DUI law successfully challenged in Virginia.

Post #219,150 by Another Scott 8/13/05 10:36:27 AM Reply	DUI law successfully challenged in Virginia. [link\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/11/AR2005081102079.html\|Washington Post]: In a decision that could prompt similar challenges nationwide, Judge Ian M. O'Flaherty cited a decades-old U.S. Supreme Court ruling when in the past month he dismissed charges against three alleged drunk drivers. \t O'Flaherty, one of 10 judges who preside over traffic cases in Fairfax County District Court, ruled that Virginia's law is unconstitutional because it presumes an individual with a blood alcohol content of 0.08 or higher is intoxicated and denies a defendant's right to the presumption of innocence. As a district judge, O'Flaherty does not establish formal precedent with his rulings. But reports of the constitutional argument have quickly found their way onto Web logs and into the offices of defense attorneys and prosecutors across the country, prompting some to explore tactics to exploit or attack the Fairfax decisions. [...] A lot will depend on each state's interpretation of its drunken driving laws, Oberman added, and whether a person with a 0.08 blood alcohol level is presumed, by law, to be intoxicated. If so, as is the case in Virginia, other elements must still be proven, including whether the defendant also failed a roadside sobriety test. Corinne Magee, the attorney whose challenge of the state's drunken driving law led to O'Flaherty's ruling, said the decision was based on the 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case Francis v. Franklin , which dealt with a prosecutor's obligation to prove all elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. After closely reading the decision, Magee said she realized that it could apply to the state's drunken driving laws. "I expected him to convict on other evidence in the case," Magee said of O'Flaherty, who presided over the case in which her client was accused of driving with a blood alcohol content of 0.21, more than twice the legal limit. "I was surprised when he dismissed the case . . . but I think it was based on a very careful reading of the Francis case." I'm conflicted on this. My bedrock opinion is that a person's actions matter in deciding whether they're a threat to public safety, but that only goes so far. Clearly some people can be smashed on BAC < 0.08 and others are ~ OK at higher levels. Sobriety checks should be part of the picture. But sobriety tests have elements of subjectivity that BAC tests don't. But it's hard to believe that someone with a BAC of 0.21 wasn't drunk. :-( If this leads to dismissals of DUI cases against people who were clearly impaired, then there will be Hell to pay. The decision is already being decried by MADD and others. Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,156 by bionerd 8/13/05 11:58:23 AM Reply	It really boils down to how they define "intoxicated" The only defining objective criteria used to define intoxication is the blood alcohol level. There are no other objective criteria. Roadside sobriety tests screen for certain behaviors, but not every drunk person is going to display the exact same behaviors. And they're are going to have a hard time proving the causal factors behind those behaviors. I can say the alphabet forwards and backwards, no matter how drunk I am. A person with neurological impairments, or even corns or bunions, may not be able to walk a straight line. Without a BAL, how do you prove someone is intoxicated? It is true that everyone metabolizes etoh differently. I've seen people with a BAL over .3 look completely sober, but you know there is some level of impairment even if it isnt subjectively obvious. Would you want this person behind the wheel? I wouldnt. VA will find itself wading in a can of worms with this one.
Post #219,158 by Another Scott 8/13/05 12:18:48 PM Reply	Yup. Without a BAL, how do you prove someone is intoxicated? Dunno. As you say, there's no really good, objective way to know for sure. But DUI is more about driving than public intoxication. Otherwise, bars and restaurants and clubs should have limits on how much alcohol they could serve a person, shouldn't they? I don't think there's a good solution to the problem of keeping drunks off the road (short of some magical (perfect) car sensor that prevents operation by impaired drivers). As it stands now, it's perfectly legal (AFAIK) to drive to a bar, drink 15 shots of whiskey and drive home. The bartender won't get in trouble unless it's clear that the person is drunk. Even though that much whiskey would surely increase the BAC far beyond 0.08. By having the law written (as it apparently is in some cases) that DUI == (BAC > 0.08), then there seems to be a conflict. Like you, I don't want drunks deciding on their own that they're fine and driving off and killing or maiming people. But either DUI convictions should be based on something more than just a BAC (something that illustrates actual intoxication), or the law should be called "Driving while BAC > 0.08". I'd have no problem with that - it's objective and there are reasonable reasons to have such a standard. But I think determination intoxication or impairment should (somehow) be based on how a person acts, not on how much alcohol (or whatever) they've consumed or how much is in their blood. A 85 year old man who's zonked out on percocet is as much a danger as a 19 year old who's had 3 pitchers of beer... Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,159 by boxley 8/13/05 12:21:30 PM Reply	intoxicated does not equal impaired Did you every ee the McGill University study on impairment? 12 shots plus a joint of good quality weed. 1/2 the shots and 1/2 the weed were placebos. Driving skill test with pylons and emergency stops with a light that flashed and re-action time to shut it off. Person who had the best score, sober or drunk was a 105 lb young lady who had no placebos, she actually scored better after the booze. Now what this indicates to me that a level of intoxication does not suggest impairment unless coupled with a dificulty steering a vehicle which is an observable offence of its own. This does preclude stops "just because" the determining thru investigative detention that the person stopped may have had a drink which leads to a presumptive conviction based on the BAC levels. Perhaps a discovery of BAC overage should be followed by in appointment for a confined roadway intoxicant test where the BAC is matched then the person drives a course of medium dificulty, based on that the charge is either forwarded or dropped. thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,165 by mmoffitt 8/13/05 1:41:37 PM Reply	Good idea, but time would be the issue. You're stopped at 11pm. How long until you take the qualifying tests? Long enough to "sober up?" If so, what you did at 11pm is no longer being tested. I don't have an answer for this, but my initial thoughts were along your lines. Then I thought better of it. bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #219,172 by boxley 8/13/05 3:53:42 PM Reply	you missed "make an appointment" at a later date in the testing facilities you injest alcohol until your BAC is he same as the violation BAC then take the test. Charge for the drinks to cover the cost of the test, than, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,182 by Ashton 8/13/05 5:54:06 PM Reply	{chortle} too sane for US Law.
