Is 'buzzed driving' 'drunk driving'?

[redqueen]

There's a PSA out now that says so.

There's another thread where people are insinuating that if someone appears imparied, yet is under the legal limit, that it's ok for them to drive.

What do you think?

[MissMillie]

1. I'd bet that

people who are "buzzed" are over the legal limit.

It really doesn't take much alcohol to get to the legal limit.

[FudaFuda]

16. Actually, in my experience, just the opposite

Granted, this was when the limit in my state, and most others at that time, was .01

The limit in most, if not all, states now is .008

But back in the .01 days, I worked for some time as an assistant prosecutor.

During a 'continuing legal education' weekend, the State Police provided us with an Intoxilyzer 5000 for our education and amusement. Several of us 'partied' in a hotel conference room and drank to stupefaction that night, occasionally checking our BAC level. I did not hit the magic .01 BAC until I'd had 5 beers and several shots of bourbon. I eventually topped out at .014, and I was wasted.

For everyday drunks, a BAC of .013 would be 'buzzed.' But since I was, at most, a once a week drinker, the .01 level was definitely too impaired for driving.

As for the idea that you can't be arrested for DUI if you're not over the .008 level, nope it doesn't work like that. A BAC level of .008 only gives the state the right to have the jury instructed that the evidence justifies the presumption that you were legally impaired. But you can be prosecuted for any measurable level of BAC - the state simply doesn't get the presumption of guilt if the level was under .008

[imdjh]

22. And that is my objection

For the record, I rarely drink at all at this point. But I do believe that the law should be clear, and not some mush which can or cannot be applied depending upon the whim of a public servant.

Set the limit, over it and you're busted, under it and you aren't. Leaving it up in the air, is like having signs on the freeway which say that the maximum speed limit is whatever a police officer or the car next to you considers comfortable. I do understand "speed greater than reasonable" but there are conditions under which that is applied, whereas the driving while impaired seems way too flexible.

[alarimer]

71. The problem is most of those breathalyzer tests are very inaccurate.

They can vary by as much as .02. So a .08 (the legal limit) might actually be .06, and, thus, be under the limit.

[flvegan]

2. Culpable negligence.

If you know you're buzzed, then you know you're impaired and then no it isn't okay to drive.

[liberalhistorian]

11. Amen! Just because you're under the "legal" limit

doesn't mean you're capable of driving effectively and people should never drive after even a couple of drinks, period. End of discussion. Their lives and the lives of innocent others are at stake.

[liberalhistorian]

12. Amen! Just because you're under the "legal" limit

doesn't mean you're capable of driving effectively and people should never drive after even a couple of drinks, period. End of discussion. Their lives and the lives of innocent others are at stake.

[Cowpunk]

48. Where's your proof?

What facts do you have that prove anyone with a buzz shouldn't be driving?

What statistics can you cite that show that drivers who may be mildly affected by alcohol are more dangerous than the average driver?

[remedy1]

3. Yes.

If you are impaired in any way, you are committing a criminal act. One does not have to be "over the limit."

[ZombieHorde]

41. Such as being sleepy, suffering from alergies, having a slight cold...

[Gormy Cuss]

4. In some states the legal limit isn't the end all -- acting impaired is enough.

And feeling 'buzzed' is usually enough to be impaired, although there are always exceptions.

[Occam Bandage]

5. Yes. nt

[MadBadger]

6. Id be over the legal limit I think even if I was just buzzed, so legally it would be drunk driving.

Buzzed for me is like 5-7 beers, and drunk is somewhere in the range of 9+ in a couple hours

So even though I wouldnt be drunk, I think Id blow over a .08

[redqueen]

7. Wow...

buzzed for me is two beers.

[MadBadger]

8. I'm also a college student weighing over 200 lbs

[redqueen]

10. Ah...

I was never a heavy drinker. Even when I drank regularly... lightweight.

:hi:

[rufus dog]

18. You don't have to take the advice

But be damn careful. I did some stupid ass shit in my 20's and got away with it. But that was pure luck. Looking over at a buddy driving with one hand over his eye and him telling me it was so he didn't see double and at the time thinking that was a plan. Drinking six beers, then having a last beer and shot at closing time. The sober dude has a better chance at getting the girl, says the guy who didn't get the girl often.

