUI.


Even if you're not within a mile of a motorized vehicle.  Because Fark you that'$ why.
 
2013-05-14 05:48:59 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: Oh hey, Drunk Driving deaths only make up 6% of all drunk driving deaths when the BAC is between .05 and .07.


Was the alcohol a factor in the crashes?
 
2013-05-14 05:49:34 PM

super_grass: [upload.wikimedia.org image 680x520]

Virtually all countries inEurope has stricter standards for who can belong on the road.

We don't want to enact more sensible anti-drunk drivinglegislation and suffer the tyranny ofEurope do we?

No, real Americans drive inebriated and let G-D sort out the fatalities!


Because when I hear "safe, responsible driving", I think Russia. That 0.0 sure has gotten all the drunks off the road.

Oh, wait.
 
2013-05-14 05:51:11 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Walker: Pretty soon if any alcohol is detected in your system you will be charged with DUI.

Even if you're not within a mile of a motorized vehicle.  Because Fark you that'$ why.


Yup. See above.

Cop: hey you, the hood is warm, you got the keys?

You: yerp!

Cop: CA-CHING!

You: FML
 
2013-05-14 05:53:45 PM

DrewCurtisJr: antidisestablishmentarianism: Oh hey, Drunk Driving deaths only make up 6% of all drunk driving deaths when the BAC is between .05 and .07.

Was the alcohol a factor in the crashes?


Yep. Sober people made up the largest amount of fatal crashes so we need to really focus on driving sober.
 
2013-05-14 05:59:20 PM

js34603: Don't drive after drinking. Why is that so hard?

/I only had a couple!
//I have a high tolerance so I can drive after drinking!
///I make up excuses to justify my inability to control my alcohol consumption and blame the evil government for taking my right to drink and drive!


nice.

i4.ytimg.com
 
2013-05-14 06:00:55 PM

ZeroPly: if you had a drink, you don't drive.


Why not?  A single beer has as much effect on my ability to drive as a single water does.
 
2013-05-14 06:01:59 PM
So how long until the NTSB requires that all cars in the US come with ignition interlock devices, whether or not the owner has ever been convicted (or even accused) of a DUI? MADD has called for that; and it's for the children, after all.
 
2013-05-14 06:02:12 PM

antidisestablishmentarianism: Yep. Sober people made up the largest amount of fatal crashes so we need to really focus on driving sober.


It is too bad they don't have a rate/per
 
2013-05-14 06:02:59 PM
I drink and drive everything in sight.
 
2013-05-14 06:04:22 PM

BafflerMeal: super_grass: [upload.wikimedia.org image 680x520]

Virtually all countries inEurope has stricter standards for who can belong on the road.

We don't want to enact more sensible anti-drunk drivinglegislation and suffer the tyranny ofEurope do we?

No, real Americans drive inebriated and let G-D sort out the fatalities!


Give America the same public transit options, drop the drinking age to match Europe, and get rid of the puritanical attitudes and I'm right there with ya.


THIS X100
 
2013-05-14 06:04:51 PM
Can't wait for self driving cars.
 
2013-05-14 06:07:48 PM
DUI in and of itself should not be illegal. Well, let me clarify that. Driving recklessly while drunk should be severely punished. If you're driving recklessly, get pulled over, and you've been drinking? The book should be thrown at you. Your punishment should be far greater than the current DUI punishments.

But punishment for just blowing over the limit, e.g. at a DUI checkpoint, or when officers hide just outside of bar parking lots to pull people over? Fark that. That's the part of it that's revenue generation, and that's the part of it that's an easy excuse for cops to perform warrantless searches.
 
2013-05-14 06:08:24 PM

dericwater: Can't wait for self driving cars.


Won't change anything. You'll still  be "in control of the vehicle" by having turned it on, thus still DUI. $afety and all you know.
Seriously, do you think they'll make an exception for self driving vehicles?
 
2013-05-14 06:09:28 PM

dericwater: Can't wait for self driving cars.


I can't wait for self driving cars with software patches that require a $300 fee or your vehicle stops working
 
2013-05-14 06:12:43 PM
This isn't about safety, it's about how much money the state makes off of your DUI conviction. 0.08 was based off 1 drink/hour... there is no basis for the change.
 
2013-05-14 06:14:00 PM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: Jerking off with Purel is going to result in felony DUI.


I used some Purel after doing the naughty one time.  It was the worst mistake I have ever made.  Incarceration would have been less painful.
 
2013-05-14 06:16:53 PM
If we lowered all speed limits to 35mph, think of all the lives that would be saved.
 
2013-05-14 06:17:40 PM

Smeggy Smurf: dericwater: Can't wait for self driving cars.

I can't wait for self driving cars with software patches that require a $300 fee or your vehicle stops working


Meet the 2020 Microsoft Durango - now with Metro dashboard!
 
2013-05-14 06:24:12 PM

TheTurtle: brap: I take umbrage at the headline, I may be sauced out of my gourd, but I'm never too drunk to hail a cab.

