sigh, I try to tell a tard that all drunk drivers weren't created equal and his next post is responding with stats of lumping every single drunk driver together.

and no I don't suck at driving. but yea driving in the snow is fine, thats why 70% of all winter deaths occur in it. cool story bro.

the irony of your post is you pretending like all drunk drivers are created equal while saying that all snow drivers aren't created equal.

Sigh, I try to tell a tard that drunk driving is serious, and he doesn't get it.

People die in regular condition accidents all the time. 70% of winter deaths just means that snow is more dangerous than regular conditions, well, that's obvious. Again, who is making you drive in the snow? Not my choice that dumbasses like you decide to drive drunk.

Obviously all drivers aren't created equal, but doesn't make it justifiable to drive drunk. And yes, especially in the snow. Huge factors include: FWD vs RWD vs AWD, 4x4 capabilities, what type of tires you have, weight of your vehicle, ABS, etc.

drunk driving is serious for like 90% of the population, I agree with that

Sure, you are just the exception. I believe this statement. Let's have a test for anyone who wants to drive drunk to show that they can drive drunk because then they can blow a .3 and think it's cool to drive. Really can't wait until you get a DUI.


C'mon, son, stop being a hypocrite.

I generally cut myself off after 4 beers when driving. However, it really depends on the amount of drinks x the amount of time taken to consume.

sigh yet another post with so many hilariously wrong statements in a post by niftymatt

The thing is, the risk for anyone who is completely blasted is going to be very very high. Most of the deaths are from people who have a BAC over .15. Someone at .08 is not nearly as risky. The problem is that MAAD has pushed the line down and keep wanting to push it down to absurd levels. People drive home once at .06 and realize they are fine, therefore they are excellent drunk drivers. They get blasted, get to .22, and drive into a wall. Trying to scare people without facts to back them up causes people to take more stupid risks than they might if you were just honest with them.

when i'm talking about drunk drivers, i'm talking about drunk drivers. driving at .09 is not drunk even tho its techincally over the limit.

i've never blown a breathalizer so I have no idea what my BAC is when I drive but I'd say drunk for me is like 10-15 beers throughout the night (maybe 5-8 hours?). obv drunk varies from person to person.

I do agree with the point of most humans being ******ed especially when influenced by alcohol tho.

well, on an off topic note.

i hadn't drank for like two months or so, and am pretty large person (6'4 255lbs) and recently blew a .20 after having 6 sam adams over the course of like 1.5-2 hours.

however, the breathalyzer was just a random one the bar owned and could have been faulty. i was pretty surprised regardless.

Seems way off. Using bloodalcoholcalculator.org .062 for 2 hours and .079 for 1 hour.

I have 2 DUI'. I have drank and drove since then (stupidly) but I would suggest you don't at all it's not worth the time and money the state will take from you.

If you drink 2 beers within 1 hr you will be over the limit.

I voted 3 for legal limit reasons not because you are actually drunk after 3 Miller Lites.

Correlation is not causation.

That figure is for alcohol-impaired deaths, defined as deaths in accidents in which one or more driver had a BAC of 0.08% or higher. (At least you didn't use the absurd "alcohol-related" stats.) This doesn't mean the driver who was at fault had the high BAC. In fact, it doesn't mean a driver was at fault at all. Further, and more importantly, it ignores the pretty well established fact that people who are very drunk (for our purposes, let's say 0.25%+) are much less able to drive well, and much more dangerous, than those with lower BACs, lumping them all together. We don't know from those stats how many of those deaths involved people who were a little tipsy and how many had drivers who were blacking-out drunk.

(An interesting note in that regard: there are not many more alcohol related deaths than alcohol impaired, suggesting [if the curve is smooth] that most of the deaths are from drivers who are much higher than their cutoff BAC level.)

