Driving after drinking

[The Penguin]

Many people heard about don't drink and drive. Yet many people still do it. I know different areas allow a certain blood alcohol level until you're not aloud to drive. Still, there many people will still drive even when they past this limit. I get very disgusted for people are heavy drinkers and want to drive afterwards. This is a confusing topic for me as I'm not a drinker. If they lose their own life being careless of drinking too much and driving behind the wheel I have no pity for them. However, when they cause an accident to someone else, this makes me very angry.

 

[wyverary]

If you are feeling the least bit buzzed, that , in my opinion, is driving under the influence. Always have a designated driver and make sure they do not have one single drink.

 

[Judge]

I underwrote private passenger auto insurance for many years. I still recall one time when I ran someone's CA MVR and it was literally 26 pages long. A record number of offenses in house. It is utterly mind-boggling how some people will not only drink and drive, but do it on a revoked license due to multiple DUIs and other moving violations. And repeat this violation over and over. Until they finally injure or kill someone, where it becomes a felony with prison time where they are finally separated from their car and their freedom.

When such people are on the road, it can be appallingly dangerous for everyone else.

 

[Suzanne]

I know Penguin, it confounds decency. But that is the mentality. When under the influence of alcohol, many lose their inhibitions and thus become careless.

Like you, I have no pity for ones who put theirs and others lives at risk. It disgusts me when a hospital is too busy with drunks and drug abusers, to take care of others.

Can you imagine a parent rushing with their child to the hospital and are turned away, because the staff are over run with dealing with drunks? Or an elderly one has fallen and needs medical attention, but staff are too busy, stopping drunks from causing trouble? This happens and makes me shake with anger.

I do feel blessed, however that I have my faith and know why all this happens, which stops me going crazy with injustices in this world.

 

[Randomperson]

Agreed, on the first offense they should inject a chip into the liver that causes pain when drinking too much, and install a device in the car that senses the chip and alc level and blocks said moron from driving while drunk.

 

[StephF]

I think persistent repeat offenders should eventually get a lifetime ban. No more driving for you !.

Unfortunately, that would likely cause them to drive while disqualified and that is a whole different thing. I better stop here before I get onto my soapbox and start ranting.

 

[Harrison]

I often have to recover what's left of the carnage they cause, in my eyes they should be locked up and stripped of any future right to drive.

 

[Jaywalker]

I don't understand why it is socially unacceptable to drink and drive while it is socially acceptable, and often legal, to operate a cell phone, hands free or not, while driving. They cause similar levels of impairment.

I know of no activity during which the Dunning-Kruger effect is more readily apparent than driving. Most people feel they have sufficient skills to operate their vehicle competently while impaired, whether the impairment be chemically or technologically induced.

Impaired driving is a serious problem, but it makes no sense to single out drunk driving.

 

[The Penguin]

and often legal, to operate a cell phone, hands free or not, while driving. They cause similar levels of impairment.

You brought up an interesting argument. I have no issues hands free but do have issues people texting and other activities that requires looking at the phone screen. They eyes should be watching the road, not devices non related to the car. The only reason for me looking at my phone screen is for the GPS feature.

 

[AsheSkyler]

The most I ever have out is a sip/mouthful of whatever my husband's having to satisfy flavor curiosity. (And I drive home.) By the end of the meal, I don't even have a hint of it in my mouth anymore.

I don't understand why it is socially unacceptable to drink and drive while it is socially acceptable, and often legal, to operate a cell phone, hands free or not, while driving. They cause similar levels of impairment.

I know of no activity during which the Dunning-Kruger effect is more readily apparent than driving. Most people feel they have sufficient skills to operate their vehicle competently while impaired, whether the impairment be chemically or technologically induced.

Impaired driving is a serious problem, but it makes no sense to single out drunk driving.

Not me, I drive SO much better when I'm talking or lightly distracted. My speed is steady and at the level it's supposed to be, I'm a good distance away from whoever is in front, and it's generally the opposite of when all I have to focus on is driving. The only time I look at the phone is to make sure I'm holding it right-side up before I answer it! Texting is no no.

 

[Judge]

I don't understand why it is socially unacceptable to drink and drive while it is socially acceptable, and often legal, to operate a cell phone, hands free or not, while driving. They cause similar levels of impairment.

