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.

(Christian Science Monitor)   Critics of the proposal to lower the legal blood alcohol limit from 0.08 to 0.05 include the American Beverage Institute and Mothers Against Drunk Driving   (csmonitor.com) divider line 91
    More: Strange, M.A.D.D.: Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, American Beverage Institute, blood alcohol content, free daily, trade organization  
•       •       •

6154 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 May 2013 at 11:19 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-17 08:47:48 PM
When even MADD agrees your plan is stupid, it's REALLY stupid.
 
2013-05-17 09:11:02 PM
I would do whatever the NTSB Chair Deborah Hersman told me to do.
 
2013-05-17 09:13:08 PM

doglover: When even MADD agrees your plan is stupid, it's REALLY stupid.


Now I'm starting to wonder if they don't get a piece of the action from the ridiculous fines

/pity... they started out because a young lady was tragically killed just down the road from my home
//went national, went nuts
 
2013-05-17 09:19:52 PM
If a little is good, then a lot must be better.
 
2013-05-17 09:23:03 PM

tin_man: If a little is good, then a lot must be better.


Next up: a Constitutional amendment banning the manufacture and consumption of alcohol in the United States

/what could possibly go wrong?
 
2013-05-17 09:24:50 PM
If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.
 
2013-05-17 09:28:04 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: tin_man: If a little is good, then a lot must be better.

Next up: a Constitutional amendment banning the manufacture and consumption of alcohol in the United States

/what could possibly go wrong?


As long as it's been properly demonized, and packaged in a palatable way, the internet will cheer in unison for the death of demon alcohol.
 
2013-05-17 09:28:31 PM

Mugato: If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.


This^

/there is such a thing as "normal operating temperature"
 
2013-05-17 09:31:05 PM

tin_man: As long as it's been properly demonized, and packaged in a palatable way, the internet will cheer in unison for the death of demon alcohol.


Consultant
www.cincinnativiews.net
 
2013-05-17 09:39:11 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Mugato: If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.

This^

/there is such a thing as "normal operating temperature"


I need to find a Breathalyzer to test this proposal. (Sober 4 years).
 
2013-05-17 10:00:52 PM

simplicimus: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Mugato: If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.

This^

/there is such a thing as "normal operating temperature"

I need to find a Breathalyzer to test this proposal. (Sober 4 years).


Congratulations. I'll assume it was something you wanted or needed to do, and that is sincere

/but just so you know, and for future reference: don't take everything I post seriously
//I'm not only a drunk, I suffer from CSD*

*compulsive smartass disorder
 
2013-05-17 10:05:58 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: simplicimus: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Mugato: If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.

This^

/there is such a thing as "normal operating temperature"

I need to find a Breathalyzer to test this proposal. (Sober 4 years).

Congratulations. I'll assume it was something you wanted or needed to do, and that is sincere

/but just so you know, and for future reference: don't take everything I post seriously
//I'm not only a drunk, I suffer from CSD*

*compulsive smartass disorder


That's why you're Favorited as :smartass. But there are an assortment of beverages not known for alcholic content. OJ is one, I think.
 
2013-05-17 10:10:20 PM

simplicimus: MaudlinMutantMollusk: simplicimus: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Mugato: If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.

This^

/there is such a thing as "normal operating temperature"

I need to find a Breathalyzer to test this proposal. (Sober 4 years).

Congratulations. I'll assume it was something you wanted or needed to do, and that is sincere

/but just so you know, and for future reference: don't take everything I post seriously
//I'm not only a drunk, I suffer from CSD*

*compulsive smartass disorder

That's why you're Favorited as :smartass. But there are an assortment of beverages not known for alcholic content. OJ is one, I think.


OJ leads to low-speed pursuits

/nothing is truly safe
 
2013-05-17 10:20:39 PM
Read the MADD President's statement carefully - it is intentionally ambiguous when it comes to policy. They do not want a lowering of any limit, and that's why they oppose this limit reduction. What they want is a complete ban on all alcohol anywhere, for any reason, at any time. They are well recognized as the new prohibitionist movement in the country.
 
2013-05-17 10:26:30 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: simplicimus: MaudlinMutantMollusk: simplicimus: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Mugato: If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.

