Drinking/smoking Laws too harsh?

[Kwo-ne'-she]

Driving under the influence is illegal, regardless of your age. While you may have felt "perfectly ok", you were, in fact, under the influence ~ as you admitted drinking two beers, and there was still enough alcohol in your system to register. That is a law that even adults have to deal with.

 

Drinking under the age of 21 is illegal in most places. Does not matter if you, or any other individual agrees with the age limit ~ that is the law.

 

Being out past curfew ~ breaking the law. Doesn't matter if you are one block, one minute, one house from yours. If you are under the legal age to be driving at that time of night, you have broken the law.

 

Laws, even ones we may not agree with, are in place for a reason. Rebelling against them will only make your life harder. Part of being a "responsible adult" is to act like one....which includes obeying the laws we have here.

 

I'm not "flaming" you. I raised 3 very headstrong boys, and was a bit "wild" myself in my younger years. Yes, I drank underage and drove a few times. Was it right? No. As you get older, and look back, you realize the silly mistakes you made as a kid, and strive to do better. I'm grateful I didn't hurt anyone with my own stupidity, and no ~ I wasn't "drunk" either, just a couple of drinks....but still, it was wrong.

 

Drunk driving laws were not put into place simply to ruin everyone's fun. They were enacted because far too many people have been killed by a driver under the influence, or killed themselves by driving under the influence.

 

Before you react, please note that I have been careful to use the phrase "under the influence" (since you deny actual drunkeness), I will take you at your word about the situation happening as you said. The bottom line is, there were apparently several laws broken. Out past curfew, underage drinking, and driving under the influence. All laws which you clearly knew about, but you made the choice to break them, and now must face the consequences. That is what adults do...face the music when they have screwed up.

 

I hope you learn from this, and stop to think about some of the things posted in response to you.

[AriaIncognito]

You broke the law.

 

Doesn't matter if you blew a .01 or a .1, you are 17 and were found to be drinking.

 

You broke the law.

 

Don't try to clear your conscience due to some technicality. There are reasons there are restrictions in place for alcohol consumption. It's morons like you that end up getting people killed. Those that think "i only had 2 i'm fine". Yeah, maybe you were "fine" but you were still breaking the law, and therefore need to deal with the consequences of those actions.

 

MADD would have a field day with this thread.

[Kowhai]

This is a touchy subject for me. as far as I am concerned the drink driving laws are not tough enough. I can not speak for the USA but here in New Zealand they are not tough enough. I would love it to be zero tolerance, One drink and off to jail for the night and a heavy fine imposed. There is some country has it like that. They went from the highest road toll. to the lowest almost over night. It is time the governments of the world got there **** together and outlaw drink driving.

 

Anthony

[Trimmer]

I don't know if you were "drunk," and casting the discussion along that line is not the point. I strongly suspect you were unsafe, and your inability to even consider that is my concern.

 

And I don't consider you a "bad person" because you made what you admit is a stupid mistake. I am concerned because I suspect you think it's stupid only because you got caught, that you don't realize that it was a bad judgement call being a young driver with a couple beers in you, and that you are not even willing to entertain that it might have been less safe for you to drive in that condition.

 

No I havent it happened last night. Did you know that 0.08% level is considered the legal limit for safe driving???

Something maybe your lawyer can explain to you, or perhaps the judge will do it.... What we know as the "legal limit" does not define a "safe" legal limit for drinking. The .08% level in your state is the limit at or above which the state can presume a driver is intoxicated without needing to offer other evidence, but that does not equate to your idea that the law declares you "safe" at any lower level. Even a 25 year old wouldn't be able to say "I was under the limit, so the law says I was safe."

 

Now, some laws do allow an "inference" (a presumption) to be drawn at some lower level - for example, Georgia (which I think someone brought up earlier) appears to provide an inference that could be used in a defense that being below .05% means an adult is not impared, however, the state can even refute that inference with evidence of impairment - slurred speech, a collision, etc... And even with that proviso in the Georgia law, it looks like you would still be in hot water in that state because they have a special .02% limit for underage drivers.

