|
PT6A posted:It's not like they're expensive and easily circumventable by getting a sober person to start your car, or leaving your car running while you drink. You have to blow every X amount of minutes. It's not just blow and go. I have mixed feelings about this. People shouldn't drive drunk but there is too much other bullshit surrounding it. Such as, you can't sleep it off in your car. Anyway, why do people choose to drive intoxicated? Do they do it because they think they can handle it or because they don't have another option?
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 10:56 |
|
|
PT6A posted:Are cops really harsh about PI in the States or something? I know a guy who's gotten a few here in Calgary, but that's because he gets really drunk and he tends to have a lovely attitude when drunk. I don't know anyone else that's ever received one here, and I know plenty of people that regularly walk home quite intoxicated (probably 0.15 or drunker). You basically have to be causing a scene of some sort before the cops will even consider giving you a ticket, and then you have to be a prick to them before they'll actually give you one. Never got the fine, just drunk tank. And never been stopped for walking. Only sleeping.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:It depends on where you live, honestly. In my college town, the cops cracked down on public intoxication because they knew a lot of people were underage and wanted that sweet citation revenue from giving the 1-2 combo of public intoxication with minor in possession/minor under the influence so you had to be careful about when you left and the route you took home. In Atlanta, the cops literally don't give a poo poo and would rather you be walking home than driving, and will leave you alone (and in many cases offer to give you a lift back to your place) as long as you're not being an obnoxious rear end in a top hat. They sure as hell will throw you in the drunk tank though if you're so drunk you're stumbling off the sidewalk and into traffic, I've seen that happen myself while going out with friends. My buddy nearly got a PI ticket for standing in the middle of the street while trying to hail a cab, but I managed to keep him from mouthing off to the cops, and I told the two cops I'd keep an eye on him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:If someone is going to repeatedly ignore the law about drink-driving, why would they pay any attention to the law about driving without a license? It's not actually about preventing anything, it's about making sure the Bad People are Punished.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:Anyway, why do people choose to drive intoxicated? Do they do it because they think they can handle it or because they don't have another option? Alcohol intoxication leads directly to lowered inhibitions and risky behavior.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:I think if you blow over the legal limit (0.08 BAC) once, you lose your license for life. .08 isn't really that high, at least in terms of how a person feels.(yes I'm aware studies have shown .08 leads to a higher incidence of accidents)
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
My friend had a few tickets and had to go to court. I told him about the right to travel act and the no drivers license got thrown out
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Are cops really harsh about PI in the States or something? I know a guy who's gotten a few here in Calgary, but that's because he gets really drunk and he tends to have a lovely attitude when drunk. I don't know anyone else that's ever received one here, and I know plenty of people that regularly walk home quite intoxicated (probably 0.15 or drunker). You basically have to be causing a scene of some sort before the cops will even consider giving you a ticket, and then you have to be a prick to them before they'll actually give you one. Its so cute that you think that Calgary is anything like the US.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
Actually when I was in Dubai I got one for hailing a Cab down. Costs me $800. Met people with .05 in jail.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
Do all these people advocating a one-strike then banned for ever policy similarly agree with the three-strikes then 25 years in prison policy for felonies. Both seem equally harsh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
And a friend in a cab got one for being in a cab.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Its so cute that you think that Calgary is anything like the US. I don't, hence the reason I was asking. At the same time, we're now a city of over a million people so it's not like some tiny, backward village. You can take your attitude and shove it up your rear end.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
I do the same thing. The way I avoid driving drunk is to invite my friends over to my place or a bar within walking distance of where I live so they can drive drunk. I'm a good friend and I am positively contributing to solving drunk driving.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Just require people blow start their car with the amount of time the unit must be installed increasing with each incident. That or get the loving self driving cars already. I'd loving love to take a nap on long trips.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:Just require people blow start their car with the amount of time the unit must be installed increasing with each incident. That or get the loving self driving cars already. I'd loving love to take a nap on long trips. This is the best idea imho
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:02
|
|
|
Hey leave Calgary alone. Its a real city its got a Wikipedia article and everything.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
darthzeta88 posted:My friend had a few tickets and had to go to court. I told him about the right to travel act and the no drivers license got thrown out Are you a sovereign citizen? That's an argument they like to use.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
There are different levels of impairment. A 70 year old grandma is prolly just as lovely of a driver as a normally decent driving 25 year old who's had a few. I'm against drunk driving but I'm a pragmatist and merit-whore. If your BAC is .2 but you drive perfectly then where's the problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
Volcott posted:Are you a sovereign citizen? That's an argument they like to use. I have never used it since I sometimes drive for business and my ID currently is my license. But I do support sovereign citizenship. Most of the things I want to do, like swimming with sharks, I have to leave America cause of laws.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I don't, hence the reason I was asking. At the same time, we're now a city of over a million people so it's not like some tiny, backward village. You can take your attitude and shove it up your rear end. Yes, its a city of over 1 million people and has things like trains and working bus systems and a well constructed mixed use central business district. These are things that much larger US cities do not have. I was there last week for a conference. Calgary is so much nicer than Houston is not funny.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
