Have you driven drunk? Answer honestly...

[BudweiserCeltic]

I don't know where, but there are places in the US that offer free taxicabs after a certain hour or something. I really like that idea because I really feel most drunk driving is somewhat related to cost of transportation and availability. While I was in the US, I got from place to place in subways, taxis ([dang] those where expensive in Boston), and walking without much inconvenience.

[dark_lord]

nick and champ, i appreciate ur feedback, honesty, and respect. 

could i have worded things differently, maybe.  but its truly how i feel and i dont take it back.  i aplogize if it made anyone unhappy or offended, but those words accurate describe how i feel.  this is one area i have pretty strong feelings on. i do feel it is ignorant, selfish, and pathetic for someone to admit to doing it THEN attempt to defend their reasons/actions.  if someone's decision to potentially put myself, my family, or loved ones at risk, i take offense to it.  as i said b4, im not against people consuming alcohol at all, i just take offense to it when they make a decision to get behind the wheel of a vehicle that will endanger lots of innocent people, when there are other safe alternatives to get home or their destination. 

i think i will just take a step back from this thread for a little while, so my "fire within" doesnt come out the wrong way and offend anyone.

[ChampKind]

Just to chime in here a bit. DL, you know you're my sith, right? I think what Champ was trying to say and why Schupac got so defensive is that, yes, you have every right to your opinion, and, after a rather stupid occurence in my youth that made me reflect on what I was doing, I agree with your opinion, but the way that you and some others voiced their opinions was a bit harsh and condescending. Just a bit.

Now, you have every right to your opinion and the right to voice it. But given the way in which you voiced that opinion and some of the words you and others used, like ignorant, selfish and pathetic, it instantly put Schupac and maybe another person here and there on the defensive because they took those words as insults on their person. Perhaps it was meant that the decision was ignorant, selfish and pathetic and not the person but I can see how someone might instantly get defensive.

As I said in an earlier post, Schupac is young and possibly not as informed on the subject as he could be. And he has a point. Alcohol doesn't impair all people equally after consuming an equal amount of liquor. But the government has to work within the realm of doing what's right for the greater good not what's right for every individual. Therefore, after studies the .08 level was determined to be of the level at which going above was dangerous for the greater good. But I think he got very defensive after perceiving that he was being judged personally and being insulted. Again, just his perception, I'm not saying that's what was happening. And, in defending himself, he may have dug himself a deeper hole.

I will state that drinking and driving is a bad choice. But good people sometimes make bad decisions. Schupac is probably one of those people. But the choice itself, of driving after drinking, even if it is after just 2 beers having been drank within the last 90 minutes, is a dangerous, risky, irresponsible, inconsiderate, stupid decision. Schupac and others will someday, maybe soon, probably learn this and hopefully never make that choice again.

Just thought I'd look at it from afar and say what I was seeing. Hope that helps.

Thanks Nick, that helps to clarify what I had been trying to say.  

[fairweatherfan]

Was about to write one of my usual wall of text posts, but Nick said it very well for me - no one is defending drunk driving, but the extremity of some of the rhetoric in this thread is troubling when you consider that impaired driving, by itself, is a crime about increasing the potential of causing harm, not about actually hurting anyone.  Add to that the fact that 70% of the respondents to this poll admitted to driving after 5+ drinks at least once, and you have a scenario where posters are basically calling the majority of the board awful, selfish people with no moral core who should be jailed and publicly scorned.  From that perspective, it's not surprising that there'd be a bit of a backlash from some, even if they're arguing something many people find categorically indefensible.

People get very, very emotional about this topic, and understandably so: a lot of people (including me) have lost loved ones to impaired drivers.  Impaired driving is a bad idea and puts yourself and others at serious risk, but it's important to always keep in mind that impairment is a continuum, and alcohol is only one factor that can contribute to it.  Schupac isn't a normal person if he's driving at a .07 who suddenly becomes a soulless monster at .08 any more than a sober driver becomes a soulless monster when they use their cell phone and then a normal person again when they turn it off - every voluntary increase in impairment becomes more risky and more worthy of prevention and punishment, but attacking the basic decency and humanity of people who drive impaired, especially when it's only addressed to one group of impaired people and makes no distinction between degrees of impairment, is counterproductive to a reasoned discussion and just leads to a bunch of angry people yelling at one another.  We need to worry about how we can reduce the number of people who drive impaired, not about how harshly we can condemn people who have already done it.

Ok, so that wound up being kind of a wall of text anyway, so I'll close with a joke:  Alcoholism is a disease, but it's the only disease you can get yelled at for having: "[dang it], Otto, you're an alcoholic!"  "[dang it], Otto, you have lupus!"

[Redz]

Schupac isn't a normal person if he's driving at a .07 who suddenly becomes a soulless monster at .08 any more than a sober driver becomes a soulless monster

This is the part that still tears at me 22 years later (I posted an incident earlier in this thread where I [dang] near killed a couple of friends and myself but luckily did not get in an accident or get caught by the police).

