Impaired driving

[cerevro]

Thanks to the bros who provided good piece of advice.

To those who judged, I did not post this to be judged here. I was looking for piece of advice from the open minds bros here.

BTW, nobody got hurt, no crash, it was a RAID after the Raptors final game.

We all make mistakes, don't we? We are not perfect. We are humans. And as humans, we make mistakes and we learn.

 

[fuji]

Thanks to the bros who provided good piece of advice.

To those who judged, I did not post this to be judged here. I was looking for piece of advice from the open minds bros here.

BTW, nobody got hurt, no crash, it was a RAID after the Raptors final game.

We all make mistakes, don't we? We are not perfect. We are humans. And as humans, we make mistakes and we learn.

I'm glad they got you at a RIDE check and that no one got hurt. They likely saved a life here as from your piss poor attitude, showing NO remorse, I'm quite sure that you have driven drunk before and would have kept on driving drunk until you either killed somebody or got caught. Glad you got caught first.

 

[johnhenrygalt]

You probably don't belong on terb, then.

Question, if you had (or have) kids, would you prefer:

A) You separate from your wife and see your kids every weekend

or

B) Your wife and kids are killed by a drunk driver

ONLY those two options. Do you know ANYONE who prefers B?

Or C) - grow up, man up, stop being a sniveling coward and have an adult conversation with your wife.

 

[gcostanza]

Thanks to the bros who provided good piece of advice.

To those who judged, I did not post this to be judged here. I was looking for piece of advice from the open minds bros here.

BTW, nobody got hurt, no crash, it was a RAID after the Raptors final game.

We all make mistakes, don't we? We are not perfect. We are humans. And as humans, we make mistakes and we learn.

I didn't know cops raided people for D.U.I.?

 

[gcostanza]

I'm guessing he meant "RIDE".

Possible?

 

[nottyboi]

The limit is 0.05, I have certainly never driven with BAC anywhere near that limit. If you have then you deserve to be judged for it.

Based on what? All the evidence says otherwise....

 

[nottyboi]

You probably don't belong on terb, then.

Question, if you had (or have) kids, would you prefer:

A) You separate from your wife and see your kids every weekend

or

B) Your wife and kids are killed by a drunk driver

ONLY those two options. Do you know ANYONE who prefers B?

You forgot about the one where your daughter gets enslaved, sold to a consortium, is put to work in a brothel, tortured, and eventually killed. But of course you want to live in a fantasy world. Its kinda telling that the consequences you lay out only focus on personal consequences and not the outlying consequences. I acknowledge there are some horrendous consequences that arise out of the sex industry, but to me it is more a product of the regulatory environment. As for DUI we need to focus on where most of the harm is done. By stopping those that routinely drive very drunk.

 

[nottyboi]

I sleep remarkably well. It's a gift.

Of course, people with no moral compass tend to sleep very well because they are never bothered by their actions and believe they are good.

 

[nottyboi]

Not going to get much support on here.

I absolutely despise drunk drivers (as in, people who drive who are quite obviously intoxicated). It makes things harder for those of us who drink responsibly.

I regularly grab a beer or two with co-workers before driving home. I've been stopped several times by the police leaving the bar, and I've had to wait around 15-20 minutes for a car with a breathalyzer to come by just to blow a 0 or 0.01 (apparently a process booze quite nicely). I hate to be lumped in with people who get slammed and drive. I think 0.08 is a reasonable limit, and if you're over that or even near that, you deserve whatever punishment is being handed out.

I believe there should be penalties at 0.08, but they should be lesser, but they should escalate with BAC reading. Over 0.15 and you go to jail, first time or not.

 

[fuji]

You forgot about the one where your daughter gets enslaved, sold to a consortium, is put to work in a brothel, tortured, and eventually killed. But of course you want to live in a fantasy world. Its kinda telling that the consequences you lay out only focus on personal consequences and not the outlying consequences. I acknowledge there are some horrendous consequences that arise out of the sex industry, but to me it is more a product of the regulatory environment. As for DUI we need to focus on where most of the harm is done. By stopping those that routinely drive very drunk.

