The most politically incorrect thread of all time.

[PredFan]

Politically incorrect because I'll get hammered on all sides by everyone. It's politically incorrect because no one would even think of saying it in public, until now:


I drink and drive. I have been drinking and driving home since I was 17. I am now 53. Mind you, it doesn't happen much these days simply because I drink less than I used to. But I still do. I do it because I CAN drink and drive and I have to get home. Designated drivers? Ha! Anyone EVER do that?

I have never gotten so much as a ticket when driving under the influence, nor as much as a fender bender. How do I know this? Because I always remember everything up until the point when I pass out. I believe it is something in my make up that processes alchohol differently. I'm not really sure, but I do know that it is genetic. Both of my brothers have the ability also.So do my daughters, though none of us ever talk about it. It's too PC to even mention among kin. I am always capable of control. I laugh more, and feel high, but when I need to, I can be in control.

Why do I say this? Why post this? Because I'm anonimous here and I have a point that I think is valid.

I believe that there are many others like me out there. You never hear about them because they never get stopped nor cause harm to people AND they too, never talk about it. Also, my point in this post is that I believe that the police practice of road blocks and random checks should be stopped. There are those who are not capable of driving under the influence and they can be seen and recognised by anyone. If you are seen to be driving impaired then by all means you should be stopped. In my case, since I drive very well, I should not be randomly stopped and checked. Heck, I'm probably a safer driver when I've been drinking. I concetrate on the road more for fear of getting stopped.

Hammer away!

 

[top gun]

Politically incorrect because I'll get hammered on all sides by everyone. It's politically incorrect because no one would even think of saying it in public, until now:


I drink and drive. I have been drinking and driving home since I was 17. I am now 53. Mind you, it doesn't happen much these days simply because I drink less than I used to. But I still do. I do it because I CAN drink and drive and I have to get home. Designated drivers? Ha! Anyone EVER do that?

I have never gotten so much as a ticket when driving under the influence, nor as much as a fender bender. How do I know this? Because I always remember everything up until the point when I pass out. I believe it is something in my make up that processes alchohol differently. I'm not really sure, but I do know that it is genetic. Both of my brothers have the ability also.So do my daughters, though none of us ever talk about it. It's too PC to even mention among kin. I am always capable of control. I laugh more, and feel high, but when I need to, I can be in control.

Why do I say this? Why post this? Because I'm anonimous here and I have a point that I think is valid.

I believe that there are many others like me out there. You never hear about them because they never get stopped nor cause harm to people AND they too, never talk about it. Also, my point in this post is that I believe that the police practice of road blocks and random checks should be stopped. There are those who are not capable of driving under the influence and they can be seen and recognised by anyone. If you are seen to be driving impaired then by all means you should be stopped. In my case, since I drive very well, I should not be randomly stopped and checked. Heck, I'm probably a safer driver when I've been drinking. I concetrate on the road more for fear of getting stopped.

Hammer away!

Pred we REALLY appreciate this you have no idea!!!

It's important and sometimes difficult to accurately gauge someone's mind set, intellectual ability and values with mere posts and no face to face discussion.

You've cleared that up for us now... thanks again.

Narsasistic... in denial... dangerous alcoholic willing to roll the dice on killing innocent people at any time. You said you're a Republican Christian correct?

Take notes folks... take notes...

 

[Pandora]

Politically incorrect because I'll get hammered on all sides by everyone. It's politically incorrect because no one would even think of saying it in public, until now:


I drink and drive. I have been drinking and driving home since I was 17. I am now 53. Mind you, it doesn't happen much these days simply because I drink less than I used to. But I still do. I do it because I CAN drink and drive and I have to get home. Designated drivers? Ha! Anyone EVER do that?

I have never gotten so much as a ticket when driving under the influence, nor as much as a fender bender. How do I know this? Because I always remember everything up until the point when I pass out. I believe it is something in my make up that processes alchohol differently. I'm not really sure, but I do know that it is genetic. Both of my brothers have the ability also.So do my daughters, though none of us ever talk about it. It's too PC to even mention among kin. I am always capable of control. I laugh more, and feel high, but when I need to, I can be in control.