[MadBadger]

21. I dont drink and drive, and if i did have 3 or 4 beers, I wait several hours before driving

I was just saying that I'm only buzzed at 5 beers, but legally Id be over the limit so it would be drunk driving.

[rufus dog]

Smart man

I heard they have some smart ones at UW.

[Warpy]

44. You're going to have to watch that

because people with a high capacity for alcohol before they get that buzz are the ones most likely to turn into alcoholics.

That doesn't mean it's inevitable. It does mean that it's something you're going to have to look out for.

Your weight has little to do with it. Your brain chemistry does.

[MadBadger]

53. I'm not going to have to watch that.

[rufus dog]

13. Dude - six beers in two hour will likely put you over the limit.

I am 220 lbs and would be over the limit.

[MadBadger]

19. I know, thats what I said. Though I wouldn consider myself buzzed, Id still be over the legal limit

[NeedleCast]

20. Everyone would be over the limit with six beers in two hours

The question is (and it varies by individual), whether or not they're acutally impared.

[rufus dog]

9. As a guy who partied and drove too many times

I don't see the problem. If I go out with the "boys" I tend to take the DD role. Just not worth the risk of ruining multiple lives. Plus your friends say some funny stuff when they are poured into the seats.

If it makes just a few people think that having one more beer, even though they would be under the legal limit, probably is a risk then the campaign works.

[FiveGoodMen]

14. Anyone who owns a car and even watches a beer ad should be locked up for life

At least, I keep hearing things moving in that direction.

If you can spell 'alcohol' you're probably a terrorist.

You know what? Let's just lock everyone up. Then we won't have missed any potential jail fodder.

[redqueen]

24. Defensive?

[FiveGoodMen]

31. Nope. Just angry.

Land of the free, my ass.

[redqueen]

32. Well it's only an ad campaign. (nt)

[FiveGoodMen]

33. The constant pressure to find new things to throw people in jail for...

to increase the penalties for everything...

to outlaw new drugs even as we should be bringing this stupid WOD to a close...

to criminalize teenagers photographing of their own bodies...

to push past the fact that we already exceed most of the world in locking own our citizens up...

As I said before: Land of the free, my ass!

[Rebubula]

73. OK....

...I agree with you on drug laws and the new drive to classify teens as sexual preds - that stuff is silly.

However, to rail against Drunk driving laws is just being ridiculous. Every single day another 10 families have to hear that someone they loved is dead due to someone driving drunk.

Sometimes Freedom has limits...such as when your freedom plows drunk into the car my daughter is driving.

So...to sum up...fuck off if you have a problem with drunk driving laws.

[FiveGoodMen]

74. Gee, if I didn't have the person above on ignore already

I could respond to their "fuck off" message.

Guess what I'd say...

[imdjh]

15. The problem with the legal limit is that it has been shown to be political and therefore arbitrary

One presumes that there was a reason for setting the legal limit at .10 when it was established. Even then it was not without criticism, generally for being set too low. At the time it was said that the legal limit in France permitted one to have a cocktail before dinner, two glasses of wine with dinner, and a cognac afterward and still be legal to drive. Meanwhile, in some Islamic countries driving with alcohol on your breath, regardless of BAC one presumes, was a very serious crime.

Then came MADD and the demands that the limit be lowered, for no rational reason other than an aim to make it illegal to drive after consuming alcohol at all, or more likely to make it possible to more severely punish people involved in accidents. Notice that I didn't say responsible for accidents, but involved. I do this because apparently we don't actually track whether alcohol was the cause of an accident, only if it was involved. Likewise, when it is involved we seem less concerned with actual guilt or error and more concerned with blame, punishment, and of course litigation.

If we assume that there was some scientific basis for the .10 limit, then it's reasonable to assume that the political .08 limit affords a considerable margin of certainty and that if one is below that limit then one cannot reasonably be considered to be driving while drunk or impaired outside of a normal range of abilities. Driving at .07 means that you have had four beers total, and half of one has worn off. How many people here would consider that to be the crime some would have you believe that it is?

