Georgia mom blows .392%, charged with DUI

[RockofStrength]

Dionysus approves of this thread.

 

[Benny]

Most people, even drinkers, are noticeably impaired in the .17 range. It makes for a short simple report.

I would certainly hope so, since that is over twice the legal driving limit.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Highest BAC I've ever seen was two nights in a row, the same guy: .504 and .545. And yes, he was conscious and talking.

His drink of choice? Dollar-store Listerine.

No joke.

 

[Bill of Rights]

well, some people would argue that since she didn't hurt anyone, she should only be held accountable for the property damage she caused, because some people believe that DUI shouldn't be a crime.



But then again, some people are..........well.......... retarded!

I think it's less that some people think DWI should not be a crime and more that to define it by an arbitrary number is the problem. Case in point: when one day, a BAC of .10 gets you busted and the next, .08 is enough to do the same or to trigger even worse penalties, does that mean that the guy who at .09 who was let go on the first day didn't do anything wrong? Coming at it from another direction, the guy I mentioned above was obviously very used to dealing with alcohol. I'd imagine that he'd have looked stone-cold sober at .30 and been in a dangerous state of withdrawal if he got anywhere close to as low as .10.

Don't misunderstand, these are extremes we're discussing, and she was clearly impaired with no business being on the road. This was a good bust. My point is, what's the difference in a person's real reaction time, behavior, etc., between .079 and .080? Base it on something realistic, and I'd have fewer problems with it... Of course, that gets into subjectivity and would be a nightmare to prove impairment, not to mention both that it would decrease safety and gov't revenues... I don't know that there is a real-world solution that doesn't involve an arbitrary metric... But I do think finding a way to do the job without sacrificing liberty is a laudable goal.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[04DarkShadowGT]

anybody care to take the bet it was a 3rd gen camaro?

for those unfamiliar with the generations, 3rd gen = 1982-1992:

Lets be honest, all F-bodies are mullet mobiles.

 

[superjoe76]

Sounds like she had some blood in her alcohol system! .392!!

 

[femurphy77]

Oh Wait! Never mind, I didn't see the decimal in the original header, I thought it was 392, not .392!

Kinda changes the whole conversation doesn't it?

 

[chocktaw2]

^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^

Most humans are unconscious or worse by this point. She's put in long hours in order to hit that personal best.

^^^ Correct ^^^.Lot'sa practice !

 

[grizman]

Oh I GUARANTEE it was a 3rd gen car. Probably an IROC too just because the acronym fits (Ignorant Redneck Out Cruising)

Strange, 99% of the ignorant rednecks I see out cruising are in rusted out Ford pickup's and trashed out Mustangs with some sort of big Ford decal on the rear window. Must depend on location.

Now I get it had to be a Chevy, seeing as how a Ford couldn't have made it through the fence and two picnic tables without collapsing into an immobile heap.

 

[Sureshot129]

Strange, 99% of the ignorant rednecks I see out cruising are in rusted out Ford pickup's and trashed out Mustangs with some sort of big Ford decal on the rear window. Must depend on location.

Now I get it had to be a Chevy, seeing as how a Ford couldn't have made it through the fence and two picnic tables without collapsing into an immobile heap.

I'm surprised it took this long for a Chevy guy to get in this thread.

 

[Noland]

I want a pic of the Camaro. I need to know if it had a trailer hitch and a No Fear sticker.