Why do I say this? Why post this? Because I'm anonimous here and I have a point that I think is valid.

I believe that there are many others like me out there. You never hear about them because they never get stopped nor cause harm to people AND they too, never talk about it. Also, my point in this post is that I believe that the police practice of road blocks and random checks should be stopped. There are those who are not capable of driving under the influence and they can be seen and recognised by anyone. If you are seen to be driving impaired then by all means you should be stopped. In my case, since I drive very well, I should not be randomly stopped and checked. Heck, I'm probably a safer driver when I've been drinking. I concetrate on the road more for fear of getting stopped.

Hammer away!

I won’t hammer but I have questions.

When you say drink and drive, do you mean a few beers or do you mean you got crap faced drunk?

Lots of people drink a few beers or glasses of wine before they drive and do fine. Some people can hold more than others.

One beer and I can hardly walk straight and my words are slurred some... But I know people who can drink a half case and look more sober than me.

Also, can I ask, what is your race? I am Native American mostly and alcohol seems to affect my family in a way it does not affect others I know.

I think cities make money off drunk driving tickets, for them its not about safety its about $$$

I don’t believe the police should be hunting down people for crimes. They should patrol their route and if they see a crime then deal with it. I don’t think they should be allowed to say your tale light is out (when its not) as their reason to pull you over either. We don’t let them profile other groups but we let them park outside bars to target people they think are drinking? It’s the same kind of thing.

 

[top gun]

I won’t hammer but I have questions.

When you say drink and drive, do you mean a few beers or do you mean you got crap faced drunk?

Lots of people drink a few beers or glasses of wine before they drive and do fine. Some people can hold more than others.

One beer and I can hardly walk straight and my words are slurred some... But I know people who can drink a half case and look more sober than me.

Also, can I ask, what is your race? I am Native American mostly and alcohol seems to affect my family in a way it does not affect others I know.

I think cities make money off drunk driving tickets, for them its not about safety its about $$$

I don’t believe the police should be hunting down people for crimes. They should patrol their route and if they see a crime then deal with it. I don’t think they should be allowed to say your tale light is out (when its not) as their reason to pull you over either. We don’t let them profile other groups but we let them park outside bars to target people they think are drinking? It’s the same kind of thing.

Pandora I think you make some good points here. Let me tell you what I think and see if you do not agree.

And Pred... you chime in here too to see if we can't all find some reasonable common ground here. I may have seemed overly harsh in my reply to you (that's just my sarcastic comedic side)... but as a person who likes his beer or a nice Stoly's and 7 I think there's a fair middle ground to be had.

First I think we have to agree there must be the uniform standard as imperfect as that might be.

However I think lowering the "drunk" level from .1 to .08 was an overreach.

The .1 standard was about 3 beers in an hour for an average adult male and probably a little over 2 for an average female... that seemed reasonable to still be competent to drive, to me.

The other thing I think would be more fair is to graduate the punishment by just how high someone tests. As it is now you could blow a .08 or a 3 and under the law you are equally drunk & incapacitated. This seems an overreach.

In my perfect world I'd start @ .1 for being over the limit and that would be the base penalty whatever that might be. Then above .15 the penalty goes up and then @ .2 goes up again and so on.

The object to me is to keep impaired drivers off the roads. The more impaired the more punishment. But if bars & restaurants are going to be allowed to serve alcohol there has to be some reasonable level below drunk that still allow for driving privileges.

So what do ya think... did I make any friends here?

 

[Pandora]

Pandora I think you make some good points here. Let me tell you what I think and see if you do not agree.

And Pred... you chime in here too to see if we can't all find some reasonable common ground here. I may have seemed overly harsh in my reply to you (that's just my sarcastic comedic side)... but as a person who likes his beer or a nice Stoly's and 7 I think there's a fair middle ground to be had.

