NHL: Around the League 50

[ChiHawks10]

Crazy thought, how about not driving at all impaired and getting an Uber instead. Or socialize without drinking. Or get a ride from a friend. There are so many options!

Our of curiosity, would you have a glass of wine while out to dinner with your wife, and then drive? Or would you get an Uber? I mean... who Ubers or gets a ride after a glass of wine, or one beer, or one drink? I don't know of anyone that would do that, personally. There's a reason the limit is set at .08. Under that, they've determined you're not impaired.

 

[hawksrule]

Our of curiosity, would you have a glass of wine while out to dinner with your wife, and then drive? Or would you get an Uber? I mean... who Ubers or gets a ride after a glass of wine, or one beer, or one drink? I don't know of anyone that would do that, personally. There's a reason the limit is set at .08. Under that, they've determined you're not impaired.

What you said is plainly wrong. One can be convicted of impaired driving below .08. The notion that an unidentified “they” have determined “you’re not impaired” there is silly.

Alcohol not only makes people bad drivers, it makes people bad judges of whether they’re suitable to drive.

When we go out we usually Uber or subway. If we’re driving, one of us (or both) don’t drink. Drinking really isn’t important, and it’s really easy to do without having to get behind the wheel.

 

[ChiHawks10]

What you said is plainly wrong. One can be convicted of impaired driving below .08. The notion that an unidentified “they” have determined “you’re not impaired” there is silly.

Alcohol not only makes people bad drivers, it makes people bad judges of whether they’re suitable to drive.

When we go out we usually Uber or subway. If we’re driving, one of us (or both) don’t drink. Drinking really isn’t important, and it’s really easy to do without having to get behind the wheel.

Well yeah, it's at the officer's discretion to determine if you're impaired based upon evidence to go along with the breathalyzer. So yes, you can be given a DUI even if you blow under the legal limit, technically. The point remains, that as long as you're not showing obvious signs of being impaired, and you were to blow under .08, I would say the vast majority of cops aren't going to tag you for DUI.

And makes sense for you, since you live in NYC(pretty sure you're in the city, itself?), where public transportation is easier than if you lived out in the suburbs and wanted to hit a bar, or have a drink with dinner or lunch.

Never said it's important. Just asked you a question.

I'm not saying people should drink and drive. I'm just pointing out that I don't think there's anything wrong with someone having a drink, or glass of wine, or a beer with their lunch or dinner, and then driving. Most of those people would likely blow 0.0, and I'd argue the vast majority wouldn't be visibly impaired in any way, either.

 

[hawksrule]

Well yeah, it's at the officer's discretion to determine if you're impaired based upon evidence to go along with the breathalyzer. So yes, you can be given a DUI even if you blow under the legal limit, technically. The point remains, that as long as you're not showing obvious signs of being impaired, and you were to blow under .08, I would say the vast majority of cops aren't going to tag you for DUI.

And makes sense for you, since you live in NYC(pretty sure you're in the city, itself?), where public transportation is easier than if you lived out in the suburbs and wanted to hit a bar, or have a drink with dinner or lunch.

Never said it's important. Just asked you a question.

I'm not saying people should drink and drive. I'm just pointing out that I don't think there's anything wrong with someone having a drink, or glass of wine, or a beer with their lunch or dinner, and then driving. Most of those people would likely blow 0.0, and I'd argue the vast majority wouldn't be visibly impaired in any way, either.

Most countries it’s either .05 or .02. Some it’s 0.0. You can thank a strong alcohol lobby and a strong restaurant lobby for the .08. A threshold of impairment should not be inferred.

Plenty of people, particularly those who are slight, can easily be .05 after a single drink or glass of wine. And as I said, people are terrible judges of their own fitness to drive.

It’s not that different than texting. Looking at a text on your phone is less distracting than typing out an email, but both are still bad, both impair driving, and it shouldn’t be done. Just because a quick glance at a text only slightly impairs someone and will probably be fine doesn’t make it acceptable.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Most countries it’s either .05 or .02. Some it’s 0.0. You can thank a strong alcohol lobby and a strong restaurant lobby for the .08. A threshold of impairment should not be inferred.

Plenty of people, particularly those who are slight, can easily be .05 after a single drink or glass of wine. And as I said, people are terrible judges of their own fitness to drive.

It’s not that different than texting. Looking at a text on your phone is less distracting than typing out an email, but both are still bad, both impair driving, and it shouldn’t be done. Just because a quick glance at a text only slightly impaired someone and will probably be fine doesn’t make it acceptable.

All true. Fair argument.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I don't drink anymore but I got really used to not drinking at all if I was driving when a coworker got dinged with .05 and almost lost his job and his house because of it. Feel kinda shitty it took that to get me not to be an idiot but it's something you get accustomed to really quickly.

Play stupid games win stupid prizes. I'm not judging Aho because I've gotten away with way worse shit in my twenties but he should know better.

 

[madgoat33]

I've spent an obscene amount of money on uber/lyft the past 8ish years and its still worth it.

 

[Pez68]

BAC is a nonsensical standard for "impaired" driving anyways. Everyone's tolerance for alcohol is different. The same goes for concentrations of almost every other drug in your system.

You can be stone cold sober by all measurable standards, and still be at .08.

Let's also not get into the conversation of what constitues "impaired". I'd wager I'm a better driver after 2-3 beers than most assholes on the road are with none.

