Pulled Over after Drinking and Driving

[Captain Vlad]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Quite obviously, a policeman can always find "probable cause" to stop you, at any point he wishes, my friend.

Sure he will. But he'll at least have to think about his cover story, and the police need as many reminders as possible that they work for us.

They don't need blanket permission to search anyone anytime they feel like it. Pretty soon those random searches stop being so random, and it's not always a high probability of illegal activity being found that motivates that...that's one of the better reasons to ensure that such things stay illegal...so that private citizens have some legal retaliation should the police begin to abuse their powers.

Some may gripe at my last post,
No Personal intent,
But Drinking and Driving in Any Way,
Even 8 hrs later,
Is Lethal,
In Any Country,
Over here you would get Life,
Period,
If You Hit a Person with Drink while Driving,
You are Guilty,
I've arrived at a lot of Accidents,
Most are induced by Drink,Drugs,Tiredness,
My Job?
I'm in the Rescue Service,
My Final comment here,
Never Ever,Ever,Ever,
Drink And Drive,
It Kills.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Zachstar

Wrong on both counts.

Any beer recently ingested impairs your ability to drive. No matter how safe or how much you trust yourself. It is not YOUR highway. It belongs to the taxpayers. Don't like it? Pull a tea party but don't use any road to get there as that is obviously socialism! You may be under the limit but you are morally impaired in my view.

The police have the duty to protect folks and the courts have ruled for that time and time again. Folks who constantly complain about the constitutionality of the stops conveniently fail to note the numerous court rulings on the subject. The police CAN stop you and test you if even the slightest question on your ability to safely operate the vechicle. And frankly I do not believe Arm was driving "Stone Cold Sober" I think his check was valid but a random bit of bad luck for the rest of us in my view that he tested under the limit at the time and was not drug away to jail to face harsh fines.

Somehow I bet you would like that ... people being hauled off to jail not for breaking a law but rather disagreeing with your point of view.

Frankly, I believe people with the stark emotionalism you display should not be allowed to publically post an opinion (sarcasm) - but hey, the law protects you, right?

Again, enjoy your high horse and moral self-gratification. The good news here is that most people won't even think of condemning someone for NOT BREAKING a law.

By the way, suggesting that you wish that I hadn't tested under the limit is STUPID, because that means you wish I was driving OVER the limit, which I was not. By saying that, it means that you wish I was on the road over the legal limit and therefore would be arrested for breaking a law.

Now, why exactly would you wish that I would break a law? Especially considering that doing so would involve me putting others at risk. Hmm ... seems like you don't give a damn about the "innocents" you proclaim concern for, as you would seem to wish that I would NOT be on the road while over the limit.

Busted.

Your insistance on this issue is absurd, albeit entertaining.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

my view on this is simple.

1. Never drive if you have had 3 or more beers (assume 12 oz bottles)

2. The police have no right to stop you unless you prove to be suspect of some wrong doing... ie a body dragging behind your vehicle, or a trunk popped open revealing a bound and gagged hooker, or your unable to maintain lanes etc

The problem with point one is that it is incomplete: three or more beers on what time period? If someone has 3 beers over the course of 8 hours, their BAC is likely to be zero (depending on when the last drink is consumed).

There are fairly accurate scales regarding drinks-to-BAC, and I personally recommend sticking to them.

As far as point two goes, I agree completely.

[Aramike]

Vlad, Letum, and Undersea ... I either agree with your points or find them to be quite provocative.

Appreciated.

[Zachstar]

What?

Of course you wish to try to twist this into some battle over your "rights"

In case you have not got it yet. I 100 percent do not believe you were under the limit during the duration of the drive but merely got tested at the wrong time. The weakness of modern tests.

In my view you WERE putting others at risk so my issue is you putting them at risk in my view despite your continued attempts to twist this otherwise.

