Have you driven drunk? Answer honestly...

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

Drinking and driving is among a number of risky choices that can be made.  The fact that other risky behaviors exist that are not dealt with to the same level of condemnation does not mitigate the decision of driving after drinking. 
Given that:
1) people respond differently to the use of drugs/alcohol,
2) there is an inherent need to generalize when making public policy decisions (i.e., looking out for common good rather than satisfying each individuals needs)
3) many folks are impaired after 4-5 beers (or less) at being able to accurately assess the level of their own impairment

I am glad we have laws that essentially take the guess work out of this decision.  Basically, the idea is don't drink and then drive.

I'd be opposed to laws lowering the drinking age.  I was 18 when laws were 18. I am glad my 18 year old daughter and her friends do not have easy access to alcohol.

I agree that there are other risks that should rise to a higher level of importance and attention in a collective look at public safety.

You make very good points.  TP for level headed argument.

I understand the public policy, and I'm not so opposed to it.  It would be great if laws in general could be applied less ham-handedly, but I understand this isn't Utopia.  My 2nd post was more in response to the other posters here, not the policy itself.  I just feel people condemn drunk drivers on the same level I would condemn a serial rapist.  They are judging disporportionately harshly compared to other crimes.  The absolute vitriol and judgement here is astonishing to me.  It strikes me as extremism, which when coupled with judgement I believe is socially very dangerous.

You can tell how serious I take this because I made it through an entire post without any smart-mouthed comments and quite a few big words...

While I think your last post definitely came off a little...well, ignorant, for the lack of a better word...I do agree with you to a point.  I absolutely agree that there is an unbalanced public response to certain offenses (although I don't think the general sentiment against drunk driving is anywhere close to rapists, or similar crimes...but I get the point), but I definitely do not think the problem is that people are responding too negatively to drunk driving.  The problem is that there are other incredibly risky behaviors, which put others in similar danger that are overlooked.  

Let's face it, the data is pretty conclusive that having a blood-alcohol level higher than the legal limit definitely impairs you, and makes it exponentially tougher to operate a vehicle (or other machinery for that matter) in a safe manner.  

I'll preface this by saying I wasn't offended by what you said, and I'm not trying to be combative now.  But my 2nd post, comparing drunk driving to other similar risky driving practices, was my response to what I thought was other people's ignorant posts on the subject.  If I drink and drive, I am not choosing to endanger someone else's life.  I am making a decision that I am competent to drive.  And frankly I don't trust a complete stranger to make that decision for me.  As in all aspects of life, some people will make bad decisions.  That's how it is.  But saying everyone that does this thing you don't approve of is a terrible person sounds like bigotry to me.

And I think the fact that many of the people who vocally and with much fire and brimstone condemn drunk drivers are now handing out TPs to eachother for not drinking puts a bit of a shadow across the argument.  If you don't drink, that's cool.  It's a healthy decision, like eating oat meal or avoiding red meat.  But if you are giving out these TPs for pure morality, then that means you think drinking is wrong.  And I don't think this should be a debate about morality, but public safety.  So to be fair, I think you're bringing some baggage into the discussion.

To oversimplify this a little bit... it's my decision to drink.  And if I ever get on the wrong side of the law, I'll take my punishment without argument.  But I will not be judged by a group of people who don't know me at all, don't know the situation I might be in, and aren't familiar with the circumstances that even could put a person in that situation.

I hop into this with extreme and acknowledged prejudice, and I fully understand and appreciate that I do not know the details and intricacies of your personal life. However, the line that I identified in your response trouble me greatly.

See, a friend of mine was killed by a drunk driver. A very good friend of mine. He wasn't drinking. The other guy was... long night at the bar with friends, no back story, nothing more then some irresponsible guy who thought he could handle it and clearly couldn't. He swerved into oncoming traffic and killed my completely sober, totally within the rules friend.

If you drink and drive, you're [dang] right you are choosing to endanger someone else's life. You are not choosing to kill anyone, and granted drunk driving is not as bad as say domestic terrorism or serial murder or whatever other crimes you'd like to throw out there, but in it's most basic form you are absolutely choosing to endanger the lives of the drivers of every car you pass on your way (hopefully) home. May you never ever learn that lesson the hard way.

I do not mean to come across like a complete jerk or a "holier then thou" voice in an argument where it's very easy to do so, but the fact is I'm minus a good friend because someone made that same call that you did, and "miscalculated." I am NOT judging you as a person, I know nothing about you, and that is part of the reason why I also do not trust the judgment of complete strangers. I just hope that if you're taking your punishment without argument, it's because you got caught normally and not because you killed someone else with your decision.  

[CoachBo]

If I drink and drive, I am not choosing to endanger someone else's life.  I am making a decision that I am competent to drive.  And frankly I don't trust a complete stranger to make that decision for me.  As in all aspects of life, some people will make bad decisions.  That's how it is.  But saying everyone that does this thing you don't approve of is a terrible person sounds like bigotry to me.