Post #219,346 by jb4 8/15/05 10:04:43 AM Reply	+5 cogent! But I agree, too sane for US jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT
Post #219,350 by mmoffitt 8/15/05 10:21:15 AM Reply	Okay, but how do you replicate the situation entirely? Unless you buy that the same BAC effects the human in exactly the same way every time. bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #219,352 by boxley 8/15/05 10:45:27 AM Reply	speaking as an expert :-) that is as close as you are going to get to a recreation. Remember an accused would not go thru the expense as a failure would be evidentiary in nature unless they had reasonable grounds for success. Also a pee test to ensure that meth or other illegal stimulants wernt giving an assist. thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,185 by imqwerky 8/13/05 6:15:47 PM Reply	Video games to the rescue! Then why not have the ol' Sega Steering Wheel in the cop's trunk. Set that puppy up in no time and have a go at a couple of courses right then and there. Seems to me that would indicate a good sense of sobriety. FWIW. Peesh,(hiccup) Amy Illegitimi non corborundum.
Post #219,169 by pwhysall 8/13/05 2:28:08 PM Reply	The only sensible measure... ...is > 0 mg. Anything else WILL impair your driving ability. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,171 by Andrew Grygus 8/13/05 3:32:57 PM Reply	Yes, but it takes quite a lot to impair your driving . . . . . as thoroughly as talking on a cell phone does. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #219,203 by pwhysall 8/13/05 8:30:07 PM Reply	Drink does that quite effectively. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,279 by ben_tilly 8/14/05 11:16:28 PM Reply	Andrew is right though Drink impairs you. But it takes a lot of drink to match the impairment of being on your cellphone. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,311 by pwhysall 8/15/05 2:04:46 AM Reply	You can stop being on your phone much quicker... ..than you can sober up. That's not to say that you should yammer on your phone whilst driving; the twin factors of concentrating on a phone conversation and only having one hand available make it a risky proposition. I get round this by having my passenger answer my phone, or by turning it off if I'm driving alone. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,313 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 2:09:39 AM Reply	Only one hand available is irrelevant Research suggests that handfree headsets are as bad as traditional cell phones. The distraction is the issue. In particular distraction that pays no attention to what is happening in the car. Humans in the car naturally modulate their conversation in deference to driving conditions. Humans on the phone, don't. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,177 by Ashton 8/13/05 5:24:22 PM Reply	Classic 'IQ' conundrum, as mauled always by Bean Counters We've had the (recurrent) IQ discussion, and see (at very-least, I presume?) that this fucking NUMBER has doomed a lot of very-Bright people to lifetime servitude in some cubicle or other opium den -- while others, say, leap over Hertz Rental counters and mug with a sappy grin - for $Millions; proceed to kill uppity wives and .. attain Riches (OK and sometimes even These: lose some Riches in the Civil Courts. Sometimes.. but, Rarely.) Ditto on that Etoh-quantification ez-NUMBER, across the entire Gaussian of homo-sap variance. 'Gaussian'? :-0 W.T.F. DOES an average (Rejected-)Marketing-grade-droid 'law'-maker know ABOUT GAUSS and his little curve's implications in all things "measurable" ?? (Most homo-saps flunked, er Mensuration-101 - if they even know what the word means.) Rest case. Yay, Judge. Let there be blood in the $Lawyer water; one small step for a man - - at a time.
