Drinking a beer while driving?

I don't understand whether there's a logic gap, etc, what the problem is... I think where dayhiker is going, is where I was going before Comedy Central interrupted. Should people be able to trust their own individual judgment whether they are "OK" to drive after drinking "a little"? I say, if you have been drinking, even "a little", either stay your butt where you are, or have someone that HAS NOT CONSUMED ALCOHOL to drive you. Some of you folks are right, people are going to drink, including yourself perhaps. I GET that. So, don't drive. Is that really difficult to understand that your judgment "may" be impaired, even when you think you're "OK"? And if that's the case, what should be done? If you don't know if you're "OK" for sure, and you drive, you're gambling, with lives. People are overestimating their decision-making capabilities all the time.

I remember watching my father-in-law, on hands and knees, making his way to the door on the front porch of his home. I was sitting with my future wife (we were dating) on the couch. He commenced to crawl to the edge of the porch and puke. He then staggered in and went to bed. The only thing I could think was why was he driving, how on earth did he make it home, and was he drinking on the way home? This goes on in America every day and night, and shouldn't. You guys can argue semantics, I'm just saying how it should be. You should not drive after drinking. Period.
 
Last edited:
No, you are pointing out that a single buddy felt that one affected him. If I apply my personal experience, I come to a different conclusion.

I say we stick to the scientific studies that have led to the current limits in blood alcohol rather than make something up based on subjective criteria.

And, if the scientific evidence changes, I would be more than happy to revisit the legal blood alcohol level.

This person has a masters in an scientific field and is well aware of the scientific method. If he consistantly noted a difference after one beer, then it's actually possible there is a cause and effect there. Yes, that means for him. If you want to continue arguing minutia over something that was casually thrown out there, knock yourself out. I think I agree with SD on this one.
 
Yes, I do see the logical gap, but I don't think it's where you intended...

The removal of open container laws doesn't make DUI legal. It's legal for me to wear a crimson hat in public if I wish. if someone robs a bank wearing a similar hat and I'm nearby, I might be detained for questioning due to my crimson hat. The same is true with alcohol. Right now, in most states it's perfectly legal to drive after drinking, as long as your BAC is below the legal limit - there's zero reason that would change. Whether the driver had two beers at Chili's or sucked two down on the way home make zero difference - either his BAC is legal or it's not.

Fair enough. I see the logical conclusion there. I guess I just don't see waiting until you get where you're going as a huge sacrifice of civil liberties and personal freedoms. Imo, allowing open containers increases the probability of inadvertent intoxication. For the sake of myself and my loved ones, I'd prefer the laws stay the way they are.

Fun thread.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
... before Comedy Central interrupted...
Apropos of nothing:

funny-pictures-gift-kitten-was-shaken.jpg
 
Be careful, I believe it's Mississippi that won't sell you cold beer, but you can buy warm beer, a styrofoam cooler, and a bag of ice.

Only in some counties like LaFayette (where Ole Miss is). Interestingly, the beer just can't be refrigerated. There's a Barn, with a beer permit, that isn't insulated, so you can get cold beer from Oct - April. :D
Posted via Mobile Device
 
This person has a masters in an scientific field and is well aware of the scientific method. If he consistantly noted a difference after one beer, then it's actually possible there is a cause and effect there...
So, your buddy regularily sits on the floor with his toddlers drinking beer and playing pong? ;) :biggrin2:

Just kidding - some people get too up tight. This is just a web discussion.

funnysign03.jpg
 
No where in this thread has anyone condoned drunk driving.

It is far more likely that a person who is driving drunk got drunk at home or at a bar than while cruising down the street with a beer in his hand.

Allowing people to drink a beer while driving is a whole lot less risky than letting people drive to bars to drink. Are we ready to shut down bars? I mean, if this is really about safety, that is a much, much greater risk - right?

And what about restaurants that serve alcohol? Ever seen the amount of alcohol that some people consume at dinner and then get behind the wheel? Crazy stuff. We need to pass laws that no longer allow the sale of alcohol at a venue from which a person might have to drive home, right?

How far are we willing to take this to be safe? Because venues that serve alcohol are much more dangerous than laws that allow a person to drink a can of beer on his way home from work.

This is the best point in this whole thread..
 
I have never been moved by the "if it would save just one life" arguments. I would not even choose to save my own life, much less the life of a random person, if it meant a tyranny of laws for everyone else.

Oh, it's tyranny I'm proposing! Tyranny, I Say!

And I'm sure if your life or the lives of loved ones, through death or maiming, were altered by a reckless individual, that your opinion would stay the same.
Zero tolerance attitudes are most definitely tyranny.

My commitment to liberty is strong enough to withstand the slings and arrows of unfortunate events. My mother has been shot. I am a staunch opponent of gun control. It is no virtue to willingly discard a belief system just because something makes it personal. It just makes you a hypocrite.
 
Only in some counties like LaFayette (where Ole Miss is). Interestingly, the beer just can't be refrigerated. There's a Barn, with a beer permit, that isn't insulated, so you can get cold beer from Oct - April. :D
Posted via Mobile Device
:cheers2:
You're right. What's asinine is that I believe I can go JUST across the Lafayette/Panola County line on Highway 6 and get me a cold one. I'm not sure about the rest of the state, I've never paid that much attention. Usually I just run down to the nearest bar or casino (as is the case when I'm in Biloxi) in town when I'm out on business (if the county is wet). I may even be able to in Tupelo, but again, I've not spent much time there, except to stop for gas.

Then again, asinine and alcohol laws seem to go hand in hand.
 
I've been wondering for about 6 pages if Jessica is as sorry as I am that she started this thread. :rolleyes:

And let's hear it for Mississippi for allowing folks to use the good sense God gave them!