I remain of the opinion that we should be aiming for public transport that is a preferable replacement to a car if all you're moving is your body, and then making a drivers licence a vocational licence, like forklift licences are. From there, it's totally practical to make the answer to this question "once". I'm not a fan of breathalyser-immobiliser devices, because there are inevitably going to be times when driving drunk is the lesser of two evils. People who live in areas prone to doing this:  will sympathise with me when I say that sometimes, no matter what your BAC is, you've gotta drive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Yes, its a city of over 1 million people and has things like trains and working bus systems and a well constructed mixed use central business district. These are things that much larger US cities do not have. I live in the city limits of Houston and my closest bus stop is 11 miles away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Yes, its a city of over 1 million people and has things like trains and working bus systems and a well constructed mixed use central business district. These are things that much larger US cities do not have. Really? I always thought our transit system was basically on par with the States (and not the cities like New York where it's actually decent). And I always saw our CBD as "mixed use, but mainly for business" based on the fact that there's hardly anyone around after 6PM. If major cities in the States are even worse than Calgary, which is basically Canada's monument to lovely urban planning, then... okay, maybe y'all are hosed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Please name thread "Calgary Pro/Con Debate"
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
darthzeta88 posted:I live in the city limits of Houston and my closest bus stop is 11 miles away. Yeah, it's a bit weird to me that anyone would bring up walking home and taking public transportation as universally viable alternatives when public transportation is absent or only functional during the day in a lot of the United States and many people live several miles or more from the closest place where they could drink socially. Not to say that the absence of a good way to get home justifies driving drunk, but as other people are saying it's simplistic to just push a harsh punishment as a solution to this problem because you think all of America is like large, dense metro areas and has lots of options.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Really? I always thought our transit system was basically on par with the States (and not the cities like New York where it's actually decent). And I always saw our CBD as "mixed use, but mainly for business" based on the fact that there's hardly anyone around after 6PM. If major cities in the States are even worse than Calgary, which is basically Canada's monument to lovely urban planning, then... okay, maybe y'all are hosed. Stuff was open for dinner downtown though - in many US cities restaurants in the CBD are not open for dinner.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Stuff was open for dinner downtown though - in many US cities restaurants in the CBD are not open for dinner. Jesus, I thought it was bad that most downtown restaurants close on weekends and shut by 9 on weekdays... Okay, I'm beginning to see the problem here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Feral packs of dogs roam many American downtowns, dodging tumbleweed and rusty muscle cars careening from bar to bar in futile search of cheap vodka to wash away daily sins.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:Yeah, it's a bit weird to me that anyone would bring up walking home and taking public transportation as universally viable alternatives when public transportation is absent or only functional during the day in a lot of the United States and many people live several miles or more from the closest place where they could drink socially.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:To be fair most people advocating for doing these things are also advocating for these things being made viable options for everyone. You ever been outside the big city? A single bus stops in my town twice a day. Once in each direction. There is no "viable option". The advocates you talk about only can achieve prohibition.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Even with a much better public transit system in place, public transit is just never going to an option for a lot of the US.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
The rest of the major US cities should be emulating New York City and Seattle in terms of public transit. Seattle is the #1 city for pedestrian safety due to viable public transit options, dedicated bike lanes, properly timed traffic lights, prominent signage for drivers, and actually useful crosswalks. There is no reason why other big cities like Atlanta, Miami, and Dallas couldn't do the same. I am much more familiar with Atlanta, so I can use this as a comparison: In Atlanta, we have MARTA (Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, colloquially known by racist assholes as "Moving Africans Rapidly Through Atlanta" and this will be relevant in just a minute). MARTA operates a heavy rail system and an extensive bus system that goes outside the perimeter (I-285) on many routes. Taking a bus is viable inside the city limits, because it seems like you can't spit without hitting a bus stop. The train is less useful but is still good for getting to some of the more important places in the city (the city center, Peachtree Street, Midtown, airport, Arts Center, Medical Center station for hospitals, etc) without the need for driving. So why don't people use it more often and vote for funding for public transit expansion? Simple: Racism. It's an urban legend of sorts that "those people" ride the bus and train. Poor people. Poor black people. Poor minorities in general. When MARTA was going to expand the train line north to the wealthy suburbs of Dunwoody, Sandy Springs, and Alpharetta, there was a major pushback due to fear mongering that "criminals" (dogwhistle code for black people) were going to take the train north, rob the wealthy white people, and carry their ill-gotten gains back on the train to their crackhouses. I wish I was exaggerating that in the slightest, but I'm not. That was a legitimate fear. The city of Atlanta pushed it through anyway, and not a single instance of MARTA-related theft and robbery of houses was ever reported. But that idea is still being kicked around that MARTA isn't safe (it has its own police force and is the 8th largest police department in the state) and that if you're white, you're in danger if you're on public transit. It's a ridiculous idea but it's the reason why Atlanta, one of the most sprawling cities in the nation, doesn't have anything more than a halfway decent