First I think we have to agree there must be the uniform standard as imperfect as that might be.

However I think lowering the "drunk" level from .1 to .08 was an overreach.

The .1 standard was about 3 beers in an hour for an average adult male and probably a little over 2 for an average female... that seemed reasonable to still be competent to drive, to me.

The other thing I think would be more fair is to graduate the punishment by just how high someone tests. As it is now you could blow a .08 or a 3 and under the law you are equally drunk & incapacitated. This seems an overreach.

In my perfect world I'd start @ .1 for being over the limit and that would be the base penalty whatever that might be. Then above .15 the penalty goes up and then @ .2 goes up again and so on.

The object to me is to keep impaired drivers off the roads. The more impaired the more punishment. But if bars & restaurants are going to be allowed to serve alcohol there has to be some reasonable level below drunk that still allow for driving privileges.

So what do ya think... did I make any friends here?

Why stick everyone in one box? I could pass the breath test after 1 beer but I sure should not be on the road. Another person could drink a half case and not pass the breath test but be perfectly fine to drive.

Why not ticket or arrest people based on their motor functions alone instead of the breath test? Plus the breath test wont cover drug use and that is as dangerous as drinking.

I drove crap faced drunk once because a policeman told me to do it. I was with my mother and my husband in a bar, the policeman was outside the bar waiting...

My mom was drunk by breath test standards and so was my husband but I was not, yet I was more unable to drive than either of them since they both had a higher tolerance to alcohol than I had.

The policeman gave my mother a ticket and arrested her. When I asked what do we do with the car, he gave me the breath test, said I pass and I could drive the car to the police station to pick her up because they would let her go after they processed her. I told him that I felt drunk and how much I drank and that I did not usually drink but he said to drive anyway. I was not then and still am not a very good driver sober and I should not have been driving but I drove to the police station where they processed my mother and then I drove her home with me.

That night I was the only one who was dangerous on the road and I was the only one the policeman let drive. I am still more dangerous on the road sober than most drunks. Do you have any idea how many mail boxes I have smashed?

The rules are silly.

 

[top gun]

Why stick everyone in one box? I could pass the breath test after 1 beer but I sure should not be on the road. Another person could drink a half case and not pass the breath test but be perfectly fine to drive.

Why not ticket or arrest people based on their motor functions alone instead of the breath test? Plus the breath test wont cover drug use and that is as dangerous as drinking.

I drove crap faced drunk once because a policeman told me to do it. I was with my mother and my husband in a bar, the policeman was outside the bar waiting...

My mom was drunk by breath test standards and so was my husband but I was not, yet I was more unable to drive than either of them since they both had a higher tolerance to alcohol than I had.

The policeman gave my mother a ticket and arrested her. When I asked what do we do with the car, he gave me the breath test, said I pass and I could drive the car to the police station to pick her up because they would let her go after they processed her. I told him that I felt drunk and how much I drank and that I did not usually drink but he said to drive anyway. I was not then and still am not a very good driver sober and I should not have been driving but I drove to the police station where they processed my mother and then I drove her home with me.

That night I was the only one who was dangerous on the road and I was the only one the policeman let drive. I am still more dangerous on the road sober than most drunks. Do you have any idea how many mail boxes I have smashed?

The rules are silly.

Well see you can't say I don't try to find concensus and a rational approach.

And although I understand you idea in theroy it's not legally enforceable. It leaves way to much up to the interpretation of the arresting officer. He could believe... or say he believed... any number of reactions were "drunk" reations. Maybe I'm a stutterer or maybe I have an inner ear infection giving me balance issues... OR MAYBE HE JUST HATES MY GUTS!

There's nothing wrong with a breath test as long as the baseline limit is reasonable. I personally believe they went into over zealous territory when they dropped it down to .08 from .1 but I understand the need for some standard measure that can be applied to everyone.

And you know if you don't think the breath test is fair you can always ask for a blood or urine test. The police are more than glad to accomadate you on that as they feel those test are even more accurate be it a little more more time consuming.