Yes I would rather hear about you paying a big ass fine and having your license suspended. The damage to your life would have been a big incentive for you to never pull this crap again. Alas you will likely do it again and the chances of you being caught are not good enough in this country. Just like the many others who feel that they can drive with "Just a little" (Except in your case it was nowhere near a little)

Lets keep it clear the only life I don't give a damn about is yours because it was YOUR choice to drink and drive so you give up any sympathy at that point.

How many more have to die Arm? How many more lives destroyed before people like you start turning down the beers until you get home and stop with the views that you can drive safely with just a little? When does the excuses stop?

[Tchocky]

No c*nts on me, drugstable.

[Aramike]

In case you have not got it yet. I 100 percent do not believe you were under the limit during the duration of the drive but merely got tested at the wrong time. The weakness of modern tests.

Unfortunately for you, I have gotten your point. And your unqualified assessment of modern testing versus the qualified assessment of the test itself, and the police officer on the scene leads me to believe you are grandstanding.

It's actually quite hilarious.


In any case, your "belief" stands up to NO scientific reasoning whatsoever, and is clearly nothing more than a "you drank alcohol, therefore you are bad" type of argument. That's emotionalism at its finest.

Yes I would rather hear about you paying a big ass fine and having your license suspended. The damage to your life would have been a big incentive for you to never pull this crap again. Alas you will likely do it again and the chances of you being caught are not good enough in this country. Just like the many others who feel that they can drive with "Just a little" (Except in your case it was nowhere near a little)

No where near the little? I was under the legal limit. In ADDITION, the officer who pulled me over felt I was fit to drive.

Do you have ANY basis for your opinion? Were you there unknown to me? Or are you just the blowhard you're making yourself out to be?

Lets keep it clear the only life I don't give a damn about is yours because it was YOUR choice to drink and drive so you give up any sympathy at that point.

I am unconcerned with your sympathy as, due to my not being arrested, I broke no laws and require none.

Again, on this issue you're nothing more than a blow hard. And, you're one that does not have my sympathy.

How many more have to die Arm? How many more lives destroyed before people like you start turning down the beers until you get home and stop with the views that you can drive safely with just a little? When does the excuses stop?

And yet again, you fail to convince me (or any other logical mind) that I did anything wrong to begin with, as proofed by my being PROVED legal.

And besides, who the hell are you to act as though you were there and knew the circumstances of the situation (ie, whether or not I was a danger to anyone else)? You're nothing more than an egotistical blowhard who doesn't give a DAMN about the innocents you profess to care about, as PROVEN by your previous statements. You have yet to furnish proof of your "friends" killed by "drunk" drivers at .06, or even .10 BAC.

Unlike you, I REALLY care about those innocents. I said very early on in this thread that I support stiffer penalties for truly impaired drivers. Also, I support the same penalties for those who show signs of impairment due to fatigue, a point which you conveniently ignore.

Grandstanding perhaps? Indeed. In fact, you're doing nothing BUT grandstanding. It's quite humorous.

Buh bye.

Voting for subsim drinking party in Wisconsin.

[Onkel Neal]

You need to calm down and stop making this personal.

Originally Posted by Zachstar

What?

Of course you wish to try to twist this into some battle over your "rights"

In case you have not got it yet. I 100 percent do not believe you were under the limit during the duration of the drive but merely got tested at the wrong time. The weakness of modern tests.

In my view you WERE putting others at risk so my issue is you putting them at risk in my view despite your continued attempts to twist this otherwise.

Yes I would rather hear about you paying a big ass fine and having your license suspended. The damage to your life would have been a big incentive for you to never pull this crap again. Alas you will likely do it again and the chances of you being caught are not good enough in this country. Just like the many others who feel that they can drive with "Just a little" (Except in your case it was nowhere near a little)

Lets keep it clear the only life I don't give a damn about is yours because it was YOUR choice to drink and drive so you give up any sympathy at that point.

How many more have to die Arm? How many more lives destroyed before people like you start turning down the beers until you get home and stop with the views that you can drive safely with just a little? When does the excuses stop?