[rufus dog]

27. You have some valid points

Having an empty beer can in back of a truck could be construed as alcohol related. Age can be an issue too. MadBadger would probably be a better driver than me after 6 beers. He is in his 20's me in 40's, vision and reaction time not as good.

I am not arguing the crime portion, rather the awareness.

[NeedleCast]

17. As a drinker, I'd say yes

Being buzzed would probably mean a minimum of three drinks and probably more like four or five for me. I wonder if signs of imparement shouldn't be weighed more heavily than BAC. Even for moderate drinkers, they can be over the legal BAC before they being to become impared.

[varkam]

23. I'll put if like this - if you're "buzzed" and get behind the wheel and kill someone...

you may not be criminally liable for it.

But I can sure as shit hope you lose every penny in the civil suit.

[redqueen]

25. I likely feel 'buzzed' (am impaired) below the legal limit.

There's no way I would drive that way ... but I wonder how often it happens.

[varkam]

29. Sorry - I didn't mean *you* - I just meant in general.

[NeedleCast]

26. Question...is this a MADD campaign?

[redqueen]

28. No it's from the Ad Council.

[Ian David]

30. Here's something from someone who thinks drunk-driving laws are too strict...

Mangled Drunk Driving Data? - Dr. David J. Hanson interview

Retired Sociologist Dr. David J. Hanson joins Steve to discuss MADD and other initiatives to further reduce the legal BAC limits. Is it possible that data tells us the real dangers are from .17 BAC and up, and that ever-stricter limits are an emotion-driven, neo-prohibitionist witch hunt? You be the judge, but this conversation is a starting point.

Additional links are here:
http://www.truthdriventhinking.com/drunk_driving.htm

Audio podcast link (MP3) http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3?http://www.truthdrivenstrategies.com/TDT2alcohol.mp3 (MP3)

More:
http://www.truthdriventhinking.com/audioblog.htm

[imdjh]

34. "no one is taking the other side"

Exactly. If you take the other side, under most circumstances, you will be landed on with both feet by the emotional responses of those who feel they are being responsible and those who want you to listen to their personal story, and repent. Then as always, we have the 'for the chidren" gang, as well as those who live in NYC and DC which are the only two cities in the country where people can take decent public transportation home from bars at 2AM.

Anyone who thinks MADD is a convent of future saints, ask yourself if MADD would close their doors if the BAC were lowered to zero and everyone really did stop driving after consuming any alcohol at all. Of course, they wouldn't. They would become Mothers Against Driving Distracted and go after the evils of driving with the radio on, and having fund raisers of course. It's the nature of the business- they don't go out of business.

[NeedleCast]

36. Yup

I think MADD has outlived it's usefulness.

Back when I first became aware of MADD in the late 80s, drunk driving laws in Texas were pretty weak and often not enforced (or were given a slap on the wrist). I think MADD did a good job of bringing the problem of drunk driving into the spotlight, making sure drunk driving laws were enforced and pointing out the problems caused by drinking drunk. They succeeded in their cause. But instead of continuing to advocate for the laws in place, and awareness, they've moved into the grounds of prohibition, or at least to the point where they seem to believe any alcohol consumption + driving should be illegalized.

As it stands now, you CAN be arrested for DUI even if you blow less than the legal limit on a breathalizer (which does not take into account any variables...body mass, tolerance, etc)) but you definitely will be if you blow over, even if you aren't showing signs of impairment.

[Withywindle]

37. Add Chicago to that list of cities.

Even though the public transit slows down a lot at that hour, it never stops completely. And you can always call a cab or ask the bartender to call one for you.

[Ian David]

40. I don't understand why millionaire celebrities keep getting arrested for DUI.

If I was the manager of, say, Paris Hilton, I would add a "no driving" clause to their contract.

They can probably afford a full-time chauffeur.

And they could CERTAINLY afford a fucking TAXI.

