Should BAC limits be left up to the individual driver?

"C.H." > writes:
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:26:06 -0600, Matthew Russotto wrote:
>> In article >,
>> C.H. > wrote:

>>>Or a bicycle.

>> Clever neo-prohibitionists have gotten the drunk driving laws
>> applied to bicycles.

>You won't believe it, drunk driving laws are applied to cars too
>and if you are too drunk to bike you are also too drunk to drive -
>as seen from the standpoint of the law. Or are you trying to say,
>that you get so drunk that you can't ride in a straight line any
>more and hope that the heavier car won't show your impairment off
>as much as the less stable bike?

You've really lost the plot.

<sarcasm>
We (tinw) all know that you have to pedal faster to stabilise the
bicycle. So the more drunk you are, the faster you should go!
</sarcasm>
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
X against HTML mail | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \ and postings | to help me spread!

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:12:35 GMT, "John Mara" >

>
>"C.H." > wrote in message
...
>
>> I have seen too many people die on
>> the road under the influence of alcohol, a lot of them thinking they were
>> sober enough to drive (in fact most of them). If you can't tell this from
>> 'prohibition' it's your problem.
>
>Who are you, Calamity Jane? I've never seen anyone die on the road under
>the influence of alcohol.
>

lol - ya' gotta wonder about someone who claims they're not an
alcoholic, nor working in the ER of a hospital or a cop who has seen so
many people die from driving drunk.

Maybe he's been the driver in most of these cases.

>John Mara

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:12:35 GMT, "John Mara" >

>
>"C.H." > wrote in message
...
>
>> I have seen too many people die on
>> the road under the influence of alcohol, a lot of them thinking they were
>> sober enough to drive (in fact most of them). If you can't tell this from
>> 'prohibition' it's your problem.
>
>Who are you, Calamity Jane? I've never seen anyone die on the road under
>the influence of alcohol.
>

lol - ya' gotta wonder about someone who claims they're not an
alcoholic, nor working in the ER of a hospital or a cop who has seen so
many people die from driving drunk.

Maybe he's been the driver in most of these cases.

>John Mara

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 19:14:01 -0800, "C.H." >

>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:27:22 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:26:42 -0800, "C.H." >
>> wrote:
>>>> So, I'm an alcoholic because I will drive after 1-2 drinks, right?
>>>
>>>Where did I say that you are an alcoholic? And where did I say that anyone
>>>who drives after 1-2 drinks is an alcoholic?
>>
>> Google is your friend.
>
>If you claim I said something, prove it, otherwise shut up.
>
>> You said it - why the hell do you think so many people are giving you
>> so much **** about your statements?
>
>No, I didn't say it, which is why you are stamping your foot like a three
>year old, believing that if you say something loud enough people will
>believe you without you having to actually prove it.

I don't see him stamping his foot any harder than you are.

>
>And the reason why some people here are ****y like Brent P is, that there
>was a lengthy thread quite some time ago where I as a relative newcomer
>dared to attack the opinion of the revered regulars.
>
>> I'm not sure if your problem is substance related or not, but you do
>> have a problem.
>
>I have a problem with bull****ters and liars like you.
>
>> I don't believe you're mentally competent to drive.
>
>That doesn't really matter, because you are not mentally competent to make
>this assessment.

I don't think you're competent to drive either, sober or otherwise.

>
>> But then again, I probably hang around a classier group of people than
>> you do - people who know how to exercise self-control.
>
>You don't know how to exercise self control, so why would classy people
>with self control want to hang out with you?
>
>Chris

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 19:14:01 -0800, "C.H." >

>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:27:22 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:26:42 -0800, "C.H." >
>> wrote:
>>>> So, I'm an alcoholic because I will drive after 1-2 drinks, right?
>>>
>>>Where did I say that you are an alcoholic? And where did I say that anyone
>>>who drives after 1-2 drinks is an alcoholic?
>>
>> Google is your friend.
>
>If you claim I said something, prove it, otherwise shut up.
>
>> You said it - why the hell do you think so many people are giving you
>> so much **** about your statements?
>
>No, I didn't say it, which is why you are stamping your foot like a three
>year old, believing that if you say something loud enough people will
>believe you without you having to actually prove it.

I don't see him stamping his foot any harder than you are.

>
>And the reason why some people here are ****y like Brent P is, that there
>was a lengthy thread quite some time ago where I as a relative newcomer
>dared to attack the opinion of the revered regulars.
>
>> I'm not sure if your problem is substance related or not, but you do
>> have a problem.
>
>I have a problem with bull****ters and liars like you.
>
>> I don't believe you're mentally competent to drive.
>
>That doesn't really matter, because you are not mentally competent to make
>this assessment.

I don't think you're competent to drive either, sober or otherwise.

>
>> But then again, I probably hang around a classier group of people than
>> you do - people who know how to exercise self-control.
>
>You don't know how to exercise self control, so why would classy people
>with self control want to hang out with you?
>
>Chris

"C.H." > writes:
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:16:48 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:41:12 -0800, "C.H." >
>> wrote:
>>>> You don't get to bind my fist just because you fear for the safety of
>>>> your nose.

>>>Your fist won't kill me (and you would not like the retribution either).

>> Yeah - that's rich. Not only are you a medical doctor capable of
>> diagnosing alcoholism over the internet, you're a tough guy too.

>I never called you an alcoholic, despite all your claims to the contrary.
>And it doesn't take a tough guy to defend himself against some bigmouth
>like you.

But it takes a tough guy to ignore an annoying little flea like you.

Hush... what's that sound?
Could it be the sound of Christian Hübner being plonked?
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
X against HTML mail | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \ and postings | to help me spread!

"C.H." > writes:
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:16:48 -0700, Olaf Gustafson wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:41:12 -0800, "C.H." >
>> wrote:
>>>> You don't get to bind my fist just because you fear for the safety of
>>>> your nose.

>>>Your fist won't kill me (and you would not like the retribution either).

>> Yeah - that's rich. Not only are you a medical doctor capable of
>> diagnosing alcoholism over the internet, you're a tough guy too.

>I never called you an alcoholic, despite all your claims to the contrary.
>And it doesn't take a tough guy to defend himself against some bigmouth
>like you.

But it takes a tough guy to ignore an annoying little flea like you.

Hush... what's that sound?
Could it be the sound of Christian Hübner being plonked?
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
X against HTML mail | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \ and postings | to help me spread!

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:18:23 -0800, "C.H." >

>
>> But it IS okay to drink a few.
>
>Unfortunately yes - and a lot of people die because of this.

Maybe they should do some cocaine to keep them alert when they hit the
road after a few drinks.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:18:23 -0800, "C.H." >

>
>> But it IS okay to drink a few.
>
>Unfortunately yes - and a lot of people die because of this.

Maybe they should do some cocaine to keep them alert when they hit the
road after a few drinks.

"C.H." > writes:
>On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 15:35:10 -0600, Matthew Russotto wrote:
>> In article >,
>> C.H. > wrote:

>>>> There's that neo-prohibitionist again -- "Wanna drink? MOVE!".
>>>
>>>No. Neo-prohibitionist says: Wanna drink? No way!

>> Nope, that would be the old-fashioned paleo-prohibitionist. More
>> honest than their neo- bretheren, but just as irritating.

>Irritating is an in-duh-vidual like you who tries to stick me into
>a bracket with all kinds of bozos just because I don't condone your
>drinking and driving.

Irritating is that you need to stereotype people. Perhaps it's due
to limited mental capacity that you can't treat and think of people
as individuals.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
X against HTML mail | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \ and postings | to help me spread!