I generally go out of my way to hold myself to a high moral standard, treat people with respect, be honest, love my children and wife, embrace friendship and I feel pretty confident that most who know me would regard me in a positive light because of those qualities. I'd like to think those who knew me will remember me for that after I'm gone. 

I had those same standards when I was 18, but I made a reckless decision.  Had I not been so lucky, my legacy, and to a large degree that of my family's, would have been seriously tarnished.

That makes me feel grateful still to this day, but it also makes me feel a bit guilty knowing that I'm no better than any old jerk who killed someone in an accident while drunk.

The key to me is to learn a lesson if one presents itself to you and move on. 

[JSD]

Has anyone considered this? With beer, wine, liquor taxes and OUI income, this country makes a fortune off alcohol consumption. Could there be a better system funded through all this income?

[CDawg834]

I don't know where, but there are places in the US that offer free taxicabs after a certain hour or something. I really like that idea because I really feel most drunk driving is somewhat related to cost of transportation and availability. While I was in the US, I got from place to place in subways, taxis ([dang] those where expensive in Boston), and walking without much inconvenience.

For those of us close to Boston, it would also be helpful if the public transportation didn't shut down an hour before the bars did!  I understand they are hurting for $$$, but couldn't the T stay open until 2:30 Fridays and Saturdays?

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't know where, but there are places in the US that offer free taxicabs after a certain hour or something. I really like that idea because I really feel most drunk driving is somewhat related to cost of transportation and availability. While I was in the US, I got from place to place in subways, taxis ([dang] those where expensive in Boston), and walking without much inconvenience.

For those of us close to Boston, it would also be helpful if the public transportation didn't shut down an hour before the bars did!  I understand they are hurting for $$$, but couldn't the T stay open until 2:30 Fridays and Saturdays?

Completely agree on that.  I understand if they don't want to run the buses all night, but at least keep the T going for awhile longer.  That was always a pain, for sure.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I don't know where, but there are places in the US that offer free taxicabs after a certain hour or something. I really like that idea because I really feel most drunk driving is somewhat related to cost of transportation and availability. While I was in the US, I got from place to place in subways, taxis ([dang] those where expensive in Boston), and walking without much inconvenience.

For those of us close to Boston, it would also be helpful if the public transportation didn't shut down an hour before the bars did!  I understand they are hurting for $$$, but couldn't the T stay open until 2:30 Fridays and Saturdays?

Completely agree on that.  I understand if they don't want to run the buses all night, but at least keep the T going for awhile longer.  That was always a pain, for sure.

They probably don't want people puking in their facilities.

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't know where, but there are places in the US that offer free taxicabs after a certain hour or something. I really like that idea because I really feel most drunk driving is somewhat related to cost of transportation and availability. While I was in the US, I got from place to place in subways, taxis ([dang] those where expensive in Boston), and walking without much inconvenience.

For those of us close to Boston, it would also be helpful if the public transportation didn't shut down an hour before the bars did!  I understand they are hurting for $$$, but couldn't the T stay open until 2:30 Fridays and Saturdays?

Completely agree on that.  I understand if they don't want to run the buses all night, but at least keep the T going for awhile longer.  That was always a pain, for sure.

They probably don't want people puking in their facilities.

Yeah...  I've seen my share of vomiting and peeing in garbage cans in the T stations before.  I suppose there's something to be said for avoiding that.

[Schupac]

Nick and Fairweatherfan did a good job making the points I was trying to make.  I think my language may have been misleading, and the emotion some bring into the discussion may mislead them as well.

And yes, my feeling the need to defend a large portion of the population, that includes me, who hasn't hurt anyone made me dig myself a hole with quick, defensive arguments.

One thing I will say though is this, Nick you made a few references to me being young, and act as if I will someday naturally come to agree with the other posters here.  I may be young, but I have a job, I support myself, I have responsibilities, and I've never been arrested or hurt anyone drinking.  I am not some naive fool with no life experience.  I've been drinking since I was a very wee lad, and have learned my tolerances and yes, learned my physiology.  I know when I am too impaired to drive safely, and when I'm not significantly impaired.

I guess what I was trying to get at by bringing up all the other forms of impairment was twofold.  First, just to deflect some of the condemnation because it seems, in a society that still has some remnants of its puritanical background, alot of people find it easier to condemn drunk drivers because of the source and not the level or effect of their impairment.