transit system. As Lewis Black said, "And you fuckers in Atlanta have that MARTA gently caress thing. What's the point? It's a subway to nowhere!" and while he's exaggerating a good bit, it's not nearly as useful as it should be. Edit: Funding is also an issue, but that also comes back to the racial problem. The majority of MARTA's passengers are poor minorities and not white people, so the white people in charge of the state don't want to give any funding to something that would help. MARTA receives no funding from the State of Georgia and is entirely funded by a one cent sales tax solely within the Atlanta city limits and rider fares. There isn't a statewide tax because backwoods yokels in the rest of the state would rather disembowel themselves than send their tax money to do stuff for Atlanta (there's a whole issue with Atlanta vs the rest of Georgia which is a completely different problem altogether and by-and-large the non-Atlantans hate the city and vice versa). HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Oct 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
I remember reading something about how where Uber has become popular, drunk driving has gone way down, so more convenient taxis seems like a partial solution. Maybe an entire solution if they get widespread (and cheap) enough. edit: after googling, "way down" was an exaggeration but looks like they have had some effect. Cicero fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Oct 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
I can only speak to our transit system, but although it's not particularly unsafe, it's definitely more likely to have weird/creepy/harassing/aggressive people on it at the time of night you're likely to be drunk. There are times I would've been pretty nervous if I weren't 6'2" and male. We too have a special police force for transit, but there aren't enough of them and they often seemed more concerned with fare evasion rather than the guy who's harassing people because he's drunk on Lysol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
Dallas is greatly expanding its light rail system and already has built a substantial portion of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:To be fair most people advocating for doing these things are also advocating for these things being made viable options for everyone. That'd be great but it's not what the thread is pushing, at least according to the title, and there's a long way between where we are and public transportation being ubiquitous and effective in the US. I feel like there was a thread not too long ago that concerned owners of pubs in rural Ireland wanting to ease the drunk driving restrictions for their patrons' (and their own) benefit. People brought up as an alternative the idea of pubs running bus loops to take patrons home at night, but I am not sure if that's remotely feasible in Ireland and I doubt much of the rural US is any better. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Oct 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
People drive drunk because they've done it hundreds of times before and never experienced any consequences from it. They prefer to use their car over a taxi/bus/walking for all the reasons they own a car in the first place. Being X% more likely to kill someone isn't a big change in the moral calculus of someone who doesn't think they are someone who would cause a car crash. Also it is probably unhelpful to use the term drunk driving since almost no one conceptualizes themselves as drunk after 2 or 3 drinks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
You have a chicken and egg scenario with urban drunk driving and public transport where yes it sucks if no public transport exists to get you home when you're drunk but people wont push for better public transport if they can drunk drive home.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:You have to blow every X amount of minutes. It's not just blow and go. I work in alcohol testing for an ignition interlock manufacturer. Yeah, most every state requires random retests within intervals when driving. The industry is going in the direction of cameras on ignition interlocks so when you do your servicing they can compare the photos. If you aren't the one blowing they find out. Any decent mechanic can get around an interlock but the device will record that it was disconnected. You could theoretically build a machine that would mimic a human breath pattern but some interlocks now require a "blow then suck" pattern to make it harder to fool. And yes, that does lead to bad jokes at the office. 0.08 is actually pretty lenient and drivers are pretty impaired at that level. People who fall under government DOT guidelines have to stay below a 0.04. In Europe the standard for drivers is 0.05. The rationale many use is that Europeans have less of an excuse because they have public transit but that does not make driving 0.08 any safer in the States. If I were in charge I would go with three strikes and you are on permanent ignition interlock. Circumventing after that means permanent loss of license. There is an inherent unfairness between rich and poor for a DUI. The cost of a DUI averages about $10k for the offender after factoring in court costs, lawyers, and interlock fees. Not sure how to fix this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 10:56 |
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Perhaps, as with teen pregnancy, preemptive education is better than punishment? Creating a culture where drunk driving is considered by your fellow patrons to be bad enough they stop you without the police getting involved at all seems the best course. What changes would need to be made to enable this? Step 1: Ban alcohol marketing. Good luck, it is a $4 billion industry. Step 2: Aggressively target environments where alcohol is consumed to instill the message that you don't have to drink to have a good time in an attempt to roll back the last 60 years or so of alcohol lifestyle marketing making beer/wine/etc synonymous and implicitly/explicitly needed for fun/class/sophistication/etc. Essentially you need to make it so that abstaining or being the DD isn't seen by society as an awful sacrifice. Belome posted:People drive drunk because they've done it hundreds of times before and never experienced any consequences from it. They prefer to use their car over a taxi/bus/walking for all the reasons they own a car in the first place. Being X% more likely to kill someone isn't a big change in the moral calculus of someone who doesn't think they are someone who would cause a car crash. Exactly it is the same logic that leads people to routinely break just about every traffic law in existence: the convenience is immediate and happens every time but the probability of punishment is pretty much zero. You know you should come to a full stop at the stop sign and know that if you don't you run a higher risk of hitting someone but you roll through anyway because you also know that you could do it every day of your life and likely will never get a ticket.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 19:12
|
|