Bottom line: Set a reasonable baseline standard and raise the punishment level as the imparment moves up seems very fair to me. And for gods sake I certainly don't want the cops to just guess by looking at me.

 

[Pandora]

Well see you can't say I don't try to find concensus and a rational approach.

And although I understand you idea in theroy it's not legally enforceable. It leaves way to much up to the interpretation of the arresting officer. He could believe... or say he believed... any number of reactions were "drunk" reations. Maybe I'm a stutterer or maybe I have an inner ear infection giving me balance issues... OR MAYBE HE JUST HATES MY GUTS!

There's nothing wrong with a breath test as long as the baseline limit is reasonable. I personally believe they went into over zealous territory when they dropped it down to .08 from .1 but I understand the need for some standard measure that can be applied to everyone.

And you know if you don't think the breath test is fair you can always ask for a blood or urine test. The police are more than glad to accomadate you on that as they feel those test are even more accurate be it a little more more time consuming.

Bottom line: Set a reasonable baseline standard and raise the punishment level as the imparment moves up seems very fair to me. And for gods sake I certainly don't want the cops to just guess by looking at me.

You got some good points there. I see what you are saying.

why not just arrest them if they do damage while drunk driving instead? I know what you are thinking, many people would be drinking and driving, and that is probably true. But if the first few of them who hurt persons or property when drinking and driving had the book litterally hurled at them, it would make others think twice? I mean not just thrown, hurled like smack them down and make them lose everything.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

why not just arrest them if they do damage while drunk driving instead? I know what you are thinking, many people would be drinking and driving, and that is probably true. But if the first few of them who hurt persons or property when drinking and driving had the book litterally hurled at them, it would make others think twice? I mean not just thrown, hurled like smack them down and make them lose everything.

The problem is that if they kill someone the first time out and get the book thrown at them, the victim is still dead.

Sure, some people can drink and drive home completely unconcious, but how do you know if you're one of those people until you don't make it home? Till you wake up in a jail cell or lying along a road with the victims of your excesses covered with bloody sheets? My brother was one of those people, he woke up in a jail cell where he ended up spending 30 days. He learned a hard lesson in those 30 days and he's been stone sober for more than 30 years now.

I've been run off the road by a drunk (in an old Rambler station wagon) and I tend to be in the 30 day mandatory jail sentence for the first offense and a mandatory death sentence if you kill someone. There is no reason to drink and drive, but that's just me. I'm glad that you've managed to make it home and all your family members too, I hope your luck holds out, but I know better. You've set an interesting example for your children and grandchildren and one of them, one of these days is going to be the first one to fail at holding up the family tradition--let's hope it's just themselves they kill or maim.

Jesus must be proud of you and your ability to drink and drive.

 

[PLC1]

Politically incorrect because I'll get hammered on all sides by everyone. It's politically incorrect because no one would even think of saying it in public, until now:


I drink and drive. I have been drinking and driving home since I was 17. I am now 53. Mind you, it doesn't happen much these days simply because I drink less than I used to. But I still do. I do it because I CAN drink and drive and I have to get home. Designated drivers? Ha! Anyone EVER do that?

I have never gotten so much as a ticket when driving under the influence, nor as much as a fender bender. How do I know this? Because I always remember everything up until the point when I pass out. I believe it is something in my make up that processes alchohol differently. I'm not really sure, but I do know that it is genetic. Both of my brothers have the ability also.So do my daughters, though none of us ever talk about it. It's too PC to even mention among kin. I am always capable of control. I laugh more, and feel high, but when I need to, I can be in control.

Why do I say this? Why post this? Because I'm anonimous here and I have a point that I think is valid.

I believe that there are many others like me out there. You never hear about them because they never get stopped nor cause harm to people AND they too, never talk about it. Also, my point in this post is that I believe that the police practice of road blocks and random checks should be stopped. There are those who are not capable of driving under the influence and they can be seen and recognised by anyone. If you are seen to be driving impaired then by all means you should be stopped. In my case, since I drive very well, I should not be randomly stopped and checked. Heck, I'm probably a safer driver when I've been drinking. I concetrate on the road more for fear of getting stopped.

