So you've been pulled over for drunk driving...

[TracyThom]

Exactly. At 2:30 a.m., there are usually 4 things on the road: Cops, drunks, cabs, and newspaper delivery folk.

[olliegjw]

Maybe harsh penalties for first time offensders will keep them from becoming 2nd time offenders. Again, the easiest way to avoid being ticketed for DUI at .09 is to not drive after having a drink. There've been too many studies to count that even after 1 drink a person's senses are impaired as compared to being stone sober.

A person who gets 2 hours of sleep is impaired compared to them getting 8 hours of sleep. A person who eats, or talks on a cell phone while driving is impaired as well. A 25 year old has one drink, are they more impaired than a totally sober 70 year old?

 

What I am getting at, is the .08 drivers aren't the problem. The .15's, the .20's, the .25's are the problem. The repeat drunk drivers are always up in that range. The fatalities almost always happen in that range.

[DuWayne Steurer]

A person who gets 2 hours of sleep is impaired compared to them getting 8 hours of sleep. A person who eats, or talks on a cell phone while driving is impaired as well. A 25 year old has one drink, are they more impaired than a totally sober 70 year old?

 

What I am getting at, is the .08 drivers aren't the problem. The .15's, the .20's, the .25's are the problem. The repeat drunk drivers are always up in that range. The fatalities almost always happen in that range.

 

Is a .08 driver more impaired than a tired driver? Maybe, but there's no test to measure for tiredness right now.

 

The way I see it, everyone knows the legal limit is .08. One may agree with it or disagree, that's not the point. That's the law. Whether you agree with it or not, there's consequences to breaking it. As of yet, the gov't has not made it illegal for 70 year olds to drive.

 

My major problem is that there's people who want to find ways around it once there's a consequence to pay. I've personally seen too many lives ruined by drunk driving to feel an ounce of compassion for those who choose to get behind the wheel after having either a few, or a few too many. Driving impaired, regardless of how you got there, is dead wrong. Tired, drunk, stoned, whatever. So far, there's no reliable highway test for driving tired, so we do the best we can.

 

And no, I'm not a prude. I do drink. I just choose to not put myself or others in harms way by getting behind the wheel when I do.

[valpocrewsader]

The way I see it, everyone knows the legal limit is .08. One may agree with it or disagree, that's not the point. That's the law.

Just like our speed limits, and of course, everyone in this thread follows them to the letter. I am of the firm belief that there is absolutely nothing wrong with people who drive at .09. Absolutely nothing. Or perhaps more accurately, there's no way that you can say uniformally that no drivers should be out driving at .09. Perhaps some subset of our driving population should not be on the road at .09, but my opinion is that would be a very very small percentage. There is such a thing as a bad law and the .08 legal limit is an example of one.

[Crazyk1294]

There is/was a free shuttle service in the Oconomowoc/Ochauchee Lake area that was paid for by the bar owners. The bar owners were told by police that they are NOT allowed to advertise this service in the bar because the communities need the revenue from DUIs. What does that say? Endangering lives is OK for the sake of extra cash for the departments? Or that officials are aware that .08 is not as unsafe as we are made to think?

[BREWCREW5]

olliegjw wrote:

What I am getting at, is the .08 drivers aren't the problem. The .15's, the .20's, the .25's are the problem. The repeat drunk drivers are always up in that range. The fatalities almost always happen in that range.

This is a generalized opinion and not fact.

 

.08 drivers are plenty of the problem.

[PKBadger]

There is/was a free shuttle service in the Oconomowoc/Ochauchee Lake area that was paid for by the bar owners. The bar owners were told by police that they are NOT allowed to advertise this service in the bar because the communities need the revenue from DUIs. What does that say? Endangering lives is OK for the sake of extra cash for the departments? Or that officials are aware that .08 is not as unsafe as we are made to think?

If I were one of the bar owners I would be asking: what law am I breaking? This is equivalent to the police telling someone they can't advertise a lawnmowing service because people in the neighborhood don't like the noise. A business owner should be able to promote services that their clients demand.

 

I suppose that the community leaders could go all political and revoke their liquor licenses, but that's when I'd be calling the ACLU lawyers. The whole thing is ridiculous.

[DuWayne Steurer]

I am of the firm belief that there is absolutely nothing wrong with people who drive at .09. Absolutely nothing. Or perhaps more accurately, there's no way that you can say uniformally that no drivers should be out driving at .09. Perhaps some subset of our driving population should not be on the road at .09, but my opinion is that would be a very very small percentage. There is such a thing as a bad law and the .08 legal limit is an example of one.

From the Brown University Website

 

0.02 - 0.03 Legal definition of intoxication in R.I. for people under 21 years of age. Few obvious effects; slight intensification of mood.

0.05 - 0.06 Feeling of warmth, relaxation, mild sedation; exaggeration of emotion and behavior; slight decrease in reaction time and in fine-muscle coordination; impaired judgment about continued drinking.