The question is whether anyone on terb is a hypocrite for judging people who drive drunk. Terb is not a forum devoted to murder and enslavement.

Give it up, your pathetic defence of drunk driving is now causing you to say ridiculous things.

It's a good thing the OP has been dealt with by the authorities before he hurt anyone. Lives were likely saved by the police here--the guy showed no remorse. He likely had done it before and would have kept on driving drunk is they hadn't caught him.

 

[fuji]

I believe there should be penalties at 0.08, but they should be lesser, but they should escalate with BAC reading. Over 0.15 and you go to jail, first time or not.

Yet you have been shown evidence that .008 BAC results in a significant number of deaths. You lied about that, and when you were shown the actual data you slithered away.

 

[poorboy]

I believe there should be penalties at 0.08, but they should be lesser, but they should escalate with BAC reading. Over 0.15 and you go to jail, first time or not.

Have you not read any of the links I've posted? They have already taken care of that. If you blow between .5 and .8, there is a graduated scale of 1,3 and 7 day suspensions based on the number of previous suspensions in B.C. Ontario is similar. Over .8 first time, driving prohibition. Over .8 second time, criminal charges. People are blasted at .8. There's no need to set an even higher limit at .15.

Concentrate on repeat offenders? The odds are very high they've driven drunk many times before and just have not been caught. Average number of times that a driver has driven drunk is 80 times in the US! Probably not much different in Canada. Why? The odds of being caught are actually very low. How many drunk driving roadblocks has the average person passed through in their life? How many times does a cop pull over a person to check their sobriety? Hell, how many times do you speed and aren't caught? How often do you actually see a cop car versus other traffic? I used to live by the Phoenix Nightclub. The only time the cops showed up was when there was shooting or stabbing. How many drunk drivers do you think got away from that club every Friday and Saturday night?

http://www.statisticbrain.com/drunk-driving-statistics/

A person who drives over .80 and is caught deserves what's coming to them.

 

[lucky_blue]

That statement was correct, as you just agreed. The behavior people here post about, safe sex with SP's, is in fact squeaky clean as compared to a drunk driver. You and I also agreed that people who bare back SP's and potentially spead HIV around are just as bad as drunk drivers are.

I think we are all violently agreeing with each other now.

Of course, everyone - and I mean EVERYONE here only engages in "safe sex with SP's". Let's take SP's out of the picture altogether. There are plenty of people who bareback irresponsibility and who "potentially" and actually spread STI's (unintentionally or not).

Amazing how twisted your thinking is. Again - delusional.

 

[lucky_blue]

Why does any of this matter? I'm reading this specific thread to find out specific information on the clearly identified subject and all you guys are doing is bashing this one user and name calling. He posts 16x a day on average and??

There was a user who was even more prolific, cycleguy007 or something or other... I got tired of reading about his fantastical life so I added him to the block list and moved on. I didn't see any posts from him. If you guys have such disdain for Fuji, just block and move on. There's no awards for being right on a message board... Nobody cares in the real life. The life that actually matters

Some truth to this but why defend the biggest troll on the board?

 

[lucky_blue]

Based on what? All the evidence says otherwise....

Of course, unlike everyone else here, Fuji has a BAC tester built into his brain. It automatically communicates with the starter in his car via bluetooth and disengages the starter at 0.0499999999999%

 

[nottyboi]

Have you not read any of the links I've posted? They have already taken care of that. If you blow between .5 and .8, there is a graduated scale of 1,3 and 7 day suspensions based on the number of previous suspensions in B.C. Ontario is similar. Over .8 first time, driving prohibition. Over .8 second time, criminal charges. People are blasted at .8. There's no need to set an even higher limit at .15.

Concentrate on repeat offenders? The odds are very high they've driven drunk many times before and just have not been caught. Average number of times that a driver has driven drunk is 80 times in the US! Probably not much different in Canada. Why? The odds of being caught are actually very low. How many drunk driving roadblocks has the average person passed through in their life? How many times does a cop pull over a person to check their sobriety? Hell, how many times do you speed and aren't caught? How often do you actually see a cop car versus other traffic? I used to live by the Phoenix Nightclub. The only time the cops showed up was when there was shooting or stabbing. How many drunk drivers do you think got away from that club every Friday and Saturday night?

http://www.statisticbrain.com/drunk-driving-statistics/

A person who drives over .80 and is caught deserves what's coming to them.