This^

/there is such a thing as "normal operating temperature"

I need to find a Breathalyzer to test this proposal. (Sober 4 years).

Congratulations. I'll assume it was something you wanted or needed to do, and that is sincere

/but just so you know, and for future reference: don't take everything I post seriously
//I'm not only a drunk, I suffer from CSD*

*compulsive smartass disorder

That's why you're Favorited as :smartass. But there are an assortment of beverages not known for alcholic content. OJ is one, I think.

OJ leads to low-speed pursuits

/nothing is truly safe


lol you crack me up.
 
2013-05-17 10:31:41 PM
Found a source (wiki(:
A report in October 2006 demonstrated that some soft drinks contain measurable amounts of alcohol. In some older preparations, this resulted from natural fermentation used to build the carbonation. In the United States, soft drinks (as well as other beverages such as) are allowed by law to contain up to 0.5%. Modern drinks introduce carbon dioxide for carbonation, but there is some speculation that alcohol might result from fermentation of sugars in an unsterile environment. A small amount of alcohol is introduced in some soft drinks where alcohol is used in the preparation of the flavoring extracts such as.
so 10 sodas will get you to one beer.
 
2013-05-17 10:37:41 PM

simplicimus: 10 sodas will get you to one beer.


Only if you don't help nature along a bit...
 
2013-05-17 11:26:07 PM
Oh for farks sake
Everyone get drunk and slam into a spandex wearing bike rider
 
2013-05-17 11:27:44 PM

simplicimus: Found a source (wiki(:
A report in October 2006 demonstrated that some soft drinks contain measurable amounts of alcohol. In some older preparations, this resulted from natural fermentation used to build the carbonation. In the United States, soft drinks (as well as other beverages such as) are allowed by law to contain up to 0.5%. Modern drinks introduce carbon dioxide for carbonation, but there is some speculation that alcohol might result from fermentation of sugars in an unsterile environment. A small amount of alcohol is introduced in some soft drinks where alcohol is used in the preparation of the flavoring extracts such as.
so 10 sodas will get you to one beer.


Such as the Iraq?
 
2013-05-17 11:28:03 PM
But just think of all the money it would bring in for state and local governments!
 
2013-05-17 11:28:40 PM

doglover: When even MADD agrees your plan is stupid, it's REALLY stupid.


They's comin' fer yer guns beers!
 
2013-05-17 11:32:30 PM
I haven't read the article or comments yet but I'm assuming MADD is upset because they want a limit of 0.001%.  Amirite?
 
2013-05-17 11:32:33 PM
I dunno, maybe better available and super cheap (or free) public transportation may help to curb people driving drunk. Or how about some places designed for walking instead of needing a car?

Though that latter one definitely comes a little late in most cases.
 
2013-05-17 11:35:23 PM

Raw_fishFood: I dunno, maybe better available and super cheap (or free) public transportation may help to curb people driving drunk. Or how about some places designed for walking instead of needing a car?

Though that latter one definitely comes a little late in most cases.


This could describe a small college town with free/cheap campus buses (that also stop down the road from Bar Row.) See: Iowa City.
 
2013-05-17 11:36:12 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

If we want to crack down on illegal guns using Europe as an example, it's only logical that we should crack down on drunk driving the same way. Vehicles kill even more people than guns in this country even though we're in the midst of a gun violence epidemic.
 
2013-05-17 11:36:33 PM
OH...MY...FARKING...GOD.

binaryapi.ap.org
www.csmonitor.com
 
2013-05-17 11:36:52 PM

jtown: I haven't read the article or comments yet but I'm assuming MADD is upset because they want a limit of 0.001%.  Amirite?


They claimed it wasn't the right move at this time, and would take too long for us to see effects. They don't mention what their bright idea is.
 
2013-05-17 11:38:01 PM
Weird, I always thought of MADD as neo-prohibitionists.
 
2013-05-17 11:38:58 PM

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

If we want to crack down on illegal guns using Europe as an example, it's only logical that we should crack down on drunk driving the same way. Vehicles kill even more people than guns in this country even though we're in the midst of a gun violence epidemic.


The dangers of drunk walking are also pretty high, so without a cheap ride you're farked one way or another.
 