Yup. If the police catch someone driving and operating a handheld device here it's expensive. Over $200 fine.

People do it anyways.

 

[Jaywalker]

I have no issues hands free but do have issues people texting and other activities that requires looking at the phone screen.

It's the mental distraction that's problematic. Hands free doesn't address that.

If the police catch someone driving and operating a handheld device here it's expensive. Over $200 fine.

That seems pretty light. What are the consequences for driving under the influence? Why is there a discrepancy?

 

[The Penguin]

It's the mental distraction that's problematic. Hands free doesn't address that.

If you look at it this way, hands free wouldn't be much different than speaking to an passenger in a car. The only difference is the audio source is remotely instead of locally in the car.

 

[Judge]

That seems pretty light. What are the consequences for driving under the influence? Why is there a discrepancy?

A fair question given that such a civil offense can cause a fatality every bit as can the criminal offense of DUI.

The discrepancy? My guess would be highly $ucce$$ful lobbying of our state legislature on the part of the telecommunications industry.

 

[Jaywalker]

If you look at it this way, hands free wouldn't be much different than speaking to an passenger in a car. The only difference is the audio source is remotely instead of locally in the car.

The data do not lie. Source Source2 Source3

Edit to add: Talking with a passenger is also distracting. Anecdotally, I know my own driving suffers when I talk with passengers.

 

[The Penguin]

The data do not lie. Source Source2

Your kinda missing my point. If your against drivers speaking hands free on the phone, are you also against drivers speaking to passages too. Explain your reasoning in your own words. Not just throwing a source and not writing any text.

 

[Jaywalker]

Your kinda missing my point. If your against drivers speaking hands free on the phone, are you also against drivers speaking to passages too. Explain your reasoning in your own words. Not just throwing a source and not writing any text.

No, I'm not missing your point. As I wrote above, and the data indicate, talking with a passenger is also distracting.

People tend to think of driving as on of the things they do as they multi-task. The reality is that driving is multi-tasking, all by itself.

People base their determination of the amount of attention needed for the task when everything is going well and predictably. It's when something unexpected occurs that a driver's skill is tested. A competent driver is always prepared for dealing with unexpected events. Since they don't know exactly when or what those unexpected events will be, the must be fully attentive at all times. When the unexpected occurs, reacting quickly and correctly is often a matter of life and death.

 

[The Penguin]

No, I'm not missing your point. As I wrote above, and the data indicate, talking with a passenger is also distracting.

People tend to think of driving as on of the things they do as they multi-task. The reality is that driving is multi-tasking, all by itself.

People base their determination of the amount of attention needed for the task when everything is going well and predictably. It's when something unexpected occurs that a driver's skill is tested. A competent driver is always prepared for dealing with unexpected events. Since they don't know exactly when or what those unexpected events will be, the must be fully attentive at all times. When the unexpected occurs, reacting quickly and correctly is often a matter of life and death.

You're making a too complex discussion. Truck drivers, bus drivers, etc., have to have contact with radio to the main command center. There many times they must speak to them while driving. There are many jobs requires talking while driving. They key thing is having responsible drivers that can handle this. Anyhow, if your going to continue to debate about this topic, I"m going to end the conversation right here with you.

 

[Jaywalker]

You're making a too complex discussion. Truck drivers, bus drivers, etc., have to have contact with radio to the main command center. There many times they must speak to them while driving. There are many jobs requires talking while driving. They key thing is having responsible drivers that can handle this. Anyhow, if your going to continue to debate about this topic, I"m going to end the conversation right here with you.

You're the one making the issue unnecessarily complex. You're trying to differentiate based on the cause of cognitive impairment, not the impairment itself. The reality is that distracted driving increases risk for other road users similarly to drunk driving. It makes zero sense to oppose drunk driving and condone cell phone use while driving. One is as bad as the other. It's that simple, not complex at all.

Responsible drivers don't do either.

 

[AsheSkyler]

It's pretty safe to say that's the Dunning-Kruger effect at work. It's extremely unlikely that you're actually an anomaly.

No, it's not. It's pretty safe to say you have no idea what hyperfocus is.