Now, obviously drunk driving is a major, major problem, but the BAC tests can f*** right off.

I'd be willing to bet 99% of casual drinkers have zero measurable impairment at .02 BAC.

 

[hawksrule]

BAC is a nonsensical standard for "impaired" driving anyways. Everyone's tolerance for alcohol is different. The same goes for concentrations of almost every other drug in your system.

You can be stone cold sober by all measurable standards, and still be at .08.

Let's also not get into the conversation of what constitues "impaired". I'd wager I'm a better driver after 2-3 beers than most assholes on the road are with none.

Now, obviously drunk driving is a major, major problem, but the BAC tests can f*** right off.

I'd be willing to bet 99% of casual drinkers have zero measurable impairment at .02 BAC.

There’s a very strong correlation between bac and driving impairment. To call it nonsense based on highly suspect anecdotal evidence isn’t at all cogent.

 

[x Tame Impala]

There’s a very strong correlation between bac and driving impairment. To call it nonsense based on highly suspect anecdotal evidence isn’t at all cogent.

If you believe that you should recognize the difference between a .08 and a .02.

 

[madgoat33]

Point is, roads are public and driving at all impaired is against the interest of public safety. You want to drink and drive? Fine, but 0 sympathy from me if you pay the price.

 

[hawksrule]

If you believe that you should recognize the difference between a .08 and a .02.

Look man, if it’s so important to you to drink and drive despite how simple it is not to, I can’t stop you. But recognize that you’re no better or different or deserving than the rest of the dipshits who think they’re fine to drive but aren’t.

 

[hawksrule]

I truly can’t think of anything more entitled than defending getting behind the wheel after drinking, all the more so when there are so many easy alternatives.

 

[Giovi]

Look man, if it’s so important to you to drink and drive despite how simple it is not to, I can’t stop you. But recognize that you’re no better or different or deserving than the rest of the dipshits who think they’re fine to drive but aren’t.

It would be good to remember there's a difference between drinking and driving under the legal limit an driving over the legal limit. To say the two actions are the same is just plain silly.

 

[hawksrule]

It would be good to remember there's a difference between drinking and driving under the legal limit an driving over the legal limit. To say the two actions are the same is just plain silly.

What’s silly is acting as if the legal limit is the determinant of whether one is impaired. The legal limit used to be .15. Doesn’t make .14 safe. See how quickly your argument falls apart?

 

[Giovi]

What’s silly is acting as if the legal limit is the determinant of whether one is impaired. The legal limit used to be .15. Doesn’t make .14 safe. See how quickly your argument falls apart?

Are you really trying to use a decades old, changed law, to argue a point in 2022?

 

[hawksrule]

Are you really trying to use a decades old, changed law, to argue a point in 2022?

No, I’m undermining your frail logic.

 

[Giovi]

No, I’m undermining your frail logic.

You really achieved nothing at all, except showing that using absolutes in a debate can undermine your own credibility.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

It would be good to remember there's a difference between drinking and driving under the legal limit an driving over the legal limit. To say the two actions are the same is just plain silly.

You really achieved nothing at all, except showing that using absolutes in a debate can undermine your own credibility.

The legal limit is arbitrary. That's the point.

 

[Giovi]

The legal limit is arbitrary. That's the point.

And the point made by myself and others is there is a world of difference between getting in your car and driving after having a drink with supper, and getting drunk and driving.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I don't care enough about this to keep discussing it.

 

[BLKHKhockey]

I don't care enough about this to keep discussing it.

I was typing up a comment and ended up deleting it. As I do here often. The life of a lurker.

 

[hawksrule]

You really achieved nothing at all, except showing that using absolutes in a debate can undermine your own credibility.

You’ve provided nothing meaningful to the discussion, and your supposed point unraveled immediately upon arrival. If an empty quip makes you feel better, then good for you.

 

[hawksrule]

And the point made by myself and others is there is a world of difference between getting in your car and driving after having a drink with supper, and getting drunk and driving.

You continue to miss the point as much as a point can possibly be missed.

 

[Pez68]

There’s a very strong correlation between bac and driving impairment. To call it nonsense based on highly suspect anecdotal evidence isn’t at all cogent.

This is just more of your holier than thou, moral superiority shtick you love to whip out every once in a while. Alcohol and drug impairment is based on a multitude of physiological factors that you obviously don't have the slightest comprehension of. Alcohol and drug tolerance is affected by psychological, genetic, and behavioral factors, among others. The brain is an incredibly complex thing that works differently for every person on the planet.

For instance, I can pop 2-3 vicodin and have absolutely ZERO effects when it comes to alertness, drowsiness, sobriety, pain relief, etc. They don't do anything for me, and never have. No, I was never a habitual vicodin user. I have taken them 3-4 times in my lifetime due to injuries, and thrown them away every time, as they are useless. Ibuprofen, on the other hand, is a life saver...

A regular marijuana user can have "excessive" amounts of THC in their system by normal standards, and be completely sober. When I pop edibles, 5mg is enough for me. I know regular users than need 4-5 times that amount to get high.

Should I continue?

If your stance is that you should never drive with any amount of alcohol in your system, because any impairment while driving is too much, then I'm sure you would have no problem revoking the license of anyone over, say, 60? Because, you know, cognitive and motor skill decline is 100% a factor as you age, and those older drivers are operating their vehicles much more dangerously than someone in their physical and mental prime. Right?