Of course they are. Not necessarily dangerous behavior, but observed behavior. Just like how drug possession is most often detected via behavior observation. Furtive movements when stopping, elevated heart rate observed in the neck, nervousness.
If a person is that intoxicated, it’s likely that a trained person can see it.
I highly doubt breathalyzers are as unreliable as the roadside drug testing conducted here. Is it possible for said machines to ping you 5-7 days after you’ve last had a beer
Can they ping you because the person next to you was drinking a beer?
Perhaps they’re unreliable, but they can’t hold a candle compared to the roadside drug tests conducted here.
And what ultimately (what test) will decide if he has been drinking? What do you do when you determine he has been drinking? Maybe you have some measurement that decides whether or not someone has drunk too much to drive?
You don’t need training to see someone hit a pedestrian.
Ok. You said a lot of DUI’s are given without reckless behavior. So we agree that few DUI’s are given without observed behavior? And we agree that driving while intoxicated is reckless behavior. Sounds like we see things the same way.
So you were trying for a “Gotcha!” Nice. I figured.
No, Officers looking for DUI arrests don’t waste their time messing with people who don’t have observable signs that they likely are. Just like with drug arrests.
No I’m not. I’m using the definition of reckless. When you read the definition of reckless how does it not fit?
I didn’t even think about it being reckless behavior itself until you said something. That’s when I looked up the exact definition and realized it fit. But I wasn’t searching for gotcha in the least bit my question to you was sincere.
Would you say the limits should be changed for someone driving a tesla in autopilot? People have been arrested because the police have observed them fully asleep in the drivers seat. People have also been arrested for being not present in the drivers seat, but in the back laying down.
In many cases autopilot can get you 99% of the way home, and even someone who is pretty drunk could be plausibly safer than someone who is completely sober. IMO, self driving is going to bring a bunch of questions around DUI enforcement in the near future.
Observation of a combination of the listed factors(odor of alcoholic beverage being a major one). Arrest him and take him to jail.
From what I’ve found .3% of people who went through a DUI checkpoint were arrested. The overwhelming number of people arrested aren’t via checkpoint.
Probably not… Or maybe… autopilot doesn’t automatically break harshly, nor will they turn left/right at a roundabout/street (believe it or not I’ve actually d
had the privilege one of these Tesla’s once… for like five minutes… under the very, very close supervision of an adult…) Until we have compiled data/trials conducted indicating a Tesla can be driven safely with X BAC we should hold off on loosening restrictions. When we get into the realm of driverless cars (entirely driverless) perhaps scrapping BAC entirely would be the way to go (completely driverless, no pedals/breaks/steering wheels and/or requiring manual override in order to take the wheel during an emergency).
Maybe the fairest way would be to take an objective safety test with your car (if you have lane assist that is fine, and helps you, if you have autopilot even more assistance). You take the driving test sober first, then continue to drink and take the test until you can’t pass anymore, and that would become your legal limit (adjusted slightly lower like speed limits would make some sense too). Seems like if we care about safety, this would make pretty good sense.
This indicates 99.7 percent passed, right? If you don’t pass an RBT/RDT here you’ll get arrested, they can’t have you driving home if you’re drunk (understandable) or if you’ve smoked a joint last week (…)
Perhaps, but metabolism of alcoholic beverages will differ based upon carbohydrate intake, level of physical fitness, age, weight, wakefulness and more. Given all these variables having 3 drinks on night A may be very different from 3 drinks on night B. Furthermore 3 shots back to back will differ from 3 beers, peak BAC with the shots will be higher.
You might be tired on night A, but energetic on night B etc, there’s no uniform level of alcohol consumption = x effect. Furthermore, with alcohol one typically percieves impairment at a lesser rate compared to how intox they are. Similar to benzodiazepine intoxication, delusions of sobriety are rather common.
I could have one beer every 1-1/2 hrs over a 7.5 hour night out, get behind my car 9 hrs afterwards and probably blow 0.00, but I’ve had five beers
Some speed limits on certain roads were determined by observing how fast people would go without a speed limit. It has been studied that a large majority of people will drive a safe speed without a speed limit. They measure the speed and reduce it by 20% or so, and that is the new speed limit.
I would not be opposed to lowering the limit a set amount for everyone. Say you pass at 0.12, and we reduce by 25% so that your limit is 0.09. The amount we reduce it by is obviously debatable.
I just don’t think we should treat Senna / Andretti in their primes the same way as Grandma. They probably had faster reaction times than I do when they are completely plastered.
They’ve been employing speed limits here (like the new draconian 18mph in suburban neighborhoods) based upon certain data regarding road safety.
Speed limits here to my knowledge aren’t based upon how fast people go without them, they’re based upon
- roadside safety data
- (in my conspiracy theorist opinion) how to raise as much revenue as possible. Seriously they’ll pull you over and fine you like 300$+ if you’re going over 1.5mph over, we’ve also got cars pulled aside equipped with hidden speed cameras, bridges with speed cameras under them etc
I’ve never gotten a demerit point because I don’t speed, I also coincidentally happen to know where all the bridge cameras are located.
DUI is actually closer to negligence. The idea that it’s in the “reckless” family is absurd. “This guy is too drunk to drive, but sober enough to be said to not care about the consequences of his actions.”
The rhetoric goes when you’re drunk you don’t care about potential consequences, when you’re sober you’ve got more inhibition. The level of ethanol induced disinhibition differs from person to person. Alcohol induced psychosis is a common phenomenon (typically acute in nature).
Some people (such as myself) are merely very happy, friendly when drunk… Others might go full crackhead. All of us have probably made at least one decision we regret when under the influence.
I recall shamelessly hitting on my cousins friend during my 18ths, she was a good twelve (wait… eleven…) years older than I was.