0.07 - 0.09 More noticeable speech impairment and disturbance of balance; impaired motor coordination, hearing and vision; feeling of elation or depression; increased confidence; may not recognize impairment.

 

 

[BREWCREW5]

---

There is/was a free shuttle service in the Oconomowoc/Ochauchee Lake area that was paid for by the bar owners. The bar owners were told by police that they are NOT allowed to advertise this service in the bar because the communities need the revenue from DUIs. What does that say? Endangering lives is OK for the sake of extra cash for the departments? Or that officials are aware that .08 is not as unsafe as we are made to think?

 

I strongly advise you not to believe everything you hear (especially if its a barowner talking about local law enforcement). From the work I have had with Police, it seems that cops love the "safe ride home" program and fully support its cause. Officers dont make more money or profit at all from any arrest. Its about safety.

[valpocrewsader]

This is a generalized opinion and not fact.

 

.08 drivers are plenty of the problem.

You're right. The statment, ".08 drivers are plenty of the problem" is definitely a generalized opinion and not a fact.

[PeaveyFury]

From the Brown University Website

 

My question would be what they're considering the 'control' subject in their generalized results. IE, a 300 pound trucker probably feels next to nothing at .08, while a 120 pound college freshman is probably completely trashed.

[DuWayne Steurer]

From the Brown University Website

 

My question would be what they're considering the 'control' subject in their generalized results. IE, a 300 pound trucker probably feels next to nothing at .08, while a 120 pound college freshman is probably completely trashed.

I searched several sites, and most of them basically agree with each other on the effects at certain levels. I used Brown's because it was in an easy to present format.

 

As for questioning the control, BAC doesn't need to take size into accout. A 300 pound man with a BAC of .08 has far more alcohol in his system than a 120 college kid with a .08 BAC, so the 300 pound trucker has the same percentage of alcohol-to-blood ratio, it just takes him more drinks to get there.

 

A 200 pound man will take, on average, 4 drinks in an hour to get to .09, whereas a 115 pound woman will get there in 2 1/2 drinks or less.

[BREWCREW5]

This is a generalized opinion and not fact.

 

.08 drivers are plenty of the problem.

You're right. The statment, ".08 drivers are plenty of the problem" is definitely a generalized opinion and not a fact.

 

I'll argue against that. .08 is considered intoxicated or drunk. Drunk driving is a huge problem. So basically.... .08 driver = problem.

[homer]

there's no way that you can say uniformally that no drivers should be out driving at .09. Perhaps some subset of our driving population should not be on the road at .09, but my opinion is that would be a very very small percentage. There is such a thing as a bad law and the .08 legal limit is an example of one

Right but you have to draw the line somewhere. Until they develop a way to accurately measure the drunkenness of a 90 lbs woman and a 325 lbs man the BAC is what we're left with.

[mothershipconnection]

I agree with Adam Corolla's "heavyweight license" idea. In a perfect world with unlimited resources, if you wanna drive with alcohol in your system, you go to a testing center and drink while driving until you can no longer pass the test. That's your BAC limit. For some people, .02 is DUI while it's .15 for others.

[GrubFever]

This level of how drunk you are argument is addressed in the way WI OMVI 's are processed. An officer stops you for a traffic offensive and then suspects impairment. Field sobriety tests are run, and if enough indicators are present, you are arrested for OMVI. It doesn't matter if you are 90 pounds or 300 pounds. If you are impaired, you are arrested. If no impairment is shown, you obviously aren't. The officer may PBT you to see what your level is, but the PBT results are NOT admisible in court and can not be used as a basis for arrest. Only the results of the test (HGN, walk and turn, one legged stand) can be used. Also, if you are arrested, I suggest submitting to a chemical test to determine alcohol level (breath or blood). If you do, and are over the limit, your license is only suspended. Driving on a suspended license is only a ticket. Not submitting to a test automatically revokes your license, which if caught driving, is a criminal offense. Plus, blood results generally come back higher than breath. And, if you think you are not drunk, take the test. If it comes back low, it gives your attorney something to work with. Otherwise, the only thing the attorney has is a video of you doing field sobriety tests and looking wasted. Also, cooperation goes a long ways...

[Patrick425]

There are lots of inequities in the law.

1) One guy goes out, gets loaded, gets behind the wheel, passes out and plows into another vehicle. He survives the crash, but kills the occupant in the other car.
2) Another guy goes out, gets loaded, gets behind the wheel, passes out and plows into another vehicle. Everyone survives with minor injuries.
3) Another guy goes out, gets loaded, gets behind the wheel, passes out and comes to rest in a field at the side of the road. A few hours later, he comes to (no cops ever notice him), he manages to drive home safely at that point.