Second, it was to illustrate that every time you get on the road, someone is driving impaired.  It might not having to do with drugs or alcohol, but there is someone around you who is driving unsafely.  Maybe they are just changing their CD, but they aren't looking.  And we don't all have accidents every day.  There is a level of impairment that is low enough to be acceptable.  The law has put it at .08 for BAC, which is IMO fair (and is around the 5-6 drinks I've stated I could drive on, given my weight and the time it would take me to drink those).  So if my drinking 5 drinks and being legal makes you think I am a pathetic selfish loser, I certainly do not care.  I'm legally safe to drive.  And as fairweatherfan pointed out, .07 vs .09 is not Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.  If I make an illegal decision to drive at .09, there is not suddenly a gaurantee of disaster.  There is a slight increase in the chance.  It's unfortunate, and in a perfect world it wouldn't happen, but it isn't the end of the world.  People do slightly bad things every day.  And to me, I don't see driving very slightly impaired as more socially irresponsible than not recycling or stealing someone's lunch at work.  At least with those there is a 100% change of negative effects.  THAT logic you can disagree with and I will understand, and we'll have to agree to disagree.  That is just how my brain works.  But if you disagree with me, I hope you disagree with my logic and not my morality.  I'm not advocating hurting people, I'm disagreeing on whether or not people get hurt.

This will be the third time I've said it, but I'm obviously not defending drunk driving.  But drinking and then driving does not HAVE to mean driving drunk.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I don't know where, but there are places in the US that offer free taxicabs after a certain hour or something. I really like that idea because I really feel most drunk driving is somewhat related to cost of transportation and availability. While I was in the US, I got from place to place in subways, taxis ([dang] those where expensive in Boston), and walking without much inconvenience.

For those of us close to Boston, it would also be helpful if the public transportation didn't shut down an hour before the bars did!  I understand they are hurting for $$$, but couldn't the T stay open until 2:30 Fridays and Saturdays?

Completely agree on that.  I understand if they don't want to run the buses all night, but at least keep the T going for awhile longer.  That was always a pain, for sure.

They probably don't want people puking in their facilities.

Yeah...  I've seen my share of vomiting and peeing in garbage cans in the T stations before.  I suppose there's something to be said for avoiding that.

I'm sorry. But seriously, something there should be more public restrooms or something open till late. It's quite hard to hold it in when you're waiting for about an hour for a taxicab you can use in the cold. It's quite ridiculous.

[Chris]

I don't know where, but there are places in the US that offer free taxicabs after a certain hour or something. I really like that idea because I really feel most drunk driving is somewhat related to cost of transportation and availability. While I was in the US, I got from place to place in subways, taxis ([dang] those where expensive in Boston), and walking without much inconvenience.

For those of us close to Boston, it would also be helpful if the public transportation didn't shut down an hour before the bars did!  I understand they are hurting for $$$, but couldn't the T stay open until 2:30 Fridays and Saturdays?

Completely agree on that.  I understand if they don't want to run the buses all night, but at least keep the T going for awhile longer.  That was always a pain, for sure.

They probably don't want people puking in their facilities.

Yeah...  I've seen my share of vomiting and peeing in garbage cans in the T stations before.  I suppose there's something to be said for avoiding that.

Yeah...or it could be because they are one of the most poorly run organizations you will ever find, who burn money like crazy, but never actually improve the services.  When they decided to stop the nightowl buses (which sucked, but were still a godsend when I was in college), I completely lost all faith in the MBTA.

I definitely think that the Government is sending mixed signals when they stop all public transportation before 1am, when bars close at 2am, but then spending a ton of money on advertising campaigns against drunk driving.

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I have to think some of the Boston cab companies are controlling this.

[Chris]

This will be the third time I've said it, but I'm obviously not defending drunk driving.  But drinking and then driving does not HAVE to mean driving drunk.

You are absolutely right about this.  But that is why there are laws, defining what drunk driving is.  Those laws are put in place to protect innocent people. 

If you really know your physiology (which research shows, you likely don't know it as well as you think), then great.  But can you do me a favor, and let me know when and where you plan on doing this next, so I can be as far away from there as possible?

[Schupac]

This will be the third time I've said it, but I'm obviously not defending drunk driving.  But drinking and then driving does not HAVE to mean driving drunk.

You are absolutely right about this.  But that is why there are laws, defining what drunk driving is.  Those laws are put in place to protect innocent people. 

If you really know your physiology (which research shows, you likely don't know it as well as you think), then great.  But can you do me a favor, and let me know when and where you plan on doing this next, so I can be as far away from there as possible?

Sorry I can't tell you where I am.  I think some people in this thread might try to hunt me down and kill me for my legal actions... y'know, to prevent anyone from getting hurt.

Or you could wait until I get a speeding ticket.  Then I'll have to go door to door handing out photographs of my car, and getting signatures on a clipboard stating I notified you I am a negligent monster.

As for when... well that's around 2AM, the most common hour for school children and pregnant mothers to be walking down the middle of the street dressed in all black.

Y'know, I don't think anyone is going to laugh at these jokes.

edit:  To be serious, in my last post I talked about drinking at below the legal limit.  Then I talked about the potential of driving above it.  I don't get why you are disagreeing?