Post #219,178 by JayMehaffey 8/13/05 5:27:21 PM Reply	I go back and forth on this one. On the one hand you do have the rare people who can drink while highly intoxicated without much effect. On the other hand, there are a lot of people that think they can drive fine with alcohol in their system and are simply wrong. Then there is the problem in many states that the drunk driving statues intentionally set the point where you are considered driving drunk far too low. My feeling is that the best solution might be to setup a tiered system. Below .1 you are considered sober, between .1 and .2 any fines for reckless driving are doubled and above .2 you are considered driving while intoxicated. Jay
Post #219,179 by boxley 8/13/05 5:37:25 PM Reply	how about the fellow whose BAC was above 2 drove home very safely and upon getting out of the car was stopped by a patrolman due to an expired tag who then was told to take a breathalyzer? I know someone (not myself) who wouldnt leave the first bar until we had both successfully blown 2.0 on the free tester we had before proceeding to the next one to start our night out. He would have to be about 2.5 before he became impaired and parked the car or took stimulants to sharpen his reflexes. thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,184 by Another Scott 8/13/05 6:09:07 PM Reply	Something's wrong with those numbers. [link\|http://www.factsontap.org/yourbody/BALandU.htm\|Blood Alcohol Levels]: BAL .40%: You are probably in a coma. The nerve centers controlling your heartbeat and respiration are slowing down, s-l-o-w-i-n-g d-o-w-n, s-l-o-w-i-n-g d-o-w-n. it's a miracle if you're not dead. In April 1994, a 21-year-old student died of alcohol poisoning with a BAL of .40% after a Hell Night party. [link\|http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2005/02/chico_state_nea.html\|Cal State University, Chico death]: Chico police Sgt. Dave Barrow said Hallmeyer provided two 1.75-liter handles of alcohol to the pledges as part of an initiation-week activity he was in charge of. As interim vice president, Barrow said, Hallmeyer was responsible for the pledges when Peltz was gone. Nineteen-year-old Richard Amador started drinking poor-quality vodka [what, like drinking better vodka would have made a difference?] with his pledge brothers about 6 p.m., Peltz said. He lost consciousness between 8 and 8:30 p.m. from a 0.496 blood alcohol content. Although all of the pledges were drinking, Peltz said Amador has a small build and was the only one with alcohol poisoning. "I guess he just pounded it," Peltz said. [ No sheee, Sherlock. For example, one estimator more-or-less calculated that Amador would have to have swallowed about 22 ounces (almost 3 cups) of vodka to achieve a BAC of .496. Another says the rule of thumb is .02 BAC per 1.25 ounce "drink", so Amador would have ingested 24 drinks, or 30 ounces. Of course, speed of intake isn't included in the estimates. Each "handle" of 1.75 liters is about 58 ounces, or about 47 standard "drinks" of 1.25 ounces] A BAC of 2.0 or 2.5 would have been, um, very difficult to achieve. I presume you mean 0.20 or 0.25. Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,187 by boxley 8/13/05 6:20:45 PM Reply	yes I meant .20-.25, thanks for the correction "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,195 by Another Scott 8/13/05 6:56:22 PM Reply	Anytime. Make sure you include that story in your memoirs and we'll be even. :-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,199 by boxley 8/13/05 7:27:27 PM Reply	well here is a partial said friend and myself having breached .2 and proceeded to the next bar, enjoyed ourselves there for a while proceeded back to the first one. It was 11 pm on a sunny Alaskan eve (bright twilight) when he was romping up the Seward highway driving a 1976 Suburban with no reverse when a corvette pulled up next to us, he looks out of his windows and sez"A clam is driving that! Holy Shit. He then proceeds to hammer the suburban to the next light, ariving before she got there, jumps out of the sub, splays across the hood of the vette slobbering I love you. She smiles, they chat for a revolution of the light and he jumps in the vette, hollers at me to get money (he is out) and meet him at coots (chillicoot charlies where all the tourists and tards go) Now I dont have any money (we had been drinking since 5pm) so I call home, talk to my (then) wife to meet us at coots, and bring a fifty (she had gotten paid that day) for my bud and some money for ourselves. I drive to coots, he isnt their. My wife shows up in a cab so proceed to try accross the street where they made the best marguiritas in Anchorage. There they are, she is cute, a school teacher. He is handsome in a rough way. His speech is littered with total racist, sexist commentary. Without repeating it picture a kkk meeting inside a black strip club. He gets ready to leave she is a little reluctant, half fear and half lit and wanting to get some I guess. I drive home. The next day I get his ride back to him and asks how she was. Well, she gave a half assed bj and then started crying she wanted to go home so he is a gentleman and escorts her to the door of the trailer and calls his ex to come over and finish the job. thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,200 by Another Scott 8/13/05 7:52:49 PM Reply	!
Post #219,194 by JayMehaffey 8/13/05 6:54:01 PM Reply	Target a resonable part of the population There will always be a small percent who's tolerance is either higher or lower no matter where you set the bars. The goal is to set a number that is resonable for 90% or more of the population. I'm not sure where those number really should be though. Drunk driving is like handgun control. there are a lot of studies you can quote and most of them have significant problems. The only other solution is to abandon driving while intoxicated as a class of crime and go after unsafe driving instead. There are two problems with doing that, first it's not as safe and second, it's a lot more subjective on the part of the police officer. What I mean by unsafe here is that a lot of moderatly drunk people can drive perfectly fine as long as nothing goes wrong, but they can't cope with any problems. Jay
Post #219,208 by boxley 8/13/05 8:58:29 PM Reply	your last sentence applies to totally sober drivers as well "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,210 by boxley 8/13/05 9:01:14 PM Reply	impaired driving should be a crime with stiff sentences for re-offenders but the problem I have is that it is classified now as a crime of violence when no such violence has occured unless an accident is involved. Now MADD is determined to place DUI in the same class as heroin and cocaine usage, dont beleive me call and ask. Now if a impaired person causes a wreck, heavy charge, if a sober person piles into an impaired driver only one will get arrested, that is not justice. thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,214 by pwhysall 8/13/05 9:07:09 PM Reply	Every single driver on this planet... ...has their ability to drive safely reduced by the presence of alcohol in their bloodstream. This is not anecdotal; it has been demonstrated that reaction times are slowed by even a single drink. What's so critical about this, and you inadvertently allude to it, is that the drink-driver is gambling with other people's lives. This sentence: What I mean by unsafe here is that a lot of moderatly drunk people can drive perfectly fine as long as nothing goes wrong, but they can't cope with any problems. is wrong. A lot of moderately drunk people think they can drive perfectly fine as long as nothing goes wrong. The fact that these retards have a habit of featuring in the accident statistics disproves that (drunken) notion. I just don't see where there's a grey area. There is only one safe limit : zero milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. I don't drink and drive. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,271 by Yendor 8/14/05 10:38:24 PM Reply	After taking cough syrup? Or using mouthwash, do you drive? Both have alcohol, you know... -YendorMike "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759 Historical Review of Pennsylvania
Post #219,308 by pwhysall 8/15/05 1:49:12 AM Reply	Alcohol-free mouthwash for me... ...and I read the label of my medication. Not that cough syrup ever does any good, mind. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,312 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 2:07:37 AM Reply	Ironic... that someone who has as much alcohol as you do on a regular basis should worry about the alcohol in your cough syrup. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,316 by pwhysall 8/15/05 2:48:29 AM 8/15/05 2:55:07 AM Reply	I don't. But thanks for calling a me a drunk. hic Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes! Edited by pwhysall Aug. 15, 2005, 02:55:07 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #219,276 by Another Scott 8/14/05 11:05:55 PM Reply	Why stop at alcohol? (I feel a little guilty doing this...) There is no safe distraction level while driving. People have more accidents talking on the phone, or applying makeup, or leaning over to roll down the passenger window, or turning to yell at little Satan in the back seat, or ..., than they do when they are paying full attention to driving. Therefore: Car radios should be outlawed. ? Diphenhydramine (Benadryl 50 mg) can impare driving as much as 0.1% BAC alcohol - [link\|http://www.science.com.br/artigos_pdf/effects_of_fexofenadine.pdf\|Annals of Internal Medicine]. Even fexofenadine (Allegra 60 mg) seemed to have some adverse effect on driving (compared to a placebo). As we know, nothing in life is totally safe. Making it illegal to have any alcohol in one's blood while driving would likely do little to change drunk driving deaths. The national limit in the US has been 0.08 since [link\|http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/cfr/title23/part1225.html\|1998]. Yet [link\|http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics.html\|Alcohol-Related fatalities in the US] have been in the low 40% range since 1994 (when the limit was 0.1 in many states). Note that "alcohol-related" means that the driver or non-occupant (e.g. if a pedestrian was killed) had a BAC > 0.01. That's probably a very generous category. It looks like the BAC limit in the [link\|http://www.cadd.org.uk/drunk.htm\|UK] is also 0.08. If the limit were 0., there would be a lot of problems. (Cough medicines; filling the courts with cases where people weren't impaired but had non-0 BACs; etc.) BTW, I agree with you that people shouldn't drive after they drink. Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,309 by pwhysall 8/15/05 1:59:11 AM Reply	The thing with phones and conversations... ...is that you can stop being distracted, instantly. Sure, it might be too late (see below about planning). But the option is there. Alcohol and drug impairment means that you're impaired when you get in the car. I am firmly of the opinion that drivers pay insufficient attention to the process of driving, in general. If I want to change station on the radio, I plan this event. I try to drive to the principle of COAST (Concentration, Observation, Anticipation, Speed and Time) and that means that I will wait until it is safe to do so before twiddling. That may well mean waiting until I can bring the car to a stop. By having both hands on the wheel (quarter to three, kids, not ten to two) I have maybe a half-second head start on the cool-looking dude with his one-finger steering, in the event of having to react. How fast does your car travel in half a second? All of the things you present as examples are things that I would expect to be classified as "driving without due care and attention" or, worse (for the driver in the event of an accident) "dangerous driving". If you are found guilty of the latter, you can expect to be jailed (in the UK). The primary reason for having a zero BAC is not to catch people who don't read the label on their medication, but rather to pummel home with a blunt instrument the idea that a pint on the way home from work is NOT safe, and that if you have to make the risk assessment of whether to drive or not, you should get a damn taxi. Making people read the label on their medication would be a nice side-effect. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,314 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 2:27:24 AM Reply	If you need to pay that much attention... then you should add some space to the car in front of you. Nobody's attention is 100%, all the time, and your driving style shouldn't assume that yours is, either. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,317 by pwhysall 8/15/05 2:54:20 AM Reply	Re: If you need to pay that much attention... Half a second at 70MPH is fifteen metres. I endeavour to leave a two-second gap to the car in front (except when Golf-GTi-driving eejits fill the space fume). Throwing away 25% of my reaction space/time is just daft. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,323 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 3:17:04 AM Reply	You'd hate LA freeways In normal roads I aim to leave 3 seconds at highway speeds. On the 405 I aim to leave 1 second and watch what is happening 3 cars ahead. (The gap may increase or decrease because I like to coast where feasible. With that I am leaving a distinctly larger gap than average, and I notice that I wind up needing to hit the brakes far less often than most other cars on the road. If I make the gap much larger than that, I'll immediately drop a significant amount of speed because of how many people will be cutting in in front of me. :-( Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,324 by pwhysall 8/15/05 3:25:03 AM Reply	Sounds like the M25 at 5PM And yes, I hate it. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,367 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 1:10:19 PM Reply	It's like that all day here I've gotten used to it. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,327 by Ashton 8/15/05 6:34:32 AM Reply	Peter, you ignorant slut - Madeja look (?) Agree generally; reservations about absolutes though. I am firmly of the opinion that drivers pay insufficient attention to the process of driving, in general. You're in good company; Juan Manuel Fangio, the Argentine GP Ace of another era, when Tazio Nuvolaris roamed the Grandes Epreuves-earth... when finding himself being 'driven' by another -- would often command, ATTENTION! ATTENTION! -- as he was always on top of the fluid traffic flow and anticipating... as most people don't (very well, or re the necessary several cars ahead). Never mind Fangio; I agree. And yes, I too take seriously as simple a matter as 'radio attention', let alone swapping CDs. Some imagine that, ~"our shortened attention span" - as consequence of the inane distractions of all that techno - "enhances our 'multiplexing capabilities'" - ?!? (Lovely rationalization that, no?) BS. PhD - piled higher, deeper. I demur. Attention! Is in Short supply IME. And as you imply.. I rarely encounter anyone willing? able? to grok-to-fullness what it means (in $US) notation: that, at 60 mph you are travelling 88'/sec. Even fewer are able to estimate at-all-close, what their (car's) stopping distances are, from various common speeds. And don't hold breath for many to do these rough calcs in-head and add-in the drift distance while that reaction-time is running. (A slightly-inebriated person could make such allowance; I've seen that - so believe that.) (There are also problems in passing a car at too great a speed differential, at any nom. speed.) If I want to see 120, I want to see it with a clear road in front. Yes there are a few places still 'here' where that is possible and also sane. If One is also sane. Where we likely