People who drive drunk are making an *impaired* decision, which will directly put other people's lives at risk.  Driving while intoxicated leads to poor decision making / impaired judgment, and slow reaction times.   

To oversimplify this a little bit... it's my decision to drink.  And if I ever get on the wrong side of the law, I'll take my punishment without argument.  But I will not be judged by a group of people who don't know me at all, don't know the situation I might be in, and aren't familiar with the circumstances that even could put a person in that situation.

People can judge you for getting drunk and putting their loved ones at risk as much as they can judge any reckless criminal who has a disregard for the public welfare.  I'm not sure that any "circumstances that ... put a person in that situation" are justifiable; I'd love to hear the rationale for when it's prudent to drive while intoxicated.

Another TP for Roy. It is simply mind-boggling to me that anyone would try to defend the indefensible - getting behind the wheel impaired. And to be frank, I have nothing but contempt for anyone intellectually vacant enough to try to defend such a morally bereft decision. I, too, have lost a family member to a selfish, criminal decision and the driver is behind bars - where he belongs.

Each and every person who does that deserves arrest, incarceration for 48 hours, the disgrace of having their name publicized in the local paper and, I would hope, loss of their job.

There is no acceptable defense whatsoever for driving impaired. Any attempt at one is absurd.

[Schupac]

If I drink and drive, I am not choosing to endanger someone else's life.  I am making a decision that I am competent to drive.  And frankly I don't trust a complete stranger to make that decision for me.  As in all aspects of life, some people will make bad decisions.  That's how it is.  But saying everyone that does this thing you don't approve of is a terrible person sounds like bigotry to me.

People who drive drunk are making an *impaired* decision, which will directly put other people's lives at risk.  Driving while intoxicated leads to poor decision making / impaired judgment, and slow reaction times.   

To oversimplify this a little bit... it's my decision to drink.  And if I ever get on the wrong side of the law, I'll take my punishment without argument.  But I will not be judged by a group of people who don't know me at all, don't know the situation I might be in, and aren't familiar with the circumstances that even could put a person in that situation.

People can judge you for getting drunk and putting their loved ones at risk as much as they can judge any reckless criminal who has a disregard for the public welfare.  I'm not sure that any "circumstances that ... put a person in that situation" are justifiable; I'd love to hear the rationale for when it's prudent to drive while intoxicated.

I'm differentiating between drinking and driving, and driving drunk.  By the very definition of the word, driving while *impaired* means driving at less than full capability, obviously I am not advocating that.  I take argument with stating that having any number of drinks makes me impaired.  I know my physiology, and I can drink 5-6 drinks and have no significant decrease in reaction time or judgement.

I think you misunderstood what I was tyring to say with "circumstances that ... put a person in that situation".  It was in regards to people who are condemning any sort of drinking before driving, but do not drink.  If you do not drink, you wouldn't understand making even a good and safe decision to drive after a few drinks, because you don't make those types of decisions.  Nothing wrong with not drinking, but it would be like a man talking about picking out the most comfortable bra.  Maybe he can imagine, but there's no practical experience.

I drink, and then drive, on a regular basis.  I do not drive drunk.  Even the one time I did drive drunk, I was safe.  I've never run a red light, drifted into another lane, never ran a stop sign or cut someone off.  Even after 2 beers, I drive the speed limit because I know getting pulled over for so much as a failure to signal could mean jail time.  I fail to see how I am a "reckless criminal who has a disregard for the public welfare"  I am a better driver after 5 beers than most people after a cup of coffee.

Hoyo de Monterrey and CoachBo - I already typed the above and then saw your posts.  Please consider the above.  Obviously it would be pretty hard for me to defend driving drunk.  I'm not trying to do that.  I am simply saying that condemning anyone who has a couple of drinks and gets behind the wheel is excessive.

And you can feel free to disagree with me as vehemently as you please it will not offend me (at least not in a way I won't forget in 24 hours).  But for the sake of not getting the thread locked let's all not do personal insults.

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

If I drink and drive, I am not choosing to endanger someone else's life.  I am making a decision that I am competent to drive.  And frankly I don't trust a complete stranger to make that decision for me.  As in all aspects of life, some people will make bad decisions.  That's how it is.  But saying everyone that does this thing you don't approve of is a terrible person sounds like bigotry to me.

People who drive drunk are making an *impaired* decision, which will directly put other people's lives at risk.  Driving while intoxicated leads to poor decision making / impaired judgment, and slow reaction times.   

To oversimplify this a little bit... it's my decision to drink.  And if I ever get on the wrong side of the law, I'll take my punishment without argument.  But I will not be judged by a group of people who don't know me at all, don't know the situation I might be in, and aren't familiar with the circumstances that even could put a person in that situation.