I know that if I was making millions of dollars a year, the FIRST thing I would do would be to buy a limo, and hire a maid / cook / driver.

If I was making tens of millions per year, the maid/cook/driver would be three different people.

Plus a separate driver for the whores.

[imdjh]

45. Affording a taxi- the right approach

Oddly you rarely see a practical unemotional approach to DUI, and in the greater scheme of things killing or getting killed, spending time in prison, is more important than money but they are also outside the immediate thoughts of people who likely think that the rules are too extreme to start with.

Cost of DUI ought to be a regular approach to the issue. Yes, cabs are expensive. But how expensive are they? The price of a couple of drinks? How many taxis can you afford for the price of a DUI case? Once you have a DUI, the price of a can or even a hotel room seems reasonable. The lack of stress ought to be stressed as well. With a minimum cost of a DUI being something on the order of $3000 a few cab rides a year doesn't seem too expensive.

[pitohui]

49. getting into a cab is getting into a car w. an unknown strange man

for a man the risk is probably about zero

for a woman, not so much

i have been in a situation which i do not wish to discuss, suffice it to say i don't find that just calling a cab is always a good idea, there are too many situations where the person driving the cab is not the person whose name is on the license and that person has nothing to lose by driving you off somewhere and getting you into a situation (i found out later that the taxi authority will do nothing if the holder of the license claims that someone else was driving when an incident happened)

as a woman, i basically just can't have more than a glass of wine or two when i'm out by myself any more because of all the predators

so...it depends on who and where you are, whether or not a few cab drives a year are "too expensive," in my humble opinion, if you are a solo female, you're rolling the dice every time, because there is no guarantee that the next strange driver you get in the car with is going to be one of the good guys


agree w. poster above who says if rich, they'd hire a professional driver, well, sure, i would do, someone i had a relationship with, but who among us on this forum is rich?

[Ian David]

68. If we robbed MADD Headquarters, we could be rich, and hire our own drivers. n/t

[Ian David]

38. I don't know enough about it to offer an oppinion either way.

I'm just putting out there the one reasonable-sounding person I could find on "the other side."

[zazen]

35. Would this refer to studies that show that performance usually IMPROVES with one drink?

I think it has to do with lowering inhibitions, increased blood sugar--something like that. I'm usually clearer on one drink than I am on none. Then it's downhill from there.

Having driven rather buzzed, drunk out of my mind (in my teens), and perfectly sober but distracted by kids, food, and Barney CDs (not even with a cellphone), I can say that buzzed was the least impaired, then the distracted parent, then drunk out of my mind. They're all dumb as hell behaviors, and I don't engage in any of them anymore and thank God I never hurt anyone in my idiocy, but let's keep things in perspective. Unless you're 80 pounds, drinking one beer and driving makes you less dangerous in a car than talking on your cellphone.

[LanternWaste]

39. Red, you know I'm not one to curse, but...

Red, you know I'm not one to curse, but driving while buzzed is absolute douchebaggery and I think indicates a particularly large amount of hubris (or a drinking problem-- either way, they need help).

Seriously.

[damntexdem]

42. No, it's DUI.

And it will get you into just as much trouble.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

43. If someone can pass a sobriety test, there's no moral reason they shouldn't drive.

[Spike89]

59. Therefore, anyone failing a sobriety test is guilty?

I know that isn't what you said, but some here seem to be advocating that. Back when I was bartending, one of my buddies got to spend a night in drunk tank totally sober. Like all of us behind the bar, by closing time he had plenty of drinks sloshed/spilled on him, and smelled a bit like a distillery. Anyway, he got pulled over for a tail light infraction. Failed the field sobriety test (according to my buddy, partly because he was tired, partly because the cop refused to believe the bartender story). Anyway, they hauled him to the drunk tank, booked him, then gave a breathalyzer. He blew 0.0 but because they'd already booked him, they had to wait for the morning when a judge could dismiss the case.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. I will say if they can't pass a sobriety test, they probably shouldn't be driving.

But there could be any number of reasons for that. Lack of sleep, cold medicine, etc.