Thing is, where a pretty large number of people live, there ARE no cabs.  There are no buses.  No trains.  No anything, except private automobiles, because that's pretty much how this country developed.  In Europe, where limits are often stricter, things are (a) closer together and (b) served by much better public transport.


The ONLY place you can get a cab without calling ahead in my city is the airport.
 
2013-05-14 06:24:55 PM
The 0.05 standard will, not might, not can, WILL result in false positives. There are people now who can blow 0.01 to 0.02 just from natural body chemistry, and the error in the sensors on those breathalyzers. This means more people would be detained for doing what is essentially not morally or ethically wrong, i.e. 1 drink at happy hour before going home.

We don't want that.

Don't change the standard if you cannot ensure that cops won't simply abuse it to create criminals out of anyone, thus justifying more law enforcement, thus getting themselves promoted and their departments expanded.

super_grass: Virtually all countries in Europe has stricter standards for who can belong on the road.


Ah yes, the Europe argument. Let's all be like Europe! They've always been our betters obviously... Except for that facism and all those world wars...

Yes, it sucks when innocents get killed by drunks. But look at what percentage of those drunks are repeat offenders who were likely well over 0.08 before you decide the standard needs to change.

Most of the reduction in auto fatalities has nothing to do with our crusade against drunk driving, and everything to do with safety features in the cars themselves.
 
2013-05-14 06:25:14 PM

buzzcut73: dericwater: Can't wait for self driving cars.

Won't change anything. You'll still  be "in control of the vehicle" by having turned it on, thus still DUI. $afety and all you know.
Seriously, do you think they'll make an exception for self driving vehicles?


It should be no different than if I hire a cab. And I certainly won't buy into a self-driving car system that doesn't self insure itself.
 
2013-05-14 06:34:41 PM

ZeroPly: timujin:

Trying to decide whether you're over 0.08 or not is ridiculous, especially after you've had a few and your perception is already altered.


Well I might be happier and more cautious if that's what you mean by altered.
 
2013-05-14 06:37:42 PM

doofusgumby: Know 2 people who got DUI s AT HOME. And didn't drink until after they got there.


I just don't believe this.  No DA would file - there's no way to beat the reasonable doubt if this went to trial, and no DA wants to lower his or her conviction rate.
 
2013-05-14 06:38:10 PM

Haven't you people figured this out yet? This is a scam by Google to amp up demand for their future self-driving cars. Between the red-light cameras, the left-turn cameras, the speed cameras, and the soon-to-be limit of 0.0 BAC, driving yourself is going to become increasing difficult. You'll be begging to buy a GoogleCar™.



i40.tinypic.com
 
2013-05-14 06:38:23 PM
Tougher drug laws totally eliminated all drugs too!

This is about pleasing the fascist neo-prohibitionist Jesus crowd and the politicians and police departments that want to profit off of their sentiments.
 
2013-05-14 06:40:47 PM

factoryconnection: sammyk: Even that is a little low. It used to be .10. A lot of people, myself included, felt that was just a money grab.

I don't know about that.  Even in my submarining days (yes, sailors drink a lot, submariners drink even more), downing four drinks in an hour did not leave me in a state to drive.  Five would be messy.

timujin: Not sure what this is supposed to accomplish.  What percentage of drunk driving deaths are caused by people at .08?

This I would like to see borne out in detail, however.


As a 160# male, 4 drinks in an hour would prevent me from driving, period.  (Tradeoff: it would let me sing and dance like an angel and make me a master of wit and conversation.)

The 0.08 limit allows you to have two drinks with dinner.  0.05 means one, or usually none if you aren't a man weighing more than I do.

The government brought in 0.05 here and it's killed the restaurant industry.
 
2013-05-14 06:43:51 PM

IgG4: In MN where I live, there were 395 traffic fatalities in 2012. About half were alcohol related. So 180 deaths out of 5 million people living in the state. About 800 people died from accidental falls in 2012. These deaths are tragic yes, but there are so few of them that you really need to ask yourself how much trouble it is worth to try to reduce that number more. 1 in 7 people in MN have already been convicted of DUI and that number will certainly increase dramatically if you lower the limit to 0.05%, it it really worth criminalizing a huge percentage of your population to marginally decrease that statistic? I would say no.


I don't think decreasing the deaths is the real goal.  Look, someone has to fill the prisons and crime (as defined a few decades ago) is generally at an all time low.  If the police don't have criminals to arrest and process, what will they do?  It will cost law enforcement jobs up and down the industry, from cops to court clerks to prison guards and lawyers.  If we can just increase the inventory of criminals by criminalizing successive levels of previously legal activity, we can ensure both a steady workload for our criminal justice workforce and reduce the unemployed population by incarcerating them.  This is shovel-ready job creation at its finest.
 
2013-05-14 06:45:46 PM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: Jerking off with Purel is going to result in felony DUI.


And lets face it.  Who doesn't do that at least a couple of times per week?
 
Displayed 50 of 231 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report