All three men are basically guilty of the same crime, yet all three men will face much different fates (assuming drivers 2 and 3 manage to stay out of situation 1 the rest of their lives). I realize that there is a lot of "unfairness" like this in the justice system, but it has always struck me as odd. Is the guy that fires a gun at someone with intent to kill and misses any less guilty than the guy with better aim?

[statman0007]

For some people, .02 is DUI while it's .15 for others.

I don't think that this is correct. What RoCoBrewfan is saying is spot-on. It will take a larger person longer to get to a .08 than a smaller person, but research has shown the effects that alcohol are the same at .08 for someone 100 lbs versus someone 300 lbs. With experience being intoxicated and concentration people learn how to hide their impairments more, but the effects on reaction time and hand eye coordination are the same.

 

This may help clarify, here's the equation for estimating BAC:

 

# of grams of ethanol in your system / [(your weight (lbs) x 454 g/lb) x Widmark's constant]

 

For males Widmark's constant =0.68

For females it is 0.55

The difference is due to differences in water content and fat tissue in the body between the genders.

 

The body metabolizes 7 grams of ethanol per hour on average, so you can subtract from the total number of grams of ethanol in your system with time.

 

As RoCoBrewfan pointed out, the research shows that skills start to diminish at .05 so really the law is already pretty lenient towards people driving with alcohol in their system. In my opinion, the laws should be getting stricter if anything, not easier for people to drink and drive.

[olliegjw]

For some people, .02 is DUI while it's .15 for others.

I don't think that this is correct. What RoCoBrewfan is saying is spot-on. It will take a larger person longer to get to a .08 than a smaller person, but research has shown the effects that alcohol are the same at .08 for someone 100 lbs versus someone 300 lbs. With experience being intoxicated and concentration people learn how to hide their impairments more, but the effects on reaction time and hand eye coordination are the same.

I think you are missing his point. There is a baseline of driving skills needed to pass a driver's test. While sober, some have skills that well exceed the baseline, while others (elderly and blonds) barely pass that baseline. If someone can pass the drivers test while at .08, who is to say that they are more of a problem than a poorer driver at .00. The person at .08 may be impaired compared to their sober test, but they are still skilled enough to pass the driver's test. It's like saying 80% of 100 is still better than 100% of 50.

[fondybrewfan]

This probably belongs in the politics forum but I think I can stay away from the politics part of it.

 

The Wisconsin A.G. has said publicly that he believes the 1st offense should not be a crime (I might agree with this) but he also said that instead of mandatory jail time for 2nd offense he believes probation should also be an option.

 

I think I am OK with not criminalizing 1st offense but I wouldn't mind increasing the fine on that as a further incentive to not do it again, but I think it is pretty ridiculous to reduce the penalty for 2nd offense. WI is already the most lenient state there is for drunk drivers and according to our "Police Chief" we are still to strict.

 

I personally have never been affected by a drunk driver (no deaths in family or anything like that) and I want it to stay that way. If I am out driving past midnight I really do get scared when I see approaching cars and I tend to get as far right as possible and I always wait just a little bit longer at intersections. Maybe I am a little paranoid.

[ewizabeff]

I think you are missing his point. There is a baseline of driving skills needed to pass a driver's test. While sober, some have skills that well exceed the baseline, while others (elderly and blonds) barely pass that baseline.

 

Did you REALLY just throw "blondes can't drive" into this thread? We're talking about drinking.

Edit: took out excessive bold type

[Patrick425]

I think you are missing his point. There is a baseline of driving skills needed to pass a driver's test. While sober, some have skills that well exceed the baseline, while others (elderly and blonds) barely pass that baseline.

 

Did you REALLY just throw "blondes can't drive" into this thread? We're talking about drinking.

Edit: took out excessive bold type

Yeah, don't forget the Europeans, Asians, Canadians, Hispanic, Russian, African Americans, Native Americans, Australians, Eskimos, and South-Paws.

[mothershipconnection]

There is a baseline of driving skills needed to pass a driver's test. While sober, some have skills that well exceed the baseline, while others (elderly and blonds) barely pass that baseline.

 

Additionally, tolerance, be it due to opponent processes and practice, or just genes, plays a big role. Some people get the spins and puke after 4 beers while other people the same size can still hit 3 straight triple-20's on the dart board. My boss told me he once drank 3 drinks in an hour and a half and wound up puking and passing out. Obviously, he should not even be driving at .02.

[PeaveyFury]

Additionally, tolerance, be it due to opponent processes and practice, or just genes, plays a big role.

 

I was actually wondering that when reading this thread earlier today. A heavy drinker on a regular basis might get to the point where .08 is virtually sober, I'd think.

[giffted1]

I'm kinda surprised that it took this long for the tolerance aspect to be brought up because it plays a huge part. When I started drinking 5 beers meant me seeing double and going to bed with the spins. Since then I've gained no weight but have no problem drinking 5 or more beers in a night of beer pong. I feel that an experienced drinker at .08 is probably less dangerous than a first time drinker with a lower BAC or someone on their phone.