[Cowpunk]

46. It depends how stupid you are.

I really hate this campaign, but I suppose it's useful as a message to those idiots who think "buzzed" means you can still stand up.

I hate it because it also seems aimed at striking fear into anyone who would have two or three drinks and drive home. That's about where I get "buzzed" according to my definition, meaning the alcohol has some effect on my mental state. However I would have to drink a six pack in 1 hour to reach .008 BAC, according to my calculations. Where is the evidence that mildly buzzed drivers pose a danger? I did a search, including the MADD site and came up with ZILCH. The only statistics I've seen recently showed just the opposite-that mildly buzzed drivers are not any more dangerous than the average driver, and that it is the heavily impaired drivers who are the real threat.

If anyone has evidence to the contrary, I'd like to see it.

[JonLP24]

47. I only feel a 'buzz' after 3 beers or so and that's enough to put me over the limit

So yes I guess buzzed driving is drunk driving.

[Chisox08]

50. I don't know ask the people that was hit and killed by Buzzed Drivers

[JerseygirlCT]

51. If you're even slightly impaired you have no business getting

behind the wheel of a car. Period.

Don't do that to yourself or to the innocent you could kill or seriously hurt.

[Cowpunk]

52. Let's try this again. Where's your proof?

...that being "slightly impaired" makes you any more dangerous as a driver? Facts, statistics, I mean. You know, the whole "rational reasoning" thing.

[JerseygirlCT]

58. Where's yours?

Any hint of impairment should mean a responsible person will be safe and decline to risk their own lives and the lives of others.

How are you so sure that, impaired, you are no danger? You'd better have some pretty ironclad proof, too - as you're gambling with lives. Declining to drive when there is even a doubt risks no lives.

[Cowpunk]

64. I have proof. Not that I need any.

I have been driving for 24 years, often while "impaired". Obviously I should have killed someone by now, but I've never once had an accident while "impaired". This evidence is purely anecdotal, of course.

Does the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you? You accuse me of being a danger to my fellow humans. The burden of proof is on you. Where's your proof?

[JerseygirlCT]

65. Good grief.

You are fooling yourself. And I truly hope no innocent person is the unlucky person to prove your whacky theory wrong.

Driving impaired is hugely immoral and unethical. You seem to be proud of the risk-taking you do. And if your own life were the only one at stake, then that's your prerogative - go for it. But you are involving innocent outsiders in your little game of chicken. That's just despicable.

[H2O Man]

54. I do not think anyone

who is not completely sober should drive an automobile.

[Cowpunk]

56. Was there a thought process involved in that conclusion?

Sorry, but this is getting annoying.

[H2O Man]

57. Yes.

A funeral for the 17-year old daughter of a friend tomorrow. Sorry to annoy you, when you are involved in such deep and meaningful thought.

[Cowpunk]

62. Sorry for your loss.

Did the driver have one drink?

[H2O Man]

63. Fuck you.

[JerseygirlCT]

66. Unbelievable, isn't it?

I'm sitting here, shaking my head, still somewhere between anger and disbelief that someone would be that callous with people's lives.

[DailyGrind51]

55. It depends on one's blood alcohol level.

[Stinky The Clown]

61. I have a very low tolerance for impaired driving

[ddeclue]

67. FAA has an 8 hour minimum bottle to throttle rule.

Even if you have one sip you are grounded for 8 hours minimum. You also have to be under the legal limit (0.04%) to fly AFTER the 8 hours go by before you are legal. Personally I agree that buzzed driving is drunk driving. If you want to drink, get a designated driver, hire a limo, take a taxi, take the bus, take the train, or stumble your way home - but don't drink and drive.

[Ian David]

69. How much money does MADD spend on lobbying every year...

... and how many free taxi rides for drunk people could they buy with that money?

I'm not saying that they're not doing the right thing.

I'm just wondering if maybe there is a more effective way they could spend their money.

[Forkboy]

70. Well until I find another way to get the kids to school what choice do I have?

:hide:

[tuckessee]

72. Nope, and the founder of MADD agrees.

She quit MADD in protest because the organization was taken over by what she described as "neo-prohibitionists".