Hehe. I just asked because of what my co-worker stated yesterday. I didn't think it would be such a heated debate :eek2:. I guess I should have known :D.
 
Zero tolerance attitudes are most definitely tyranny.

My commitment to liberty is strong enough to withstand the slings and arrows of unfortunate events. My mother has been shot. I am a staunch opponent of gun control. It is no virtue to willingly discard a belief system just because something makes it personal. It just makes you a hypocrite.

There goes to write that hit song "Alone in My Principles". Obviously, you're not alone. But there has been a lot of good done through people taking death personally. Whether it be foundations toward finding causes and cures to debilitating diseases, to folks organizing against drunk driving, to the hideous "meth" hearse I saw at a football game a couple of weeks ago. I guess if folks want to stop senseless death, it's hypocrisy. Liberty is great and all, but I didn;t pick a mate for life, and have wonderful children, so that I could lose them to something like what is being discussed. You have your belief system, and I have mine. Doesn;t mean I'm asking for total chaos, or let's have our liberty stripped. Simply saying folks should use the common sense that the good Lord gave them.
 
Be careful, I believe it's Mississippi that won't sell you cold beer, but you can buy warm beer, a styrofoam cooler, and a bag of ice.

And you can drink that beer while driving! :biggrin2:

I remember watching my father-in-law, on hands and knees, making his way to the door on the front porch of his home. I was sitting with my future wife (we were dating) on the couch. He commenced to crawl to the edge of the porch and puke. He then staggered in and went to bed. The only thing I could think was why was he driving, how on earth did he make it home, and was he drinking on the way home? This goes on in America every day and night, and shouldn't. You guys can argue semantics, I'm just saying how it should be. You should not drive after drinking. Period.

And your father in law was WRONG to do that. But that doesn't mean plenty of other people don't do it responsibly. I have a general rule. I know that I can still drive just fine when I've had two normal alcohol percentage beers. My alcohol percentage is well under 0.08 with two beers. I know that it takes one hour for your system to "burn off" one beer. So I get the first two beers free, but then after that I wait one hour per beer before I drive. But if I am messing liquor, I wait even longer than that.

But that is one of the GREAT things about living in Philly. It is very walkable. Since I moved into the city a few years back, I can drink as much as I want and not worry about anything. Many times, I will park my car when I get home from work on Friday and don't move my car again until Monday morning. If I don't feel like walking (like if it is cold or rainy), I can take a cab home and most likely it doesn't even cost $10.
 
There goes to write that hit song "Alone in My Principles". Obviously, you're not alone. But there has been a lot of good done through people taking death personally. Whether it be foundations toward finding causes and cures to debilitating diseases, to folks organizing against drunk driving, to the hideous "meth" hearse I saw at a football game a couple of weeks ago. I guess if folks want to stop senseless death, it's hypocrisy.
Err, no, those aren't government created foundations, are they? You're free to support them or not, etc.

Equating MADD with laws that don't appear to have any impact whatsoever on the result of drinking and driving is truly comparing apples with oranges.
 
Err, no, those aren't government created foundations, are they? You're free to support them or not, etc.

Equating MADD with laws that don't appear to have any impact whatsoever on the result of drinking and driving is truly comparing apples with oranges.

Err, well people getting active because it became personal, and affecting legislation through organization, is a possibility. Drinking, not illegal. Driving with good license, not illegal. Driving with open container in most states, illegal. Driving under legal limit, not illegal. Driving over legal limit, illegal. Deciding whether you're a big enough boy to handle your alochol consumption, your decision. So what we're doing is we're taking something perfectly legal, and for no other good reason but because we want to, we are walking the dangerously thin line between sobriety and drunkenness, trying to decide whether we should drive or not. Having the right to have an open container would only exacerbate things. That has been my point. Let's take a bad situation and make it worse. Huh? Like someone alluded to, driving is a privilege, and should be treated as such. Why risk it? I don't understand that, much less risking your life and the lives of others by your perhaps faulty judgment of your own driving capabilities after drinking. There are som many stories of folks that thought they had everything under control. Don't fool yourself... It's not a joke. Having the right to have an open container would only further help to jeopardize the driving privilege, and help you endanger lives... These are the points I'm trying to get across. Apples, oranges, semantics, whatever, what I've said above is what I said earlier. I'm sure I could find yet other different ways to put the same point, but someone else will come up with more semantics, so now, I shut up.

And the people said AMEN! :tongue:
 
...Deciding whether you're a big enough boy to handle your alochol consumption, your decision. So what we're doing is we're taking something perfectly legal, and for no other good reason but because we want to, we are walking the dangerously thin line between sobriety and drunkenness, trying to decide whether we should drive or not. Having the right to have an open container would only exacerbate things. That has been my point. Let's take a bad situation and make it worse...
I appreciate your passion for this issue. I won't drive if I have had more than one drink. That is my rule, so that I don't have to guess whether or not I have had too much. But you seem insistent that eliminating open container laws will lead to greater incidents of drunken driving. Well, the statistics do not support your argument. States with open container laws fall into the same range as states without open container laws when it comes to drunken driving offenses.

So, as much as it may seem like common sense, the reality proves otherwise. Your passion is clouding your objectivity.

Drunk driving statistics
 
My business partner told me he used to feel this way. Then (ealry 80's) he noticed how quickly his score fell on the Atari Pong game after just one beer. He said it dramatically changed how he viewed driving after just one beer. After 1, you're not conscious of the effects, but they're there. As a PS, the person telling me this is 6'-6" and probably 230#, so no, having a low bodyweight didn't enhance the result.

You should tell your friend to try playing Mario Kart after a few. After the USCe game I wasn't in the mood for more football so I decided to waste some time playing my son's Wii. I think you know that I had more beers than one but my driving didn't meet my usual standards.:wink:
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads