Drinking and driving the American system

ART6

Watching some of the American cops programmes on TV, and having driven in the 'states, I note that if the cops suspect a drunken driver they pull him over and make him do a series of coordination tests. If he can't complete them he's booked. Meanwhile, throughout Europe, we have arbitary systems that simply measure blood alcohol without any consideration of body mass, gender, or alcohol tolerance. And the levels are being reduced regularly in response to RTAs. So a fifteen stone man who drinks regularly is subjected to the same test as an eight stone girl who has only ever before supped Diet Coke.

I lean towards the opinion that our system is an over simplification of the type beloved of our politicians, and that perhaps the American system is fairer. It hits the offenders without penalising the majority for their sins.

Now. I know that I will receive a lot of hostile comments to this thread, so let me make my position clear. I never, ever, drink and drive. I know that research has demonstrated over and over again that even one drink can impair one's driving ability -- but to what extent if you are an experienced driver?

Should someone, experienced and responsible, and living out in the sticks, not be able to drive a couple of miles to the local pub and drink a couple of pints of the black stuff without endangering his licence and possibly his livelihood? Should we not target the real offenders (like those who get so smashed that they can't even open the door without falling over) and hit 'em really hard, and let the rest of the people have some pleasures?

Oh, and please don't bite my ankles. I am not advocating drunken driving.

peasant

I've always found those American roadside tests rather peculiar. I'm pretty sure that I could perform them all to satisfaction after five or six slow paced pints ...but I still wouldn't be fit to drive.

As for driving home on a quiet country road after a few pints ...it only isn't a problem as long as the road stays quiet and everything is within the known parameters. Anything out of the ordinary that demands a quick reaction ...and you're f*cked.

Did a test sponsored by the German ADAC once (decades ago). They had a simulator and let you drive it first while you were sober. Then they gave you an hour and some free beer (the only reason why I went ) and I drove the simulator again having had three pints and feeling absolutely grand.

Had three accidents ...one of them would possibly have been fatal ...that tought me !

Mena

peasant wrote: »

I've always found those American roadside tests rather peculiar. I'm pretty sure that I could perform them all to satisfaction after five or six slow paced pints ...but I still wouldn't be fit to drive.

As for driving home on a quiet country road after a few pints ...it only isn't a problem as long as the road stays quiet and everything is within the known parameters. Anything out of the ordinary that demands a quick reaction ...and you're f*cked.

Did a test sponsored by the German ADAC once (decades ago). They had a simulator and let you drive it first while you were sober. Then they gave you an hour and some free beer (the only reason why I went ) and I drove the simulator again having had three pints and feeling absolutely grand.

Had three accidents ...one of them would possibly have been fatal ...that tought me !

We had a day sponsored by the local police force many a year ago, out on an old abondoned race track. Everyone goes for a run in the provided vehicle, doing standard tests etc. Then we all went and had a BBQ and 3 pints each (they provided :pac: ). Went back and re-did all the driving. Was a blast, but it sure as hell convinced anyone not already convinced that drinking and driving is rather idiotic.

ART6

peasant wrote: »

I've always found those American roadside tests rather peculiar. I'm pretty sure that I could perform them all to satisfaction after five or six slow paced pints ...but I still wouldn't be fit to drive.

As for driving home on a quiet country road after a few pints ...it only isn't a problem as long as the road stays quiet and everything is within the known parameters. Anything out of the ordinary that demands a quick reaction ...and you're f*cked.

Did a test sponsored by the German ADAC once (decades ago). They had a simulator and let you drive it first while you were sober. Then they gave you an hour and some free beer (the only reason why I went ) and I drove the simulator again having had three pints and feeling absolutely grand.

Had three accidents ...one of them would possibly have been fatal ...that tought me !

That's an interesting point. Would you have driven in a real car on a real road in that manner rather than a simulator? Is there not a human psychological difference between simulators and reality?

peasant

ART6 wrote: »

That's an interesting point. Would you have driven in a real car on a real road in that manner rather than a simulator? Is there not a human psychological difference between simulators and reality?

Oh ..you mean the "nothing bad can happen to me here" - feeling that you get in a simulator ...or the very same feeling of invincibility that you get after about three or four pints?
:D:D

Barr

ART6 wrote: »

Watching some of the American cops programmes on TV, and having driven in the 'states, I note that if the cops suspect a drunken driver they pull him over and make him do a series of coordination tests. If he can't complete them he's booked. Meanwhile, throughout Europe, we have arbitary systems that simply measure blood alcohol without any consideration of body mass, gender, or alcohol tolerance. And the levels are being reduced regularly in response to RTAs. So a fifteen stone man who drinks regularly is subjected to the same test as an eight stone girl who has only ever before supped Diet Coke.

I lean towards the opinion that our system is an over simplification of the type beloved of our politicians, and that perhaps the American system is fairer. It hits the offenders without penalising the majority for their sins.

Now. I know that I will receive a lot of hostile comments to this thread, so let me make my position clear. I never, ever, drink and drive. I know that research has demonstrated over and over again that even one drink can impair one's driving ability -- but to what extent if you are an experienced driver?

Should someone, experienced and responsible, and living out in the sticks, not be able to drive a couple of miles to the local pub and drink a couple of pints of the black stuff without endangering his licence and possibly his livelihood? Should we not target the real offenders (like those who get so smashed that they can't even open the door without falling over) and hit 'em really hard, and let the rest of the people have some pleasures?

Oh, and please don't bite my ankles. I am not advocating drunken driving.

Crikey that American system seems funny to me , I thought that only happened in the movies

javaboy

I could be wrong here but isn't body mass implicitly taken into account when using blood alcohol measurements? If the 15st man drinks the same amount as the 8st girl, surely he will have a lower blood alcohol level anyway. Is there a doctor in the house who can say yay or nay to my ramblings?

astraboy

I think Javaboy is right. Every person will need to drink a different amount to go over the legal limit. It depends on your body mass, how tired you are, when you last ate, how stressed you are! I think the US system of standing on one leg and touching your nose is stupid. I could fail that now and I'm sober, but I'm sure there are plenty of drunkards that could get away with it.

The legal limit may not be the best system, I agree there are plenty of people that can go for a few drinks, drive home on an empty road and hurt no one, but the law needs to be applied evenly across the board. The days of "shar its only a few pints" are well and truly over and people will just have to deal with it.

ART6

Astraboy I take your point about the US system. I probably wouldn't pass it sober either, and I do accept that the "just a few jars" days are over which is why I never drink any alcohol if I'm driving. I enjoy driving and I take pleasure from doing it as well as I can. Alcohol would reduce my ability to do that.

Equally, I can't recall the last time I went to a pub, so the question doesn't affect me at all. However, I do feel that this and other legislation generally takes a "one size fits all" approach and restricts the majority to deal with the sins of the few. Example -- D&D laws accompanied by government threats that say if you drink two pints then you are over the limit whoever you are, and speed cameras that catch the few kph over the limit drivers in their thousands in attempting to deal with the boy racers.

The difference between those two examples of course is that you have no reliable means of measuring your own blood alcohol level and so can't decide if you are fit to drive or not. With the cameras at least you have a speedometer to tell you quite precisely what your speed is, but they both are still a one size fits all approach.

barryfitz

Couldnt resist I know its done the rounds before. It has to be a setup but its still funny. I couldnt do some of this stuff stone cold sober.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh5a_uemynU

Gregor Samsa

ART6 wrote: »

Meanwhile, throughout Europe, we have arbitary systems that simply measure blood alcohol without any consideration of body mass, gender, or alcohol tolerance.

ART6 wrote: »

However, I do feel that this and other legislation generally takes a "one size fits all" approach and restricts the majority to deal with the sins of the few. Example -- D&D laws accompanied by government threats that say if you drink two pints then you are over the limit whoever you are

See, there's the flaw in your argument. Breath testing does take body mass, gender and a whole host of other factors into account. The alcohol level that shows up on your breath is influenced by your physiology and metabolism, not to mention external factors like what and when you've eaten.

Which is exactly why the Government doesn't say you'll be over the limit after two pints whoever you are. It says "never ever drink and drive" - precisely so that people don't get it onto their head that there's a fixed amount of consumption under which they'll be grand, when there's not. Two pints could put one person over the limit, and three keep another under it - and the breath testing system recognises that.

Lord Nikon

There's alcohol in mouthwash. i wonder is this taken into consideration when your breath tested in the morning going to work.

Mitch Connor

The american tests would bag me every time - sober or not! Alphabet backwards!? I can't do that sober, never mind drunk!

Gregor Samsa

neuromancer wrote: »

There's alcohol in mouthwash. i wonder is this taken into consideration when your breath tested in the morning going to work.

Yes, it is. If you're unfortunate enough to be breathalysed within about 15 minutes of using a mouthwash containing alcohol (not all do), and you test over the limit on a breath test, a second breath test a little bit later would clear you. Even if that option wasn't available, procedure is that you go to the Garda station and give a urine or blood sample. Unless you've been drinking the mouthwash, they'll come back clean.

seamus

ART6 wrote: »

Should someone, experienced and responsible, and living out in the sticks, not be able to drive a couple of miles to the local pub and drink a couple of pints of the black stuff without endangering his licence and possibly his livelihood? Should we not target the real offenders (like those who get so smashed that they can't even open the door without falling over) and hit 'em really hard, and let the rest of the people have some pleasures?

Actually, I don't think there are any hard and fast figures on how drunk people are when they crash. So it's likely that the most dangerous drink-drivers on the road are those guys who only have 4 pints before getting behind the wheel of the car. I suspect that people who are falling-down-drunk are in the extreme minority, not least because I can't imagine myself being able to drive five feet, let alone five miles, when I'm completely ****faced.
"experienced and responsible" as you well know is irrelevant when you've been drinking. Your experience is generally rendered useless (ever burn yourself with the cooker when you're pissed?) and your ability to make responsible choices is diminished.

ART6 wrote: »

That's an interesting point. Would you have driven in a real car on a real road in that manner rather than a simulator? Is there not a human psychological difference between simulators and reality?

Absolutely. Much of my driving relies on the physical forces which I experience in the car - driving a simulator is just not the same, for me anyway. Whenever I hear people talk about, "We did tests in a simulator", I can't help but think that it's nothing more than a good indicator of trends, but not a serious study at all.

javaboy wrote: »

I could be wrong here but isn't body mass implicitly taken into account when using blood alcohol measurements? If the 15st man drinks the same amount as the 8st girl, surely he will have a lower blood alcohol level anyway.

Correct. BAC perfectly takes into account the physical make-up of the person. A 7 foot, 30 stone giant after 10 pints may have the same BAC as a 5-foot, 8-stone girl after 2. They'll have drank massively differing amounts but will be equally pissed.

neuromancer wrote: »

There's alcohol in mouthwash. i wonder is this taken into consideration when your breath tested in the morning going to work.

Yes and no. The alcohol in mouthwash dissipates quite rapidly, so unless you gurgle, then run out the door, and the Gardai checkpoint you right around the corner, the chances of showing a false positive are quite low. In addition, because you will have gurgled the mouthwash, it will give abnormally high readings - the Garda will see your sober demeanour and the high reading and think that something's up. So they'll probably wait 20 minutes or so and give you another roadside test, which will come up clear.
In any case, failure at the roadside doesn't mean conviction. You will be tested again at the station (either blood, urine or breath) after a wait of an hour or so, by which stage, the mouthwash will be gone.

Stealdo

The other major problem with the US system (and although that video is probably a piss take it kind of demonstrates it) is that you could quite easily practise the test and complete it easily enough through muscle memory, and knowing the alphabet backwards by heart. Ever seen people do a party piece after 15 pints and pull it off perfectly despite barely being able to speak? Magic tricks/songs etc?

Also it's hard enough to make a drink drive conviction stick here as it is with the totally objective measure of Blood Alcahol Level. How much harder would it be if we were to leave it to the subjective decision of the Garda in question? It was widely reported when random testing was brought in that a huge inhibiter to securing convictions was that the Gardai had to prove that they had reason to suspect a person was drunk prior to being allowed to breathalise them. This meant people could go to court and argue their conviction not on whether they were drunk or not but whether the Garda had enough grounds to suspect they were before asking them to blow up the balloon. I can imagine there'd be plenty of folks arguing this one.

Eoin

barryfitz wrote: »

Couldnt resist I know its done the rounds before. It has to be a setup but its still funny. I couldnt do some of this stuff stone cold sober.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh5a_uemynU

That's from Reno 911 - it's a very funny show.

I'd say with a good poker face, the American system wouldn't be that hard to pass - from the ones you see on the cop shows, it looks like you have to be falling down drunk to fail.

Del2005

Stealdo wrote: »

The other major problem with the US system (and although that video is probably a piss take it kind of demonstrates it) is that you could quite easily practise the test and complete it easily enough through muscle memory, and knowing the alphabet backwards by heart. Ever seen people do a party piece after 15 pints and pull it off perfectly despite barely being able to speak? Magic tricks/songs etc?

Also it's hard enough to make a drink drive conviction stick here as it is with the totally objective measure of Blood Alcahol Level. How much harder would it be if we were to leave it to the subjective decision of the Garda in question? It was widely reported when random testing was brought in that a huge inhibiter to securing convictions was that the Gardai had to prove that they had reason to suspect a person was drunk prior to being allowed to breathalise them. This meant people could go to court and argue their conviction not on whether they were drunk or not but whether the Garda had enough grounds to suspect they were before asking them to blow up the balloon. I can imagine there'd be plenty of folks arguing this one.

I knew a person in the States who regularly drank and drove (and a lot more people who I didn't know who also DUI'd). They know how to respond to the Police when asked questions and never get done. I also know a person who doesn't drink who was arrested for DUI in the States!!

At least a breath test gives a yes/no answer and not based on someones abililty to fool a Police person into believing they are sober.

Steve

eoin_s wrote: »

I'd say with a good poker face, the American system wouldn't be that hard to pass - from the ones you see on the cop shows, it looks like you have to be falling down drunk to fail.

Get a mate to video you trying it when you've had a few, it's good for a laugh at least.

Walk the line, balance on one foot, touch your nose with your eyes closed etc...it's actually harder than it looks..:pac:

I did it once - it was scary to watch the next morning, even though we were all adamamt that we had passed the night before.

Eoin

stevec wrote: »

Get a mate to video you trying it when you've had a few, it's good for a laugh at least.

Walk the line, balance on one foot, touch your nose with your eyes closed etc...it's actually harder than it looks..:pac:

I did it once - it was scary to watch the next morning, even though we were all adamamt that we had passed the night before.

How many is a few though - could you pass it with 3 or 4 pints on you?

Steve

eoin_s wrote: »

How many is a few though - could you pass it with 3 or 4 pints on you?

Honestly, I doubt I'd pass it sober.:)

The point I was trying to make is that your perception of the situation changes as you become intoxicated.