The Danger of Drinking and Driving

[NullSmurf]

Steve I can't answer your poll - you haven't given enough choices. It is flawed from the start...

Impaired is impaired. Unfortunately there are a lot of things that impair drivers - that is, lessen their ability to function properly when faced with a critical decision in driving. They include (but are not limited to):

1) Driving with a cell phone glued to your ear / Dialing a number.
2) Trying to dodge the bee stinging you
3) Falling asleep behind the wheel.
4) Taking prescription and non-prescription medications or NOT taking meds
5) Arguing with your spouse/kids/significant other/passenger/etc.
6) Changing a radio station / looking for a CD
7) Picking up your cigarette that fell on the floor.
8) Gawking at another accident/incident/police stop/etc.
9) Reading a newspaper
10) Applying eye makeup / Shaving
11) Trying to see what she'll do / showing off to friends...
12) Thinking that speed has nothing to do with being in an accident

etc., etc., etc.

Having been in the business of dealing with tragedies related to vehicle crashes for the last 27 years, and being a crash reconstructionist - I can personally assure you any and all of the above have had VERY tragic results. Drinking and driving is also a problem.

I sincerely think people nowadays don't take their role in driving as seriously as they should. At any one given time, especially when traveling in excess of about 30 miles per hour, a motorist is taking their life in their hands (and placing everyone else in their path at the same risk). Remember, in many cases, there is nothing separating you from oncoming traffic except the wind...

Yes - drinking and driving is a problem. But I personally think, based upon what I've seen, the danger that is far worse than drinking and driving is not taking the driving role as seriously as you should.

There is no flaw here, George. I'd love to read the accident report on the bee victim. I'm convinced that all these are problems. Hell, I've been guilty of 5,7,8 and 11, but thats not the focus of Dennis' poll. This is the DWI poll. We can do a driving while stupid poll also if there is interest.

Did I say Dennis - meant Steve.

....do you really expect someone to post and say "...oh no, it's FINE to drink and drive! Heck, I do it all the time...."...?? You say up front that your mind is made up, so....the point is...to stir up trouble?

IMHO - George's answer hit the nail on the head.

My $00.02 - B.B.S.

I suppose the short answer to that is yes. CC and Steve had a short debate over driving while intoxicated. Its obviously a passionate subject to Steve, perhaps for Bill. I'd love to hear more on Bill's position.

 

[LilBastage]

....do you really expect someone to post and say "...oh no, it's FINE to drink and drive! Heck, I do it all the time...."...?? You say up front that your mind is made up, so....the point is...to stir up trouble?

IMHO - George's answer hit the nail on the head.

My $00.02 - B.B.S.

What he said...

This is really going to go nowhere fast. It looks to me that antagonism between 2 folks in another thread was the sole purpose for starting this poll. There's not going to be a lot of "reasoned" debate over this because people are involved for very emotional reasons, which is completely understandable.

You've got many folks who have been affected in very serious ways by drunk driving and then you have the folks who have done it for years, never been caught, and never caused an accident or any other trouble. The first group isn't going to change their mind and the second group can never fully understand what the first group is saying and isn't likely to change their ways.

If one wants to come in and debate real statistics (which I'm pretty sure are not available) comparing the number of drunk drivers who get home safely against the number of those that kill, they would likely be met with a lynching and name calling and flaming would certainly ensue due to the emotional intensity that goes with losing a loved one.

Conventional wisdom says that drunk driving is dangerous. Conventional wisdom says that impaired driving of ANY kind is dangerous.

This looks to me like one of those "when did you stop beating your wife" situations and is likely to gain about as much ground as the same.

If anyone really cares, I voted "yes" and I stopped beating my wife after she kicked my ass for the third time.

 

[SamClemmons]

Oh come on nully. The answer to this poll is so blatantly obvious (it's the giant, purple Sloth in the corner) that it is, for all intent and purposes, a waste of system resources. You should be thanking George for breathing life into this otherwise useless head count.

How about a poll for the most prolific, pointless, opinion giver?

NA

 

[CoventryCat86]

As Neal pointed out this is a waste of system resources and yet another flawed poll from shawk. Kinda reminds me of one of the last times shawk had his panties in a bunch when he started the "Should Leebo be CP's official leader?" poll. As George said, this is a flawed poll so why bother voting? ???

shawk, from now on, please stop wasting our time with nonsense like this. You'd be doing yourself a huge favor.

 

[ggiese]

George, certainly the things you cited affect a person's ability to drive. We all see it every day and you don't have to be a crash reconstructionist to know that. But those items have nothing to do with the question that was posed.

Are you saying you cannot answer a straight up question about the danger of driving drunk? Where's the flaw? It's a danger or it isn't. It's a myth or it isn't. What "middle ground" do you propose?

Steve - let me ask you a question - and I would like an honest answer out of you. If your mother had a BAC that was over the legal limit and it can be proven there appeared to be nothing she did to contributed to the crash - would her drinking and driving have anything to do with her being killed? Read my entire post before you respond...

