News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5K     0 

I've never taken a breathalyzer test, but I would assume the assume the opposite.
That when the average person feels a bit too tipsy to drive, they are actually well under the limit. A quick google search gave me this - which almost says I can have 1 drink per hour in perpetuity and still stay at zero.

5192b50cecad044c2c000016
Beer I think can be controlled but hard liqour varies wildly.

That's why I only have a beer or two if I ever have to drive.
 
I've never taken a breathalyzer test, but I would assume the assume the opposite.
That when the average person feels a bit too tipsy to drive, they are actually well under the limit. A quick google search gave me this - which almost says I can have 1 drink per hour in perpetuity and still stay at zero.

5192b50cecad044c2c000016

You are correct - sort of. The 'average' body metabolizes the alcohol in a standard drink (glass of wine, bottle of beer, 1oz of distilled) per hour, but we are not all average. Your could also wind up in the 'warn' area of a roadside test which isn't without consequence. The one-per-hour pattern also assumes that it is steady, and you wait the hour after the last drink. There are a lot of biological things at play with significant consequence if you dance across the line.
I have taken breathalyzer test as part of training. It was a tad unrealistic since time constraints meant it had to be closer to power drinking. I don't recall how many drinks I had (whisky of course) but I felt I was in no shape to drive but never blew over .09.
 
Frankly I'm starting to think drinking and driving is a problem that won't ever fully go away unless you move to automation cars.

Drinking and driving will never go away because the punishments ARE A JOKE! A few years in jail or less for drinking and driving even when you injure or kill someone isn't a deterrent for most people and especially for repeat offenders. The only way to dramatically lower the amount of drunk drivers on the roads is to implement mandatory jail sentences if you drive while drunk and kill or seriously injure someone. For other cases where you get caught driving drunk, you get three strikes until you start seeing jail time as well.

For example if you get caught the first two times driving drunk without harming anyone, you get heavy fines. The third time you get caught you get a huge fine and a month license suspension and a last warning before every other offense after you start getting automatic jail time. IE 4th offense is a fine and a day in jail, 5th offense is a fine and weekend in jail, 6th offense fine and a week in jail and so on. Every offense after the 3rd is more fines, longer license suspensions and more jail time.

However if while driving drunk you kill or seriously injure someone, then its an automatic jail sentence. Namely if you injure someone moderately, its an automatic year in jail. If you injure someone signficantly it goes up from there and if you injure someone so that they have major life altering injuries, then its an automatic 8 years. If you kill someone then its an automatic 10 years in jail per life lost. Make all these punishments mandatory with no chance to fight it in court so that you can't weasel your way to a lesser punishment because you're rich and/or famous and that wealthy or poor you're going to jail for the same offense regardless.

Let this rock for a couple of years and I GUARANTEE that drunk driving will dramatically decrease in the number of offenders after the first few times a drunk driver kills someone and goes to jail for 10+ years. That will scare the crap out of most people and the majority of drivers will finally get the message and stop drinking and driving and those that don't weren't going to do so regardless and they need to be taken off the roads anyways. In my mind this would be the ONLY way to seriously decrease the amount of drunk drivers on the roads permanently.
 
Last edited:
Impaired driving causing death is technically manslaughter (unlawfully accidentally killing someone without any ill intent), except that the punishment is lighter than manslaughter.

There's a reason why impaired driving causing death is the number one criminal cause of death.

There are millions of people like Marco Muzzo (minus the wealth of course). One is quickly reminded of Ethan Couch, the poster child of affluenza, who committed a crime similar to Muzzo (and believed that he had the wealth to escape trouble).
 
Last edited:
Impaired driving causing death is technically manslaughter (unlawfully accidentally killing someone without any ill intent), except that the punishment is lighter than manslaughter.

There's a reason why impaired driving causing death is the number one criminal cause of death.

There are millions of people like Marco Muzzo (minus the wealth of course). One is quickly reminded of Ethan Couch, the poster child of affluenza, who committed a crime similar to Muzzo (and believed that he had the wealth to escape trouble).

Technically, no. The maximum penalty for both is life imprisonment. Imposed penalty patterns may well differ.
 
You are correct - sort of. The 'average' body metabolizes the alcohol in a standard drink (glass of wine, bottle of beer, 1oz of distilled) per hour, but we are not all average. Your could also wind up in the 'warn' area of a roadside test which isn't without consequence. The one-per-hour pattern also assumes that it is steady, and you wait the hour after the last drink. There are a lot of biological things at play with significant consequence if you dance across the line.
I have taken breathalyzer test as part of training. It was a tad unrealistic since time constraints meant it had to be closer to power drinking. I don't recall how many drinks I had (whisky of course) but I felt I was in no shape to drive but never blew over .09.

You are correct that speed of drinking matters but I note that you used the word metabolising which describes the process of our organs (the liver) breaking down or converting alcohol in our blood into other substances and that process actually does happen at a very predictable and steady for everyone. Our livers are almost all the same. No matter how fast you drink, or how large you are the metabolism will happen at the same rate under normal circumstances..

The speed of digestion of alcohol can vary depending on what is in your stomach, and if those contents absorb some alcohol and temporarily hold it until it is released on partial digestion, the speed of which can vary, but even that doesn't ultimately make that much of a difference that you can rely on it the way some folk-advice like "eat a bunch of carbs after drinking to soak up the alcohol."
 
You are correct that speed of drinking matters but I note that you used the word metabolising which describes the process of our organs (the liver) breaking down or converting alcohol in our blood into other substances and that process actually does happen at a very predictable and steady for everyone. Our livers are almost all the same. No matter how fast you drink, or how large you are the metabolism will happen at the same rate under normal circumstances..

The speed of digestion of alcohol can vary depending on what is in your stomach, and if those contents absorb some alcohol and temporarily hold it until it is released on partial digestion, the speed of which can vary, but even that doesn't ultimately make that much of a difference that you can rely on it the way some folk-advice like "eat a bunch of carbs after drinking to soak up the alcohol."

Fair point - for a healthy liver. The thing about 'power drinking' is the stomach (and probably small intestines, I can't remember) can only absorb at a certain rate, and that power drinking tends to irritate the linings and has been shown to actually slow down absorption.
 
I find that chart BurOak posted okay but I question it’s reliability. My wife, while never proven scientifically, clearly is either allergic to or cannot properly metabolize alcohol. She would not be safe being behind the wheel after half a glass of wine or half a bottle of beer.
 
A father will never see his wife or children again. Students will never see their teacher again. 3 young children will never be able grow up, never will be able to go to a high school party, never graduate university.

And the disgusting monster who shouldn't even be behind the wheel will get a slap on the wrist for ruining lives.

I really, and truly hope that my comment will not age well, but I am not holding my breathe.
 
The drunk driver was caught on video driving recklessly a few days earlier, as people tried to intervene:


Which only makes it even more appalling, he knew he shouldn't be doing what he was doing, he just didn't care.

It is sickening knowing that other selfish monsters like this exist and are on the road.

How many times do families have to be broken before these monsters get more than a slap on the wrist?

In addition, when will driving finally be recognized as a privilege and not a right?
 
Which only makes it even more appalling, he knew he shouldn't be doing what he was doing, he just didn't care.

It is sickening knowing that other selfish monsters like this exist and are on the road.

How many times do families have to be broken before these monsters get more than a slap on the wrist?

In addition, when will driving finally be recognized as a privilege and not a right?


How about killing someone on a suspended license, going to prison, getting paroled on the promise to "never drink again", and blowing over 0.10 again?
 

Back
Top