2013-05-17 11:40:28 PM

Raw_fishFood: I dunno, maybe better available and super cheap (or free) public transportation may help to curb people driving drunk. Or how about some places designed for walking instead of needing a car?

Though that latter one definitely comes a little late in most cases.


2:15 drunk shuttle

/pick up all the drunks drive em home for free
//plus it would be an entertaining ride
///if I works - add one for 2:15 am
 
2013-05-17 11:42:19 PM
Prison time works wonders to curb drunk drivers but since most States and Provinces treat drunk driving as a misdemeanor via silly fines, we end up with over the limit drunk driving being no big thing.

The other thing is a court system that can take a couple of years just to hear the case to convict and send to prison. Along with the mean old government refusing to spend money on jailing drunk convicts for longer than 20 minutes(processing time on the side of the road before the taxi is called).

Do a crime and who gives a fark if you lose your job and family revenue generation.

Europe actually sends their convicted drunk drivers to rehabilitation prisons.

British Columbia has a Constitution violating fine system(still being fought in the courts to 100% ban that violation of the Charter) where court access is unlawfully denied, you are convicted on the spot via a cop with only a handheld Breathalyzer screening device(not really court admissible on its own since they already had some calibration problems with the wrong reading being shown) and instantly pay the 4 grand fine or be punished by no vehicle insurance and no drivers license renewal.

/MADD spends 85% of its revenue on management and the current bunch want full prohibition to be mandated.
 
2013-05-17 11:44:10 PM
As I recall, the founders of MADD admitted that they had been drunk drivers in the days before their snowflakes were killed by other drunk drivers.  They used the point to help show they were not anti-drinking, just anti-drunk-driving.  So maybe they still like to get a buzz on when they go out and think 0.05 would interfere.....
 
2013-05-17 11:46:17 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Now I'm starting to wonder if they don't get a piece of the action from the ridiculous fines


They don't get to stand at 'checkpoints' and bust people who haven't had a drop to drink but may have some other minor outstanding offense (real or imagined).  You know ... to protect others from drunk driving.
 
2013-05-17 11:46:21 PM
During the NHL playoffs I typically wake up at .06.  I've had clients test out at .2+ and be completely coherent.  MADD are looking for nothing less than a complete ban.  If that happens (again) I can promise you that I will give up practicing law and go straight into brewing full time.  The profit would be too much to ignore.
 
2013-05-17 11:49:23 PM
Meanwhile in Ireland they're giving special dispensation for people who maintain a 0.1 at all times.

fark it, let's go ahead and swap high calorie, high liver load alcohol for the new superfood, pot. But you can only smoke it from a three foot bong. That's to limit intoxication because you hit a point where you can no longer operate a bong.
 
2013-05-17 11:49:30 PM
This is what legislators do when they need to look busy, but don't want to work. 0.08 is stupid. I'd love to know how many DUI arrests fall between 0.08 and 0.1. Not many, I'll wager.
 
2013-05-17 11:50:03 PM
If most of Europe is .05 then ...
 
2013-05-17 11:50:47 PM

Mugato: If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.


You joke about this but I used to work with a guy who was a alcoholic.He ran the surface mount machines and often had to place the surface mount parts by hand to calibrate the machines. When this guy was coming down from his drunk he couldn't do his job because his hands were way too shaky to place the parts. When this happened he would always excuse himself to go to the bathroom for about 15 or 20 minutes, and when he came back he was a champ, hand still like a motherfarker.

He was one of the nicest guys you would ever meet, and one of the best machine operators in the plant.
 
2013-05-17 11:52:02 PM
Let's assume that we do reduce the BAC to .05. Arguably we save a few more people every year from being killed in drunk driving accidents. As a former drunk who is fortunate only in that I didn't kill anybody, I'm OK with the idea. But there are three things that we need to address before it goes any further:

1) This law suffers from the Law of Diminishing Returns. Few such accidents occur at such a low level of intoxication, and as the head of MADD (!) said, this will require a lot of effort for little change.

2) We will make a lot of criminals, with no place to put them. It looks a lot like a fundraiser in that respect, just run the offenders down the DUI assembly line, collect their fine money, and oh-by-the-way, slap them with a charge that never really goes away, especially when it comes to employment over the next decade following the incident or obtaining a security clearance. Or we can just put them in jail, which helps nobody. Oh, I know, let's release small-time drug offenders to make room for other small-time drug offenders! Nope, not really working for me.

