Should BAC limits be left up to the individual driver?

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:21:26 -0800, "C.H." >
wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:50:15 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:10:54 -0800, "C.H." >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:24:02 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Everyone should be required to be competent behind the wheel,
>>>> regardless of how much they drink when they're not driving.
>>>
>>>Habitual drunks are not competent behind the wheel.
>>>
>> I'd prefer that we measure such things objectively.
>
>I can't wait to hear your suggestion.

Stop being so unobjective

>
>>>> I suppose you think it was a good thing that the guy who told his
>>>> doctor he drank a 6-pack a day lost his license.
>>>
>>>Only if he had withdrawal symptoms when sober or if he was caught driving
>>>drunk.
>>
>> As far as we know, neither of those applied to him.
>
>As he is most likely the product of your overactive imagination we can
>safely discount him.

You don't read the news much, do you?

>
>>>As much as you wish I were some MADD fanatic, the only thing I am
>>>interested in is sharing the road with safe drivers. And only because
>>>drunk drivers are unsafe even when they didn't have much to drink I am for
>>>a zero tolerance rule.
>>
>> Which is to say, 1 sip makes a person drunk.
>
>No. You need a refresher course in basic logical reasoning.

That's your logic, buddy boy. You said repeatedly that 1 drink will
lead to another. The implication was clear - if you have 1 drink,
you're very likely to have 2 even if you only started out to drink 1.

>
>A->B means by no means B->A.
>
>Chris

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:52:12 -0500, "Scott M. Kozel"
> wrote:

>"C.H." > wrote:
>>
>> Scott M. Kozel wrote:
>> > "C.H." > wrote:
>> >> Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Are you sure you're not drunk right now?
>> >>
>> >> Yes. However, I am by no means sure that you are not drunk.
>> >
>> > Chris, are you sure that you are not arguing with a bunch of drunks? :-]
>>
>> By now I am pretty sure I _am_ arguing with a bunch of drunks.
>
>I've been wondering about this "Olaf"... is that a screen name?
>It sounds like the sound of violent regurgitation...
>
>O L A F !
>
>One of the results of having too much to drink...

Fool

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:52:12 -0500, "Scott M. Kozel"
> wrote:

>"C.H." > wrote:
>>
>> Scott M. Kozel wrote:
>> > "C.H." > wrote:
>> >> Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Are you sure you're not drunk right now?
>> >>
>> >> Yes. However, I am by no means sure that you are not drunk.
>> >
>> > Chris, are you sure that you are not arguing with a bunch of drunks? :-]
>>
>> By now I am pretty sure I _am_ arguing with a bunch of drunks.
>
>I've been wondering about this "Olaf"... is that a screen name?
>It sounds like the sound of violent regurgitation...
>
>O L A F !
>
>One of the results of having too much to drink...

Fool

In article >,
C.H. > wrote:

>Because alcohol inhibits self control, self assessment and causes euphoric
>feelings, which make you think you are in much better condition than you
>actually are.

Euphoric feelings? Are you sure you're not confusing it with another drug?

In article >,
C.H. > wrote:

>Because alcohol inhibits self control, self assessment and causes euphoric
>feelings, which make you think you are in much better condition than you
>actually are.

Euphoric feelings? Are you sure you're not confusing it with another drug?

In article >,
C.H. > wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:19:58 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> It's too bad most bars are prevented from being in walking distance of
>> most homes by zoning ordnances.
>
>If your belly is too fat to walk over to the zone that bars are allowed in
>you need more exercise and walking will provide you with that.

A neo-prohibitionist HEALTH NUT, no less.

>I will readily admit that the last thing I need in my neighborhood is a
>bar that blasts loud music and has inconsiderate patrons who slam their
>car doors or blabber loudly and drunkenly after midnight.

Yep. Tell people they can't drink unless they walk to the bar, then
make sure there's no bars nearby. The diagnosis of neo-prohibitionist
stands.

In article >,
C.H. > wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:19:58 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> It's too bad most bars are prevented from being in walking distance of
>> most homes by zoning ordnances.
>
>If your belly is too fat to walk over to the zone that bars are allowed in
>you need more exercise and walking will provide you with that.

A neo-prohibitionist HEALTH NUT, no less.

>I will readily admit that the last thing I need in my neighborhood is a
>bar that blasts loud music and has inconsiderate patrons who slam their
>car doors or blabber loudly and drunkenly after midnight.

Yep. Tell people they can't drink unless they walk to the bar, then
make sure there's no bars nearby. The diagnosis of neo-prohibitionist
stands.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:08:33 -0800, "C.H." >
wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:01:53 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:53:55 -0800, "C.H." >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:40:20 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps not, but if that's true then you don't have enough experience
>>>> with alcohol to be passing judgment on those who drink responsibly and
>>>> then drive.
>>>
>>>Your 'I play a videogame to see whether I am sober enough to drive' is
>>>responsible? BRUHAHAHAHAHA!
>>>
>> Bwahahahahaha
>>
>> You can't even distinguish when someone is kidding around and when
>> they're not.
>
>With a normal person

define "normal"

> I would have assumed they were kidding, but with you
>and your self deceptions

No deception on my part. Take a look at yourself.

>the probability was higher that you were not
>kidding.

fool.

>
>>>>>Misery is what you will be in when you kill someone because you were too
>>>>>dumb or too reckless to refrain from driving although you were drunk.
>>>>
>>>> But I won't kill anyone.
>>>
>>>You are suffering from the classic case of self deception.
>>
>> Ah yes....here it comes.
>
>What?

the same old song and dance

>
>>>You may even kill someone sober
>>
>> Not gonna happen.
>
>You must be among the stupidest 2% of drivers, if you really think that
>you cannot make a mistake

It's not that I cannot make a mistake - it's that I WILL not make a
mistake that proves to be fatal.

>that leads to someone else's death. And you must
>be even more stupid if you think that you can't make that mistake even
>drunk.
>
>>>and the risk of you killing someone even when driving with legal BAC is
>>>_drastically_ higher.
>>
>> Again, I ask you to define "drastically".
>
>Depending on whose numbers you believe anywhere between 400% and 1000%.

Cite?

>
>>>To assert that you will not kill anyone, let alone that you will not
>>>kill anyone drunk, is quite simply wrong.
>>
>> Wrong? So you do in fact "know" that I will kill someone?
>
>No,

Then I am not wrong.

>I just know that there is no driver out there, who can guarantee he
>will never make a mistake that leads to someone else's death

Then give up your license before YOU kill someone

>and that you
>are no exception, even though you apparently are stupid enough to believe
>that (see above).
>
>>>> Sorry to disappoint you, but most people who drink and drive don't
>>>> even cause accidents, especially when they aren't even legally drunk.
>>>
>>>Also self deception.
>>
>> Well, here's your opportunity to show me that MOST people who drink and
>> drive cause accidents.
>
>Where did I say that most people who drink and drive cause accidents?
>

See above

>Chris

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:08:33 -0800, "C.H." >
wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:01:53 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:53:55 -0800, "C.H." >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:40:20 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps not, but if that's true then you don't have enough experience
>>>> with alcohol to be passing judgment on those who drink responsibly and
>>>> then drive.
>>>
>>>Your 'I play a videogame to see whether I am sober enough to drive' is
>>>responsible? BRUHAHAHAHAHA!
>>>
>> Bwahahahahaha
>>
>> You can't even distinguish when someone is kidding around and when
>> they're not.
>
>With a normal person

define "normal"

> I would have assumed they were kidding, but with you
>and your self deceptions

No deception on my part. Take a look at yourself.

>the probability was higher that you were not
>kidding.

fool.

>
>>>>>Misery is what you will be in when you kill someone because you were too
>>>>>dumb or too reckless to refrain from driving although you were drunk.
>>>>
>>>> But I won't kill anyone.
>>>
>>>You are suffering from the classic case of self deception.
>>
>> Ah yes....here it comes.
>
>What?

the same old song and dance

>
>>>You may even kill someone sober
>>
>> Not gonna happen.
>
>You must be among the stupidest 2% of drivers, if you really think that
>you cannot make a mistake

It's not that I cannot make a mistake - it's that I WILL not make a
mistake that proves to be fatal.

>that leads to someone else's death. And you must
>be even more stupid if you think that you can't make that mistake even
>drunk.
>
>>>and the risk of you killing someone even when driving with legal BAC is
>>>_drastically_ higher.
>>
>> Again, I ask you to define "drastically".
>
>Depending on whose numbers you believe anywhere between 400% and 1000%.

Cite?

>
>>>To assert that you will not kill anyone, let alone that you will not
>>>kill anyone drunk, is quite simply wrong.
>>
>> Wrong? So you do in fact "know" that I will kill someone?
>
>No,

Then I am not wrong.

>I just know that there is no driver out there, who can guarantee he
>will never make a mistake that leads to someone else's death

Then give up your license before YOU kill someone

>and that you
>are no exception, even though you apparently are stupid enough to believe
>that (see above).
>
>>>> Sorry to disappoint you, but most people who drink and drive don't
>>>> even cause accidents, especially when they aren't even legally drunk.
>>>
>>>Also self deception.
>>
>> Well, here's your opportunity to show me that MOST people who drink and
>> drive cause accidents.
>
>Where did I say that most people who drink and drive cause accidents?
>

See above

>Chris

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:59:32 +0800, Bernd Felsche
> wrote:

>Olaf Gustafson > writes:
>>On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:11:10 -0800, "C.H." >
>>wrote:
>>>On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:48:56 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:13:49 -0600,
>>>> (Matthew Russotto) wrote:
>
>>>>>You trivialize alcoholism. A desire to drink isn't alcoholism, any
>>>>>more than a desire for ice cream is an addiction.
>
>>>> A self-proclaimed alcoholic told me if you get drunk more than 3
>>>> times a year (Birthday, New Years, and 1 other time) you're an
>>>> alcoholic.
>
>>>Who cares, what some nutcase drunkard told you?
>
>>Indeed. Why should I care what some nutcase on usenet says either.
>
>Didn't take you long to figure out Chris Hübner. :-)
>

took me longer than it should have though....goddam booze! ;-)

>Careful; he morphs to ensure that his nutcase advertisements reach
>the widest audience so keep updating your killfiles.