Another very important thing we don't know from those stats is how many of those deaths were the "drunk" drivers themselves. If someone drives while impaired and dies as a result, I don't think too many people will be getting worked up about that. For example, driving a motorcycle without a helmet is supremely dangerous, but I doubt you, or most people here, think doing so is immoral.

From what I heard it was actually the Organ Donors Lobby here in PA that pushed to repeal the helmet law.

How ****ed up is that?

According to this site, my BAC last night should've been about .167, somehow I remember thinking while driving home how I was gonna post in this thread when I got home safely, but then I passed out.

1) Everyone thinks they are a good driver, regardless of reality. People kid themselves.
2) Everyone thinks they can hold their alcohol, regardless of reality. People kid themselves.

=> although there undoubtedly exist people that are good drivers when they are drunk, anyone that thinks he is a good driver when he is drunk is extremely likely to be kidding himself.

People soft-defending drunk driving in this thread should stop and think about how they would feel if they drove while impaired at all and DID end up hurting/killing someone. Even if the other person was primarily to blame for the accident, you might have been able to react faster if you hadn't gotten behind the wheel. And even if the other person was primarily to blame for the accident, if you ARE behind the wheel and above the legal limit, and they are killed, your life is pretty much over.

If you aren't concerned about hurting innocent people, pure self-interest should inform you that driving drunk is a bad idea because stupid other people can hurt themselves and **** up your life.

VR, that argument applies equally well to any behavior that results in imperfect driving. Neither I nor anyone else here would feel any worse if we killed someone while driving drunk versus doing it while glancing down at the radio or getting distracted or being drowsy or any of a hundred other things that can and do go wrong when we drive. No one can prevent these things from happening 100% for the time; focusing on driving while intoxicated, where we define intoxication to include levels at which normal, experienced drivers are essentially not impaired, is not rational.

you aren't even factoring in the pros at all.

pros of drunk driving are

being able to leave whenever u want (in boston where I live you have to wait sometimes 20+ minutes to get a cab after the bars close).

cost: i'm far from cheap but if I took a cab to and from everytime I drank I would have lost a ton of money. Way more money than fines would cost if I get caught for a DUI

convenience: gl trying to get a cab to stop somewhere if you and your friends wanna get some late night food.

enjoyment of listening to my ipod: music is fun to listen to while driving instead of some crackhead cab driver trying to talk to us

i'm sure there are others i'm forgetting this is just off the top of my head.

as for the part of your post in regards to killing someone that is the worst case scenario and yes your life would be over. For me the chances of that happening are ridiculously small and i'm willing to take those risks just like i'm willing to drive on the highway and risk death from almost any accident on it since accidents on highways at 65+ mph are almost certain death/insane major injury, also like i'm willing to fly on a plane even tho there is a risk of it crashing/dying and other countless risks people take in their lives which could result in death.

Epip is a top five, mebbe top ten drunk driver

Actually I'm pretty sure driving while intoxicated is preventable 100% of the time. That distinguishes it from driving while sleepy, for example, or from driving in winter weather.

Secondly, my other point is that driving while intoxicated, given the current rules, is just an open invitation for the government to ruin your life.

I work in insurance. I hear people brag about what good drivers they are every day. Everyone thinks they are a fantastic driver: never had a ticket, never had an accident, until one night they get on the highway driving the wrong way after getting sloshed.

I'm curious as to how you calculated those chances. For you.

Back home, 4 or more is no go.
Here, 1 or more is no go.

I'm a lightweight, though.

an educated guess? kinda like what anyone does when there is no way to exactly determine a %?

.

I agree with your points that everyone thinks it and while i'm sure this falls on your deaf ears I am a great drunk driver, quite possibly top 3 in the world

I personally think people should have to take the driving test drunk as well as sober.

Then you can have your Drunk Driving license that gives you a little more leeway on your BAC.

hah would be nice altho obv 1 sample size tests aren't a legit way to do it

would be sick if someone could pull up videotape of all the times uve driven drunk and decide on that tho