Hammer away!

If you were only endangering yourself with such self delusions, I'd be the first to say, "go ahead."

However, you are also jeopardizing others on the road, and that's just wrong.

I've been driving for 50 years now, and in that time have seen every stupid stunt known to man. Mostly, the Darwin Award angel passes them by, but not always. I've learned to drive defensively, including not getting behind the wheel after consuming alcohol in any quantity.

I'd say quit now, before your luck runs out.

 

[PredFan]

Pred we REALLY appreciate this you have no idea!!!

It's important and sometimes difficult to accurately gauge someone's mind set, intellectual ability and values with mere posts and no face to face discussion.

You've cleared that up for us now... thanks again.

Narsasistic... in denial... dangerous alcoholic willing to roll the dice on killing innocent people at any time. You said you're a Republican Christian correct?

Take notes folks... take notes...

Yawn! You have something to add? Or you just getting your jabs in?

 

[Pandora]

The problem is that if they kill someone the first time out and get the book thrown at them, the victim is still dead.

Sure, some people can drink and drive home completely unconcious, but how do you know if you're one of those people until you don't make it home? Till you wake up in a jail cell or lying along a road with the victims of your excesses covered with bloody sheets? My brother was one of those people, he woke up in a jail cell where he ended up spending 30 days. He learned a hard lesson in those 30 days and he's been stone sober for more than 30 years now.

I've been run off the road by a drunk (in an old Rambler station wagon) and I tend to be in the 30 day mandatory jail sentence for the first offense and a mandatory death sentence if you kill someone. There is no reason to drink and drive, but that's just me. I'm glad that you've managed to make it home and all your family members too, I hope your luck holds out, but I know better. You've set an interesting example for your children and grandchildren and one of them, one of these days is going to be the first one to fail at holding up the family tradition--let's hope it's just themselves they kill or maim.

Jesus must be proud of you and your ability to drink and drive.

I don’t drink and drive and Jesus has nothing to be proud of where I am concerned.

 

[PredFan]

I won’t hammer but I have questions.

When you say drink and drive, do you mean a few beers or do you mean you got crap faced drunk?

That is an excellent question. I mean "legally impaired", which doesn't take much. Sometimes though, I'm feeling no pain!

Lots of people drink a few beers or glasses of wine before they drive and do fine. Some people can hold more than others.

Absolutely true. I happen to be one of the lucky ones.

One beer and I can hardly walk straight and my words are slurred some... But I know people who can drink a half case and look more sober than me.

I'm a pretty big guy, I can hold a lot of alchohol, but I know I can maintain right up till I pass out.

Also, can I ask, what is your race? I am Native American mostly and alcohol seems to affect my family in a way it does not affect others I know.

I'm a mix of German and Spanish. Alchoholism has a VERY strong hereditary and racial factor so you are right to ask. There is no alchoholism in my family anywhere, and despite the accusations that I know are coming, I am not an alchoholic.

I think cities make money off drunk driving tickets, for them its not about safety its about $$$

Absolutely.

I don’t believe the police should be hunting down people for crimes. They should patrol their route and if they see a crime then deal with it. I don’t think they should be allowed to say your tale light is out (when its not) as their reason to pull you over either. We don’t let them profile other groups but we let them park outside bars to target people they think are drinking? It’s the same kind of thing.

I agree with you except for the equipment thing. Police will stop someone normally for equipment failures so it's justified in my book for them to stop me for a tail light or some such thing. I always keep my car in proper working condition.

 

[PredFan]

Pandora I think you make some good points here. Let me tell you what I think and see if you do not agree.

And Pred... you chime in here too to see if we can't all find some reasonable common ground here. I may have seemed overly harsh in my reply to you (that's just my sarcastic comedic side)... but as a person who likes his beer or a nice Stoly's and 7 I think there's a fair middle ground to be had.