This is the question I struggle with. Your argument suggests that it would, and I have some issues with that. And before you think I'm trying to discredit your mothers memory - think again - think VERY hard again. I too, have some VERY strong feelings on the subject.

BBS hit the nail on the head with this:

....do you really expect someone to post and say "...oh no, it's FINE to drink and drive! Heck, I do it all the time...."...??

Your poll reflects a position you have and are obviously passionate about and is clearly written to evoke a response favorable to your position. That is a flawed poll. If you do not want to favor your position, and want an honest opinion of the other members - rewrite your poll to allow for more fair choices.

My examples are also examples of impairment - equally as dangerous as drinking and driving. It's hard to dismiss fact, Steve. True - it is proven that a certain amount of drinking and driving causes impairment. But it is also proven there are other causes of impairment NOT related to drinking and driving - even if they are only temporary.

I do think you need to take intoxicated drivers off of the road. And I do believe the court doesn't even come close to the punishment they deserve when they hit and kill or badly injure another. But I also believe you need to take ALL impaired driver off the road - much to the chagrin of most that I've stopped.

I'm a realist - having seen it for as long as I have - and dealing with the associated nightmares. I think there are other just as serious situations are NEVER addressed by the court when they should be. Many are on the list I provided - each were causes of serious crashes. It's viewed as a "tragic" situation, but there are no criminal charges in most cases. Please don't minimize my list - it didn't matter alcohol was involved in each of those cases - they caused equally serious crashes.

It's not hard to say that people shouldn't get behind the wheel when they are under the influence of alcohol. Really - that's a no-brainer, isn't it? But I want you to seriously think about the example I gave about your mother. If she was doing nothing wrong, was her drinking and driving contributory to the crash? Should her death be minimized because she had been drinking and driving? I think if you understand that - you understand what I'm trying to say.

 

[Mrepp]

You know it’s very ironic that this thread was started, sat night I was board so I dropped by a buddy’s Bob’s house. Well most everyone there was 3 sheets to the wind. I had been playing paintball all day was really dehydrated so I passed and just drank water. Well I had never been around these particular guys when they were drinking before. Bob got a call from a friend that his wallet was stolen at some bar. Well Bob being the genius he is decided one way or another he was going to go help his friend. Normally I would just tackle him and what not but I was way outnumbered so I drove him instead of letting him be stupid. We got to this Irish bar and it was like a mini jungle. The people there were so that drunk that they seemed to revert to an almost caveman like state, it was ridiculous. Long story short I had to drag them all home (literally drag). I though I had seen drunk but that night opened my eyes to a whole new drunk. God help us if those idiots drive.

 

[ggiese]

There is no flaw here, George. I'd love to read the accident report on the bee victim. I'm convinced that all these are problems. Hell, I've been guilty of 5,7,8 and 11, but thats not the focus of Dennis' poll. This is the DWI poll. We can do a driving while stupid poll also if there is interest.

Did I say Dennis - meant Steve.

....do you really expect someone to post and say "...oh no, it's FINE to drink and drive! Heck, I do it all the time...."...?? You say up front that your mind is made up, so....the point is...to stir up trouble?

IMHO - George's answer hit the nail on the head.

My $00.02 - B.B.S.

I suppose the short answer to that is yes. CC and Steve had a short debate over driving while intoxicated. Its obviously a passionate subject to Steve, perhaps for Bill. I'd love to hear more on Bill's position.

Bruce - you remind me of a boss at work I was having a discussion with a while back... We were talking about what motivates people. If you've read most of the literature on the subject, you KNOW money does not motivate people in the long term. Yet my boss was absolutely, completely convinced it did. This was despite the fact he had attended management classes where I KNOW he was exposed to the theories. I guess it proves the addage, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink..."

I'm sorry, I'm really struggling to understand how you could possibly be that ignorant. That poll is as flawed as it gets. I use a similar technique when questioning suspects...

"Did you steal the money to pay for drugs? Or did you steal the money because you had to feed your family?"

That is flawed reasoning - setting up a circumstance where you get the response you want - and if you think Steve's poll is not a flawed poll I think you need to understand logic before attacking my analysis of the logic. Based upon your statement, clearly you do not.

 

[BlindedByScience]

.....

....do you really expect someone to post and say "...oh no, it's FINE to drink and drive! Heck, I do it all the time...."...?? You say up front that your mind is made up, so....the point is...to stir up trouble?

IMHO - George's answer hit the nail on the head.

My $00.02 - B.B.S.

I suppose the short answer to that is yes. CC and Steve had a short debate over driving while intoxicated. Its obviously a passionate subject to Steve, perhaps for Bill. I'd love to hear more on Bill's position.

So, in other words, a flawed, senseless poll, posted with the intent of starting a pi$$ing match....in which you are perfectly willing to stop by and pour gas on the fire.