3) Towns, cities, and other municipalities need to get it through their heads that if they make bars move out to the sticks they bear some responsibility for killing people. Not in my backyard? If you want people out driving drunk and killing people, that's exactly the attitude you should have. You cannot rely on the judgment of people with impaired judgment, and taking bars out of walking distance is the very first step in the chain of failure.

If those can be addressed to everyone's satisfaction, I'm all for it. Otherwise, I'm uneasy with it. I don't want to wreck everybody's fun, but I am the example of what too much "fun" can lead to, and I promise you that you do not want to be me or one of the thousands who are even worse than me. I'm only a two-time loser. When I went to court and to "DUI School" I was surrounded by people who made me look like a piker. .05 will make a lot of you people look a lot like them.
 
2013-05-17 11:53:13 PM

WhoopAssWayne: Read the MADD President's statement carefully - it is intentionally ambiguous when it comes to policy. They do not want a lowering of any limit, and that's why they oppose this limit reduction. What they want is a complete ban on all alcohol anywhere, for any reason, at any time. They are well recognized as the new prohibitionist movement in the country.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-05-17 11:53:34 PM
I prefer DAMM : Drunks Against Mad Mothers.
 
2013-05-17 11:53:46 PM
i.imgur.comi.imgur.com

I'm surprised MADD isn't for it, but maybe they're reigning in their crazy. The problem is not the occasional offender, .08 .10, as long as there is a limit you'll get people to be careful who care.

It's the repeat serious offenders that have high bac levels that cause the most problems. Lowering the limit does little to curb them, but may severely damage someone who had one too many that one time and got caught at an illegal search a sobriety checkpoint.

You don't get a second chance with a drunk driving ticket, not unless you have a good lawyer (or you're an elected official). But what's ruining a few lives if you're going to save a few lives?
 
2013-05-17 11:56:07 PM
Acid reflux? Well you are drunk. Fermentation of your guts liquids and the rise of gases. Only a blood sample would prove otherwise but thats if the officer isn't in a rush to get to his next victim to deny you your Right of innocence. 30 minutes or less per drunk person otherwise its to much work to investigate properly.

Years ago there is some guy who did fire-breathing. He got busted for being drunk without actually being drunk.
People are left to sit for 15 minutes before the breathalyser test and get off because of delay of due process at the scene. Wasn't drunk 15 minutes ago sooooooooo...

34% of deaths are via drunk driving. The rest is sober.

MADDs numbers are based on 'alcohol related' deaths. Drunky Passengers and Drunky pedestrians help to drive their numbers up really high to get their prohibition enacted.

The companys that make 'ignition interlock devices' for blowing into to start your vehicle are behind the most recent push to make a profit life saving initiative of reduced drunk driver levels.
 
2013-05-17 11:56:34 PM

simplicimus: Found a source (wiki(:
...there is some speculation that alcohol might result from fermentation of sugars in an unsterile environment....


How do we know when there is derp present?  When something is claimed which has nothing to do with the result.

/sterility has nothing to do with fermentation. It's whether yeast + sugar was present to begin with.
 
2013-05-17 11:59:51 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: tin_man: If a little is good, then a lot must be better.

Next up: a Constitutional amendment banning the manufacture and consumption of alcohol in the United States

/what could possibly go wrong?


Who can say? The previous attempt, prohibition, didn't ban the consumption of alcohol.
 
2013-05-18 12:09:09 AM
Im always hesitant to place any significance on the laws of other countries. Besides the fact that every country has different structural, economic, and moral concerns, without any data on actual enforcement, looking at just the written law is meaningless.

In a lot of respects mexico and china have more protective labor laws than the U.S., but no credible person wouldb suggest either country is more protective of labor rights than t he U.S.

It could be.like looking at a lot of old, but unenforced, laws in the books in the states and saying its ok to beat your wife in the U.S. with anything lessn than an inch wide.
 
2013-05-18 12:09:29 AM

ImpendingCynic: MaudlinMutantMollusk: tin_man: If a little is good, then a lot must be better.