disagree: I'd feel safer with a driver with .02%ish EtOH, but who knows and reliably obeys physics laws (and won't be forgetting them at such a modest %) to any teetotaler who is {ugh} "an average motorist". ie That which constitutes a Good Driver IMO: is neither simple to list-out nor possible to legislate; nor is 'impairment' easier catalogued, via YAN of those simplistic IQ-style NUMBERS. This, however much our spread-sheet kultur would like to do numbers on.. probably on screwing, too. Or maybe %likelihood Heaven/Hell to 3 significant figures? We'll continue to have L.C.D. rulez, rigidly enforced by the Speed Killz simpletons - because no one knows how (or cares to try) to write an enforceable statute addressing the larger fact, IMO Ignorance and/or Inattention Killz. Finally - citations (here anyway) are far more often about ez extraction of revenue than about "teaching a lesson" - though yes, there are exceptional cops, too. (Got an outdoor thermometer with alarm near-freezing / glare ice, etc. ??) Msgr. Safety Fast LLC Ob gauntlet/fling: My Acura Plutocrat will out-Gran-Turismo your Beemer, 'least up to 134ish .. on those 900 mile days, re the sort of trek as needs to er, leave one with enough energy on arrival? - to boogie. En garde! er, :-\ufffd
Post #219,377 by pwhysall 8/15/05 1:55:39 PM Reply	Re: Peter, you ignorant slut - The 318 is good for 120-130MPH (takes a while to get there, mind; the 100->130 leg requires getting to 6000RPM in 5th) and stable at it; after that, you just run out of horses. This is purely academic, you understand. I always drive at or within the posted speed limit. But if I were, hypothetically, to exercise my car to its limit, then I imagine that that would be the result. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,384 by boxley 8/15/05 2:17:53 PM Reply	I could get my 82 4cyl mustang to 125, you should be able to get 135-140 thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,385 by Another Scott 8/15/05 2:28:00 PM 8/15/05 2:28:40 PM Reply	I don't think so. [link\|http://www.cars.com/carsapp/national/?srv=parser&act=display&tf=/advice/bookreviews/bookreviews_sanow.tmpl\|Encyclopedia of American Police Cars]: In 1982 jurisdictions began (out of desperation) using the two-door Ford Mustang LX equipped with the 5.0-liter high-output V-8 engine as a pursuit vehicle. American sedans had gotten so slow it was well known that anything with more than a pair of squirrels on Ritalin under the hood could walk away from Johnny Law. But the Mustang, with its 132-mph top end and 7-second 0-60 capability, put an end to many speeder\ufffds plans. A 1982 4-cylinder wouldn't be almost as powerful as a 1982 [link\|http://home.pon.net/hunnicutt/history_79_93.htm\|157 HP] 5 liter V-8 (unless it had been massaged). (Power translates into ultimate speed, if all else is equal.) I suspect your speedometer was highly optimistic (or had the wrong size tires). Or there's something you're not telling us. :-) Cheers, Scott. Edited by Another Scott Aug. 15, 2005, 02:28:40 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #219,396 by boxley 8/15/05 3:21:30 PM Reply	go to mapquest and lookup driving directions from anchorage alaska to seward alaska. Now add the last 3 milage together it comes to 121 miles. I did it in exactly 1 hr with 3 people in the car. There is 2 intersections that you have to slow for and a nice eurotwisty spot coming down the pass. No traffic to speak of. Now you tell me how fast I was going :-) thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,400 by Another Scott 8/15/05 3:51:19 PM Reply	You still haven't said whether the car was stock. Yeah, I guess you did it. It's quite a contrast with my limited high speed driving experience though. [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=105895\|#105895]. That engine had 350 gross HP when new, probably over 200 at the rear wheels even at that time. It would only do 120 mph max and had a 140 mph speedo. It had a 3.23 rear end, so the gearing wasn't an issue. I find it hard to believe that a stock 1982 4 cylinder Mustang had that much power. Fess up, you were running nitrous, weren't you. ;-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,404 by boxley 8/15/05 3:57:05 PM Reply	5 speed manual transmission all stock were your valves floating at 120? If not you still had some horses to unleash. My 1964 Buick wildacat with a 421 motor topped at 120 but it was a heavy car, your goat wasnt that heavy though. The 82 mustang was a small car with plastic parts and I had the larger of the 2 4cylinders. Had to replace the transmission twice in 1 year kept losing 2nd gear. Ford claimed it was because of abuse :-) thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,515 by Another Scott 8/16/05 10:30:54 AM Reply	Dunno about the lifters. The engine was a little tired, as was the transmission (THM 400). But it did OK. It did the quarter mile in < 16 s, ~ 95? mph. It would have been much quicker with decent tires (it would lose traction very easily in 1st and 2nd) - maybe in the 14s range. I'm sure it could have done better with a little work. 6 people in the car cut the top-end some too... A friend had a 68 GTO that he massaged a little. That car was scary-fast. He ended up bending some pushrods racing some monster dual-quad tunnel ram thing (and getting stomped in the process). He fixed it and sold it shortly thereafter. Big mistake. :-( Manual transmissions help a lot. Especially overdrive. ;-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,388 by pwhysall 8/15/05 2:35:14 PM Reply	If I ever get my dream car... ...an E46 M3 Evo, then I'll leave just about anything for dead. But as said car means a \ufffd20K up-front investment plus higher running costs (M-tech cars need proper servicing by proper mechanics, more frequently), it'll have to remain a dream for now. And no, I wouldn't get it in Baby-Shit Brown (aka Phoenix Yellow). Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,422 by ben_tilly 8/15/05 5:31:57 PM Reply	Anything..except any motorcycle I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #219,426 by pwhysall 8/15/05 5:39:27 PM Reply	Re: Anything..except any motorcycle ...over 1000CC. Smaller bikes will out-accelerate it, but not outrun it. The M3 tops out at about 155MPH because of the limiter. Pretty much any bike bigger than 400CC will stuff it on 0-60. (M3 is about 5.5 sec). Of course, at 150MPH the motorcyclist is not in a position to pick the bugs out of his teeth... Mmm, protein! Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,466 by Ashton 8/15/05 9:48:03 PM Reply	'thetruthaboutcars.com' My fav acerbic commentator (and hands-on Tester) of all the toys; updated frequently. (Hmmm - he'd make a decent IWEr; certainly at parry / thrust) Now, what you Want (I deem from above) is: [link\|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/content/110808075917533721/\| Can Am] [. . .]The Can Am does the fast thing with a straightforward formula: keep it light, strip out all the fancy stuff and pour on the power. The car doesn't have power steering, ABS braking, fuel injection, traction control or anything terribly clever. What it does have is a Chevrolet 6.3 litre small block V8. In standard tune, it's good for 355bhp. The hotter version (survived above) pumps out a whopping 530bhp. For the technically minded, that engine generates 520 foot-pounds of torque at 4000 rpms. For the non-technically minded, it has enough brute force to scare the bejesus out of any passenger that hasn't competed in open car racing. Not that you'd hear them begging you to stop\ufffd Meanwhile, back here in the real world, where children want new running shoes and the wife can't understand that a sports car is a better investment than a new kitchen, you've got to balance fun with fiscal responsibility. Balance this: the extra spicy edition of the mid-engined Can Am goes from zero to 60 miles per hour in 3.3 seconds. The McLaren F1- still the world's fastest passenger car- does the same sprint in 3.2 seconds. Give up .1 of a second and a roof to the Big Mac, forget the 46mph top end difference, and you'll save \ufffd657,865.67. That's right: the Ultima Can Am costs from just \ufffd28,000. Oh yes, I forgot to mention one little thing: the Can Am is a kit car. Wait! Don't dismiss the idea as an invitation to construct- or try to construct- a shoddy replica. Unlike the majority of "self-builds", the Can Am isn't an imitation anything. The looks may hark back to the Can Am racers of the 70's, but the car is a fresh design. Ultima boss and former racer Ted Marlow started with a clean sheet of paper. Drawing on twenty years experience in the field and an adrenalin addiction of monumental proportions, Marlow has created a road-legal racecar that makes no apologies to anyone. All the major parts, from the adjustable wishbone suspension to the race-developed steering, were specifically built for the Can Am. While I didn't screw the demonstrator together myself, the car's consistent shut-lines and gel-coated bodywork (no need for painting) indicate a well-considered, quality product. Yes, well, so is a Porsche, but you don't build one of those in a shed. [More . . .] Rest case, Tazio
Post #219,481 by admin 8/15/05 11:53:43 PM Reply	Re: 'thetruthaboutcars.com' [link\|http://www.ultimasports.co.uk/record.html\|http://www.ultimaspo...co.uk/record.html] WTF. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #219,483 by pwhysall 8/16/05 1:23:26 AM Reply	Re: 'thetruthaboutcars.com' Also, [link\|http://www.noblecars.com/home.htm\|http://www.noblecars.com/home.htm] Considered by many to be the best-handling cars evar. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,486 by pwhysall 8/16/05 1:30:35 AM Reply	Oh, and drool Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,427 by pwhysall 8/15/05 5:40:30 PM Reply	The new M5 is truly terrifying, though Electronically limited to 155MPH, when unlimited the far side of 200MPH beckons. That's supercar performance for "only" \ufffd60K. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,434 by Another Scott 8/15/05 5:55:30 PM Reply	I picture you in this... (11 kB .img) [link\|http://www.autoweek.com/article.cms?articleId=102831\|Maybach Exelero]. [image\|http://www.autoweek.com/files/weekart/2005/0801/maybach_side.jpg\|0\|Exelero\|176\|345] 19 feet long, 7 feet wide, 6500 pounds, 700 HP, 218 MPH at Nardo. Ugly as sin, and impossibly impractical, but the perfect car for the land of [link\|http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/\|$5.79/gal gas], no? Cheers, Scott.