Nice.

B.B.S.

 

[stevehawk]

This poll was in direct response to an ignorant (stupid, really) statement made by CC. I didn’t want to pollute the initial thread any further so I brought it here. (In other words, BBS, I didn’t start the trouble, I just relocated it.)

Typically, I let the cat’s “assholish” behavior and personal attacks slide because everyone generally sees through 90% of his bullshit anyway. But in this case, on this topic, I am unwilling to do that.

The poll is not flawed – it’s just overly simple… a “no brainer” as it were. As someone pointed out early on in the thread, “who would ever pick option #2?” Well, you can see by the results that one person did.

 

[Hillbilly Steaks]

We need to add a new section to the forum...

we could call it "take it outside"....or "the debate section"

 

[ggiese]

The poll is not flawed – it’s just overly simple… a “no brainer” as it were. As someone pointed out early on in the thread, “who would ever pick option #2?” Well, you can see by the results that one person did.

Call the pig a cow, and it's still a pig - sorry, Steve - pigs still don't fly...

I've also noticed you ignored my posting subsequent to yours - which is kinda ironic - you accuse me of that quite a bit...

It also seems you think that if you have an opinion, it is the correct opinion - and if someone else has an opinion it's "stupid, really". That's also not right thinking, Steve...

Arrogance and ignorance are a VERY bad combo...

 

[NullSmurf]

At least George is willing to speak to the question - we'll just have to disagree. For Bill and Neal, when your argument is weak, you resort to chest beating to distract from the point. No big surprise there.

 

[ggiese]

At least George is willing to speak to the question - we'll just have to disagree. For Bill and Neal, when your argument is weak, you resort to chest beating to distract from the point. No big surprise there.

And what do you call what you're doing right now? It seems to me that you're choosing to attack Neal and Bill in the interest of derailing the discussion - certainly a form of "gorilla dust" (a milder, but equally effective version of chest beating).

Bruce - if you can't stick to the discussion at hand, please don't be critical of others that offer similar criticism. It's very captious.

 

[SamClemmons]

At least George is willing to speak to the question - we'll just have to disagree. For Bill and Neal, when your argument is weak, you resort to chest beating to distract from the point. No big surprise there.

My post was directly to the point with no chest beating involved. Only a mindless self promoter would say otherwise. You are just a silly person who won't shut up long enough to think. You trying to bait me nully?

NA

 

[SKYDIVNEKD]

Selecting option #2 is easily understandable due to the way in which it is worded. I can drive down the road, with a 40 oz. between my legs, and drink it all day long w/o being a danger to anyone. (anymore so than the other examples George pointed out). However, if I'm driving while drunk (impaired) it is not a myth, it is a fact. Some people just beat the odds while driving impaired.

And, if you can find someone with a BA of .10% after having "...2-3 beers at a picnic or ballgame..." I'd bet the house they are lying about the amount of alcohol they've ingested! That's the most popular answer when pulled over or arrested. Total bullchit!!!

I believe penalties should be as steep for reckless driving as they are for DUI. Because the driver is intentionally putting the public at risk by his/her actions.

As for the validity of your poll, I ain't goin' there.

Floyd T.

 

[Rod]

While this poll appears to be sparked by another thread, I'd like to keep the name calling and flaming to a minimum.

The answer to this poll is obvious. I too have strong feelings against those who drive drunk, however I'd like to see this thread progress in a civil manner. I've already received several "reported posts", and there is no need to bash anyone (from either side).

Thanks,
Rod

 

[NullSmurf]

At least George is willing to speak to the question - we'll just have to disagree. For Bill and Neal, when your argument is weak, you resort to chest beating to distract from the point. No big surprise there.

My post was directly to the point with no chest beating involved. Only a mindless self promoter would say otherwise. You are just a silly person who won't shut up long enough to think. You trying to bait me nully?

NA

I suppose I was. I apologize. I got lost in the adjectives.

 

[CasaSoho]

And, if you can find someone with a BA of .10% after having "...2-3 beers at a picnic or ballgame..." I'd bet the house they are lying about the amount of alcohol they've ingested! That's the most popular answer when pulled over or arrested. Total bullchit!!!

Sorry if it was lost, but that was my point. Although, you can't deny it is possible to drink responsibly, have 2-3 brews and register a .10. However, I do agree if you're using that line after getting pulled over, chances are you're lying.

Speaking of impaired, should I or should I not be driving after a strong cigar knocks me on my a$$?

 

[Wurm]

Speaking of impaired, should I or should I not be driving after a strong cigar knocks me on my a$$?

I've had cigars get me high enough that I've waited for the buzz to go away before driving home.

Like George very wisely said, "Impaired is Impaired" If you don't feel right to drive then there is a simple answer...

don't.

 

[BigFatDog]

My father was the prosecuting attorney in my home town. I'm all to familiar with the results of drunk/high drivers. He brought a lot of his work home... Drunk driving... never have and never will.