People can judge you for getting drunk and putting their loved ones at risk as much as they can judge any reckless criminal who has a disregard for the public welfare.  I'm not sure that any "circumstances that ... put a person in that situation" are justifiable; I'd love to hear the rationale for when it's prudent to drive while intoxicated.

I'm differentiating between drinking and driving, and driving drunk.  By the very definition of the word, driving while *impaired* means driving at less than full capability, obviously I am not advocating that.  I take argument with stating that having any number of drinks makes me impaired.  I know my physiology, and I can drink 5-6 drinks and have no significant decrease in reaction time or judgement.

I think you misunderstood what I was tyring to say with "circumstances that ... put a person in that situation".  It was in regards to people who are condemning any sort of drinking before driving, but do not drink.  If you do not drink, you wouldn't understand making even a good and safe decision to drive after a few drinks, because you don't make those types of decisions.  Nothing wrong with not drinking, but it would be like a man talking about picking out the most comfortable bra.  Maybe he can imagine, but there's no practical experience.

I drink, and then drive, on a regular basis.  I do not drive drunk.  Even the one time I did drive drunk, I was safe.  I've never run a red light, drifted into another lane, never ran a stop sign or cut someone off.  Even after 2 beers, I drive the speed limit because I know getting pulled over for so much as a failure to signal could mean jail time.  I fail to see how I am a "reckless criminal who has a disregard for the public welfare"  I am a better driver after 5 beers than most people after a cup of coffee.

Hoyo de Monterrey and CoachBo - I already typed the above and then saw your posts.  Please consider the above.  Obviously it would be pretty hard for me to defend driving drunk.  I'm not trying to do that.  I am simply saying that condemning anyone who has a couple of drinks and gets behind the wheel is excessive.

And you can feel free to disagree with me as vehemently as you please it will not offend me (at least not in a way I won't forget in 24 hours).  But for the sake of not getting the thread locked let's all not do personal insults.

I can fully appreciate the need to keep this civil. As I said before, I obviously know nothing about you and it would be downright stupid for me to extensively criticize you (a stranger) in a way that suggests a personal attack.

However, I understand you have not hit anything or run any lights or swerved or whatever. As of this point, thats great news. The fact remains though it only takes one time. We are not dealing with certainties, we are dealing with increased and decreased probabilities. There can be no denying that as you drink and get behind the wheel, you are (even very slightly) increasing the risk you endanger someone else.

I also take it you've never lost anyone close to you due to the stupidity and avoidable poor decision making of another. I think you might take a different view (again not knowing you) should you lose a loved one because some other guy who survived the crash thought he was a better driver after 5 drinks then most after coffee.

I am no Mormon. I drink. But to date I have made the decision to avoid endangering myself and more importantly innocent others by not driving. I sit on no pedestal, but rather recognize that it takes a single mistake to ruin an untold number of lives.

I guess we will never come to a consensus on this, and can only truly hope that you never have to learn the message I'm trying to convey here firsthand.

[Rondo_is_better]

One thing: 21 is an arbitrary age. Either make it 18 or 25. 21 is just an inconvenient compromise between warring factions and it doesn't satisfy anyone.

Other than that, I'd like to plead the fifth of Jack on this thread topic.

[Schupac]

Hoyo De Monterrey:

I'm not quoting the entire post here so that this thing doesn't end up 30 pages long.  I didn't think you were personally insulting me at all.and you are right we will likely not come to agreement on this.  It is an emotionally charged issue.  I will say though, that it isn't fair argument to assume that I only think I am a better driver after a few than most people are period.  Since we don't know eachother, you don't really have a basis to say it isn't true.

Maybe I am wrong, but sitting at work sober right now, I still believe it is true.  I drive safely.


And just one general question here for anyone that chooses to answer it:

If a person stays up late watching TV, goes to bed and gets up 4 hours later, then hits someone while driving impaired because of their lack of sleep, would you have the same level of indignation and contempt as you would for a drunk driver?  It seems to me both people are making a callous decision that leads to tragedy.  And should this sort of thing be illegal?  If it can be proved you were "DWI" (driving while impaired), even though there is no drug/alcohol reason for it, do you deserve the same treatment as a drunk driver?


EDIT:  I'm leaving work for now so feel free to lambast me in my absence.  I'll be back tomorrow.

[BigAlTheFuture]

I wasn't necessarily drunk. Had a few beers. It was the dumbest thing I've ever done. This was junior year of high school. Never did it since. And never will again.

[Cman]

I voted 9 or more.  I used to do that a bunch, and ended up getting arrested.  This was about 10 years ago, and I had to go through a program.  I have been a different person since. 

If you are a young person reading this who drinks a lot, please take it to heart that you should not drink and drive.  Thankfully, no one was ever hurt by my actions.