Post #219,438 by pwhysall 8/15/05 6:09:30 PM Reply	Can't think of anything worse. Well, there's the Chrysler Crossfire, but enough said about that. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,441 by Another Scott 8/15/05 6:16:59 PM Reply	:-)
Post #219,442 by boxley 8/15/05 6:19:03 PM Reply	The crossfire is butt ugly settle for one of these (SFW) nice Italian Motor [link\|http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.citroen.mb.ca/citroenet/sm/injection/007g.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.citroen.mb.ca/citroenet/html/s/sm2.html&h=517&w=800&sz=53&tbnid=Q2zWH9OIc1QJ:&tbnh=91&tbnw=141&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcitroen%2Bsm%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D&oi=imagesr&start=3\|http://images.google...i=imagesr&start=3] go fast in comfort thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,443 by pwhysall 8/15/05 6:20:18 PM Reply	French, lovely car, hydraulic nightmare. Peter [link\|http://www.ubuntulinux.org\|Ubuntu Linux] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #219,444 by boxley 8/15/05 6:46:52 PM Reply	maybe now, but back then not a problem "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,472 by Ashton 8/15/05 10:29:10 PM Reply	Watch it, Buster - I've driven one The SM would hold its own in '05 on most checklists which do not beigin with the heading, Most Excessive $$ Can Buy. Neat Maserati engine in the SM coupled with most-advanced chassis concepts of its time (as with the original '56 DS, ID at their introductions. Would trade my Plutocrat in a trice, were it not now suffering from out-of-production overhead, collector$ appeal etc. SM: YAN pure case of Pearls before Swine IMeptO. As to hydraulics.. Pshaw! As I've menioned before.. even in the wide-open spaces of USA, say the endless trek all across Texas at-speed? - Citro\ufffdns just kept going, and at shockingly high fuel mileage numbers VS The Dinosaurs. What killed them here was the rampant ignorance about so simple a requirement as: Draining the hyd. reservoir and flushing-in new fluid: Once a Year! (or >> some mileage). They. Wouldn't. So aside from needing a mechanic who understands that 'Clean' is not optional on the few occasions of replacing a hydraulic appendage - only ignorance killed them off in Murica.. (I knew the LA distrib. Chief Troubleshooter - re these conclusions, BTW) Could it be, then - that the same dumbth-distro as US ?? <<< {shudder} perfuses also our Euro brethren, despite all those centuries-old Institutions with books and stuff? I never had problems / I also didn't do stupid things to my 4 DSs (+ one DS-Mechanique) including a couple learning-specimens I overhauled; one engine, in 'class': just for the lore / curiosity about "working on them".
Post #219,394 by Andrew Grygus 8/15/05 3:09:02 PM Reply	To quote my uncle Lou . . . . . . who decided to see how fast his new XK150 Jaguar would go, "I don't know how fast the Jag will go, but now I know I go 140". [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #219,299 by static 8/15/05 1:20:14 AM Reply	I think you need to fine-tune your objection. This sentence: What I mean by unsafe here is that a lot of moderatly drunk people can drive perfectly fine as long as nothing goes wrong, but they can't cope with any problems. is wrong. A lot of moderately drunk people think they can drive perfectly fine as long as nothing goes wrong. The fact that these retards have a habit of featuring in the accident statistics disproves that (drunken) notion. This hinges on "as long as nothing goes wrong" and just what that means. I daresay most people would interpret "something going wrong" as major as another car running a red-light across you. Thus, the justification rolled out that slightly drunken people think they can still drive safely, and may even be able to give that appearance. It's just that it doesn't actually take much for "something to go wrong" - a fellow driver going past that you didn't see coming up behind you, a foot slipping off the brake pedal, a light red at that time of night that you never not seen green before... We have an ad campaign in Australia at the moment aimed at exactly this type of perception: after a few beers, sure, you can usually drive safely home. Steering, changing gears, navigating familiar streets are not hugely taxing for an intoxicated brain. Wade. Save Fintlewoodlewix
Post #219,280 by ben_tilly 8/14/05 11:21:54 PM 8/15/05 1:11:56 PM Reply	The charge is NOT drunk driving It is "Driving While Impaired". The question isn't whether you're unable to walk and have no judgement. The question is whether your reaction times are slowed to the point that with your usual driving habits, you will be unlikely to respond quickly enough if something unexpected happens. (Most accidents associated with alcohol are due to poor reaction time causing you to not react fast enough to, say, someone you didn't see crossing the street or the car in front of you stopping abruptly.) Most people don't understand this, and so don't understand why DUI limits are set so low. They aren't set to the point where most people are drunk. They are set to where most people are intoxicated. Cheers, Ben PS D'oh. I can't believe that I messed that one up. I was thinking the right thing, my fingers just didn't get the message. I swear. And no, I was not drunk posting... I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother) Edited by ben_tilly Aug. 15, 2005, 01:11:56 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #219,337 by boxley 8/15/05 7:59:45 AM Reply	try driving while impaired not intoxicated, Many a nascar driver has won a pole postion in an alcoholic blackout. thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #219,354 by inthane-chan 8/15/05 11:15:32 AM Reply	It would be an Irishman who made the decision...
Post #219,371 by tuberculosis 8/15/05 1:47:43 PM Reply	Reminds me of WKRP - Johnny Fever & Venus gets drunk on air to make a point about drinking and driving. Venus gets drunk, but Fever gets better and better at the tests. Also read study about skills transfer from sober to drunk state. Seems that the only way to be good at something while drunk is to practice drunk. Being good at it sober doesn't help at all while drunk. Skill tranfer the other way was not tested. "Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein "This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush

Welcome to IWETHEY!