Hehe, I would say drink and drive in GTA4, in RL get a cab if you plan to have some beverages

[Fincuan]

Originally Posted by Aramike

And yet again, you fail to convince me (or any other logical mind) that I did anything wrong to begin with, as proofed by my being PROVED legal.

You're missing quite a few peoples' points here by sticking to the legal defense. "Legal" only depends on the country or state your at, and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with a person's ability to drive. It can and will be impaired with any amount of alcohol in your blood. Besides you said yourself that the limit at your place was .08 and your level was .06, so I'd say that proves very well you weren't sober and the policeman didn't shoot that far off the target by stopping you. Up here that close a result would land you waiting with the officers to deliver another test to see which way the level is going(the limit here is 0.05).

Here's what good old Wikipedia says on the effects of alcohol:

Blood alcohol content between 0.06 - 0.10:
Effects on behaviours:

• Blunted Feelings
• Disinhibition
• Extroversion
• Impaired Sexual Pleasures

Impairment:

• Reflexes
• Reasoning
• Depth Perception
• Distance Acuity
• Peripheral Vision
• Glare Recovery

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Fincuan

the limit here is 0.05.

Same here. (for beginners and people under 21 years it's 0.0)

Here's what good old Wikipedia says on the effects of alcohol:

Blood alcohol content between 0.06 - 0.10:
Effects on behaviours:

• Blunted Feelings
• Disinhibition
• Extroversion
• Impaired Sexual Pleasures

Impairment:

• Reflexes
• Reasoning
• Depth Perception
• Distance Acuity
• Peripheral Vision
• Glare Recovery

If you have a BAC of more than 0.03 here and you are involved in an accident then you have a real problem. BAC over 0.03 are known to have an effect on once ability to drive. The willingness to take risks raises and the car handling is not as accurate as it is at 0.0. Or so the lawmakers say.
Source (since these are German rules it is unfortunately in German):
http://www.finanztip.de/recht/verkehr/03prom.htm

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Rilder

Voting for subsim drinking party in Wisconsin.

Heh, good idea!

You're missing quite a few peoples' points here by sticking to the legal defense. "Legal" only depends on the country or state your at, and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with a person's ability to drive. It can and will be impaired with any amount of alcohol in your blood. Besides you said yourself that the limit at your place was .08 and your level was .06, so I'd say that proves very well you weren't sober and the policeman didn't shoot that far off the target by stopping you. Up here that close a result would land you waiting with the officers to deliver another test to see which way the level is going(the limit here is 0.05).

The legal defense is the only defense that matters. Anything else is just opinion, some of which is qualified, while others are not. Besides, had I been driving in any way erratically the officer could have preventing me from continuing to drive, despite the test result.

[Aramike]

Blood alcohol content between 0.06 - 0.10:

Effects on behaviours:

• Blunted Feelings
• Disinhibition
• Extroversion
• Impaired Sexual Pleasures

Impairment:

• Reflexes
• Reasoning
• Depth Perception
• Distance Acuity
• Peripheral Vision
• Glare Recovery

This is where some critical thinking must come into play. At .06 these effects are extremely mild if not non-existant in many cases. Even someone at .10 may only face slight effects, albeit stronger than lower BAC levels.

In any case, someone at .06 will often be more capable of driving a car than somone who's moderately fatigued. Both individuals (in this state, anyway) are legal to drive.

As such I am curious as to the reason for the outrage against someone at .06 versus someone who's simply tired? Clearly, safety and capability aren't REALLY the concern - at least, not completely. I believe that there has been an outright attempt and demonizing alcohol by politically motivated organizations such as MADD.

Look, if these people REALLY wanted to solve the problem, they wouldn't be after people with low BAC levels. Another point that seems to be ignored here is that people at .06 aren't the ones out there killing other people.

Penalizing those who are at a minimal risk the same as those who are at a dangerous one is counter-intuitive, in my opinion.

Also, something to consider is the law with respect to OTHER drugs. Let's say someone had a prescription for Vicodin, took a pill and drove. Is that illegal? The answer is yes and no. Yes if that person is found to be impaired, no if that person is not. Food for thought.