Next up: a Constitutional amendment banning the manufacture and consumption of alcohol in the United States

/what could possibly go wrong?

Who can say? The previous attempt, prohibition, didn't ban the consumption of alcohol.


yeah... certainly we could never make any predictions based on past experience. And are you suggesting Prohibition wasn't aimed at consumption?

/are you f*cking serious?
 
2013-05-18 12:11:13 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: doglover: When even MADD agrees your plan is stupid, it's REALLY stupid.

Now I'm starting to wonder if they don't get a piece of the action from the ridiculous fines

/pity... they started out because a young lady was tragically killed just down the road from my home
//went national, went nuts


I think they're right.  There is only a limited amount of effort available, they're saying it should be focused on the high-BAC drunks.  (If nothing else politicians keep passing laws but don't provide enough courts to try them.)

simplicimus: A report in October 2006 demonstrated that some soft drinks contain measurable amounts of alcohol. In some older preparations, this resulted from natural fermentation used to build the carbonation. In the United States, soft drinks (as well as other beverages such as) are allowed by law to contain up to 0.5%. Modern drinks introduce carbon dioxide for carbonation, but there is some speculation that alcohol might result from fermentation of sugars in an unsterile environment. A small amount of alcohol is introduced in some soft drinks where alcohol is used in the preparation of the flavoring extracts such as.
so 10 sodas will get you to one beer.


Up to .5%, that doesn't mean they actually contain that.

However, the digestive tract can produce some alcohol even if you don't drink any.  This can produce a BAC of .01.

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

If we want to crack down on illegal guns using Europe as an example, it's only logical that we should crack down on drunk driving the same way. Vehicles kill even more people than guns in this country even though we're in the midst of a gun violence epidemic.


.01 is not a reasonable standard, period.  The breathalyzer has an inherent inaccuracy, it can read .02 on that guy above who didn't drink a drop.

sheep snorter: British Columbia has a Constitution violating fine system(still being fought in the courts to 100% ban that violation of the Charter) where court access is unlawfully denied, you are convicted on the spot via a cop with only a handheld Breathalyzer screening device(not really court admissible on its own since they already had some calibration problems with the wrong reading being shown) and instantly pay the 4 grand fine or be punished by no vehicle insurance and no drivers license renewal.


They should never be used as more than a screening test anyway.  There is an inherent problem that there isn't a consistent ratio of BAC to breath alcohol, it varies from person to person.
 
2013-05-18 12:12:06 AM

Wodan11: /sterility has nothing to do with fermentation. It's whether yeast + sugar was present to begin with.


Wouldn't a sterilized environment kill yeast, thereby stopping/preventing fermentation?
 
2013-05-18 12:14:10 AM
Mugato:

If my BAC ever reached as low as .05 I'd be too shaky to drive.

Believe it or not I'm sober most of the time. And I quit driving over 10 years ago when I rear-ended a minivan full of old people, totaling the then-not-ex's Geo Metro, from "driver inattention" -- while totally sober. So this won't affect me at all. However, it's still a stupid idea: BAC is not a good measure of inebriation, given this nifty thing called tolerance. I can have a BAC of 0.08 and not notice it, I might even forget I'd been drinking, but my sister who seldom drinks would be half-asleep at that point. It's better to have a "results-based" criterion: somebody with a BAC that'd kill a normal person but can drive home from the bar as well as he can sober (or better in your case, Mugato) would get a lesser penalty (if any) than somebody with a BAC of 0.05 whose driving killed a minivan full of kids. BAC per se should not be criminalized: if you're weaving when you're sober you're more of a menace than Mugato over there.

And people who can't drive for shiat should be taken off the road, drunkards or not. Not long ago I had to invent a reason for the "clean & sober" woman who was driving me home to pull over and let me out, because she was gabbing on her cell phone with such involvement that her damn SUV started weaving & drifting around on a busy road during rush hour. Under the best circumstances her driving is at best marginal, but her efforts to multitask could kill somebody. (Hint: when you're holding the phone with one hand and gesturing the other who the fark is steering?) Not to mention all those old people who confuse the gas pedal with the brake and take out half a store. If I can live without being in control of a potentially deadly machine anybody can.
 
Displayed 50 of 91 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report