Well firstly the percentage is 0.08%. .8% will almost certainly kill you. Also in ALL Those stats I do not see a single mention of BAC. So like I said, there is no real evidence that 0.08 is where the bulk of the problem lies. But stats I HAVE seen seem to indicate most of the problem is 0.15% and higher. I don't think 0.08 should be legal, but it should be a minor offense, with rapidly escalating penalties as you move up in BAC.

 

[nottyboi]

Yet you have been shown evidence that .008 BAC results in a significant number of deaths. You lied about that, and when you were shown the actual data you slithered away.

Nonsense I believe this document shows it pretty clearly:

www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811654.pdf


notice how they try to lump the 0.08 -0.14 together? I would like to see breakdown by 0.01 gradient. But of course that is nicely buried in the stats. Its only when you get to higher BAC that the fatalities tend to skyrocket. As it stands it allows us to conclude very little. This little gem pretty much invalidate their entire methodology:

"Drivers are considered to be alcohol-impaired when their BACs are .08 g/dL or higher. Thus, any fatal crash involving a driver with a BAC of .08 or higher is considered to be an alcohol-impaired-driving crash, and fatalities occurring in those crashes are considered to be alcohol-impaired-driving fatalities."

I think this is the same study you posted a while back and I pretty much said it was nonsense and their gathering and representation of data do not allow one to conclude much if anything.

The there is this:

https://www.motorists.org/issues/dui/myths/

without proper stats it is really impossible to know what the truth is to be honest. And since such bullshit stats are being gathered and promoted by lobby groups, I believe they are intentionally deceiving the public.

It will be interesting to see how hard they fight self driving cars that will shatter their little gravy train.

 

[fuji]

That document totally refutes you. It shows that a third of fatalities involved a driver with BAC over .08, and that the .08 to .14 range itself has a significant increase in fatalities over drivers under .08.

That data indicates we aren't nearly tough enough and should be applying significantly harsher penalties on people at the .08 level.

At .15 and above we should be treating it as equivalent to attempted murder with minimum mandatory sentences of at least ten years in jail. At the .08 level you should be banned from driving for life and face at least two years in prison.

In fact that data shows that even in the .01 to .07 range drivers are causing increased fatalities since they are involved in 6% of the fatalities but it's highly unlikely that on average 6% of drivers have been drinking. So even at that level alcohol is increasing the fatality rate.

 

[nottyboi]

That document totally refutes you. It shows that a third of fatalities involved a driver with BAC over .08, and that the .08 to .14 range itself has a significant increase in fatalities over drivers under .08.

That data indicates we aren't nearly tough enough and should be applying significantly harsher penalties on people at the .08 level.

At .15 and above we should be treating it as equivalent to attempted murder with minimum mandatory sentences of at least ten years in jail. At the .08 level you should be banned from driving for life and face at least two years in prison.

No it does not, it shows they cause 11% of all fatalities. BUT, what % of the driving population does that represent (some info on DUI charges would shed some light on this, but without knowing what % of the driving population that represents and what the increase of fatality rate is by 0.01 BAC it is impossible to conclude ANYTHING, unless you are biased to conclusion, like you are. Why would one group 0.08 -0.14 together ? That stinks of manipulation of data and even a child would be able to see through that let alone an adult with even a SMIDGEN of critical think ability. Then you have their data gathering methodology as stated at the end of the report with invalidates ALL their data and conclusions.

 

[fuji]

Ten percent of the driving population isn't driving around over the legal limit. If they were one person in ten at a ride stop would get arrested.

That is HUGE increase in fatalities.

Even under .08 there's no way that 6% of the time drivers have been drinking. Even that represents a huge increase in fatalities. Even people who sometimes drive while between .01 and .05 will be totally sober on most of their trips.

So that's a huge data point indicating that even .08 is not low enough.