[JSD]

My bad... I added "never" 

[nickagneta]

Schupac,

First off let me say that I too was once young and thought certain things about my physiology. But let me assure you that after 5-6 drinks(1 drink=1-12 oz. beer or 1-8 oz. serving of wine or 1-6 oz. mixed drink or 1 shot of 80 proof liquor) within a limited time period, you are without a doubt going to be impaired in some way.

Now, I'm a big guy and it takes a bit to get me feeling anything and even more before I even give the appearance of being drunk. My friends have for years always been amzed at how sober I appear after drinking as much as they do. But just because I might control myself better than most doesn't mean that my decsion making capabilities haven't been impaired.

Sometimes when driving a car drunk it's not just the physical impairment that could cause a problem but the decision making that does. Even soberpeople make bad decisions that lead to accidents. If after having several drinks you are not physically impaired your sense of judgment will be and all it takes is one bad decision at 35 MPH or more and you can kill either yourself or someone else.

I've driven drunk before but haven't for decades. I found things that meant more to me than a long walk home, $50 for a taxi, $75 for a motel room, or the price of having to make a loved one angry by calling them extra late and waking them up and telling them they need to come and pick me up. Those things were my wife, my kids and my life.

I'm not going to call anyone who has done this or currently does this names. I'm not going to give TPs to anyone that says that aren't going to do it. But, DO I feel it is irresponsible for a person to do it, yes. Do I feel it is wrong to do it? Yes. But I do strongly urge anyone who does do it to not do it ever again and if worse comes to worse and you need a ride, call me and I'll come get you. It's what I now tell my older boys who have reached drinking age. Never do it. Not even once. It just isn't worth it. For you are anyone else. Call a friend, a family member, anyone. Set up a pact with someone close to you and be each others driver if the needs be. Let each other know that know matter where they are or what time it is that you can be reached and that you will get each other a ride.

Maybe that helps you. Maybe not. But when anyone steps behind the wheel after drinking they are endangering themselves and anyone who comes within their vicinity until such time as they stop driving. And here's the kicker. You can't guarantee you won't come in contact with other people or cars. So no matter what, you are endangering others.

[Chris]

If a person stays up late watching TV, goes to bed and gets up 4 hours later, then hits someone while driving impaired because of their lack of sleep, would you have the same level of indignation and contempt as you would for a drunk driver? 

I'm not going to get into the rest of your posts, just because I vehemently disagree with your stance, but I feel the need to comment on this, since I have a good deal of knowledge about this particular subject.

I absolutely believe that driving while drowsy is incredibly dangerous, and needs to be controlled more...especially with truckers, and policemen.  However, the example you gave is not very good.

First of all, people are much better at determining whether they are too tired, than they are too drunk. 

Secondly, if someone gets 4 hours of sleep, but had not had a lot of sleep debt in the recent past, they wouldn't necessarily be impaired...and would almost certainly not be anywhere close to as impaired as a drunk driver.  This is supported by a lot of research.  People having a blood-alcohol level higher than .08 are ussually impaired, this is also supported by a lot of research.

Now, if you are talking about someone who has been up for 24 straight hours, and/or has had a recent history of restricted sleep, then there might be a case. 

I think this is an important cause, but it really is also important to understand the details of what you are talking about. 

[EJPLAYA]

It does no good at all to argue with someone who doesn't think that driving after drinking is not an issue "for them" because they obviously have little concern for others and their safety. Interesting thing about people's definitions of freedom and not wanting to be bothered or inconvenienced even if it means taking away the freedoms of other people. When your free choice and decision takes away my rights then that is where you no longer get to choose. You don't get to decide that you were only "barely impaired" or that it really wasn't a big deal, especially when you are making that call when you are under the influence as Roy so nicely stated. If you are going to drink then you sure better ALWAYS put yourself in a cab or have someone else drive you because if you don't you are taking a chance with someone else's life. If you disagree then you are so selfish that you really don't get a vote in this. The only way to stop this from happening is harsher consequences. There's a reason that they don't have problems with stealing in countries the penalty for getting caught is cutting off their hands.

[ACF]

Drivng drunk is awful, but after a few yrs on celticsblog this question must be addressed as well-                                                                                            Have you posted on CelticsBlog drunk? Answer honestly... 

It has happened a few times.
I'm quite sure, though, that I were not
putting people's lives at risk 

[fairweatherfan]

I'm just gonna leave this lying here:

Extensive research has shown that talking on a cell phone while driving produces a statistically equal level of impairment as driving with a BAC of .08.  Texting while driving is more impairing than that. 

Discuss!

[ACF]

I'm just gonna leave this lying here:

Extensive research has shown that talking on a cell phone while driving produces a statistically equal level of impairment as driving with a BAC of .08.  Texting while driving is more impairing than that. 

Discuss!

If you're driving, don't text.
And if you're texting, don't drive.