First I think we have to agree there must be the uniform standard as imperfect as that might be.

However I think lowering the "drunk" level from .1 to .08 was an overreach.

The .1 standard was about 3 beers in an hour for an average adult male and probably a little over 2 for an average female... that seemed reasonable to still be competent to drive, to me.

The other thing I think would be more fair is to graduate the punishment by just how high someone tests. As it is now you could blow a .08 or a 3 and under the law you are equally drunk & incapacitated. This seems an overreach.

In my perfect world I'd start @ .1 for being over the limit and that would be the base penalty whatever that might be. Then above .15 the penalty goes up and then @ .2 goes up again and so on.

The object to me is to keep impaired drivers off the roads. The more impaired the more punishment. But if bars & restaurants are going to be allowed to serve alcohol there has to be some reasonable level below drunk that still allow for driving privileges.

So what do ya think... did I make any friends here?

I take no offense. One cannot start a thread like I did and not expect harsh reactions from people.

I think that 0.1 effects people differently, otoh I don't thing 0.8 affects anyone much really. I believe that if a cop sees you swerving, speeding, running red lights or some such thing and then finds out you've been drinking then you deserve the punishment. I only object to random roadblock searches.

 

[PredFan]

Why stick everyone in one box? I could pass the breath test after 1 beer but I sure should not be on the road. Another person could drink a half case and not pass the breath test but be perfectly fine to drive.

Why not ticket or arrest people based on their motor functions alone instead of the breath test? Plus the breath test wont cover drug use and that is as dangerous as drinking.

I drove crap faced drunk once because a policeman told me to do it. I was with my mother and my husband in a bar, the policeman was outside the bar waiting...

My mom was drunk by breath test standards and so was my husband but I was not, yet I was more unable to drive than either of them since they both had a higher tolerance to alcohol than I had.

The policeman gave my mother a ticket and arrested her. When I asked what do we do with the car, he gave me the breath test, said I pass and I could drive the car to the police station to pick her up because they would let her go after they processed her. I told him that I felt drunk and how much I drank and that I did not usually drink but he said to drive anyway. I was not then and still am not a very good driver sober and I should not have been driving but I drove to the police station where they processed my mother and then I drove her home with me.

That night I was the only one who was dangerous on the road and I was the only one the policeman let drive. I am still more dangerous on the road sober than most drunks. Do you have any idea how many mail boxes I have smashed?

The rules are silly.

Wow! Sorry to hear that.

 

[PredFan]

The problem is that if they kill someone the first time out and get the book thrown at them, the victim is still dead.

Sure, some people can drink and drive home completely unconcious, but how do you know if you're one of those people until you don't make it home? Till you wake up in a jail cell or lying along a road with the victims of your excesses covered with bloody sheets? My brother was one of those people, he woke up in a jail cell where he ended up spending 30 days. He learned a hard lesson in those 30 days and he's been stone sober for more than 30 years now.

I've been run off the road by a drunk (in an old Rambler station wagon) and I tend to be in the 30 day mandatory jail sentence for the first offense and a mandatory death sentence if you kill someone. There is no reason to drink and drive, but that's just me. I'm glad that you've managed to make it home and all your family members too, I hope your luck holds out, but I know better. You've set an interesting example for your children and grandchildren and one of them, one of these days is going to be the first one to fail at holding up the family tradition--let's hope it's just themselves they kill or maim.

Jesus must be proud of you and your ability to drink and drive.

I think doing it for 36 years qualifies me as one of those people who can.

I am not denying that there are very dangerous people who drink and drive out there. Something needs to be done about those people. I don't agree that when you do a random roadblock to look for drunk drivers that you are stopping those people. What you are doing there is getting income for the city coffers, and unnecessarily ruining lives.

The only way you can stop the bad ones is to be harder on them. Time and time again I see where drunk drivers kill people and it comes to light that they are repeat offenders.