 

So even adults who blow under the limit can be convicted for driving under the influence. As has been pointed out, each state is different, but many states now have a section of their statutes worded something like "...being under the influence of alcohol to the extent that it is less safe to drive," with no connection to blood-alcohol level. In order to convict of this offense, it's not as much of a slam-dunk as with someone who just flat out blows over the limit (which, is often a whole separate offense under the law - the section that presumes intoxication when "over the limit") - if you blow under the limit, the state has to present evidence that the driver was in a "less safe" condition as a result of the alcohol, but it's still quite possible.

 

In your case, you made it easy for them: you are under the drinking age (thus an inexperienced driver, regardless of your extensive 2 years behind the wheel), and you blew .05 (thus you had been drinking), and you were driving. They may even be able to get you for underage posession of alcohol - you'll have to let us know what they get you for at arraignment...

 

Incidentally, how long after you were stopped did you take the breathalyzer?

[Art_Critic]

Incidentally, how long after you were stopped did you take the breathalyzer?

 

Also.. are you sure you only had 2 real sized 12oz beers ?

 

You blew a .05.. if you are 150lbs and drink 3 beers in one hour your BAC will be .052

 

Maybe you don't realize how much you might have really had to drink and you think you really only had 2 beers.. but it seems to me that you may have had more than 2.

A 16oz Dixie cup is 1.5 beers not one... or maybe you guzzled the 2 beers and then got in the car..

 

http://www.shpd.org/articles/drunkometer.html

 

Now.. if you are 80lbs and drink 2 beers in one hour then you would have a BAC of .052...

A BAC meter such as this is not a truly accurate method.. but it is very close..

There are a lot of factors that can things.. such as overweight people..

And overweight person cannot drink more than a normal weight person.. Blood volume is how these charts work and a overweight person has the same blood volume and someone the same bone size, height..

[woodsfield]

SES, you've got to listen to these people, lad.

 

i think some have been a bit harsh, but you've got to understand that thousands of people a year die because of drunken driving.

 

i know, i know..."you were not drunk." please don't tell us again. the fact that you were underage and blew "anything" is the problem. this time you had one or two beers. next time you may have more and on and on.

 

drinking and driving is a BAAAAD habit and it is tough to stop. trust me! i know! i started in high school and had a very hard time quitting. you need grow the f-ck up and don't drive when you drink! PERIOD! it's really REALLY just plain stupid.

 

if someone jumped in front of your car and you killed them, you may have a tough time fighting vehicular homicide (that's what it is where i live, Georgia---Alabama it's just MURDER).

 

as for being mature enough to be drafted and not mature enough to drink, i could not agree more (seriously). however, i'm almost 30 now (so couldn't care less, now), so when you turn 18, join the Army; they let 18 year olds drink on base (off duty and not while shooting insurgents or driving cars).

[sb129]

The law says you were OVER the legal alcohol limit for someone YOUR AGE to be driving a car.

In the eyes of the law, this means you had consumed TOO MUCH alcohol to be considered safe enough to drive.

 

IE, to them, you were drunk. It doesn't matter how you word it, you broke the law. Laws exist for a reason, if everyone who broke the law got off because they were "nearly 18" or they were "only just" over the limit, the laws would be pointless and flouted even more than they are now.\

 

If you are mature enough to drive a car, you should be mature enough to accept responsibility for your actions if you break the rules.

This also means not getting on the defensive or being rude when people point this out.

You aren't a bad person, you made a mistake, but a good person would learn from that mistake, accept they were wrong, and make an effort not to do it again. I hope you do that.

 

I am 29, and and average size woman. If I am driving, I don't drink anything, because its too hard to calculate where my limit would be, as wine and beer these days is much stronger and pub measures can be deceiving.

 

You have had some good advice on this thread. I hope you take some of it on board. Good luck for your hearing.

[luvmy2ns]

I am LOVING the smoking ban in my area!!!!!

[sb129]

Me too... its so nice to go out and come home without your hair and clothes smelling of smoke.

[melodymatters]

Well RE; the smoking ban, I think It's downright unamerican. At least in Florida where I live now, you can still smoke in bars that don't serve food, and if it's a restaurant, well its friggen FLORIDA, standing outside won't for 5 minutes won't kill you.

 

Now in upstate Ny where I used to live, It's every bar, including the little blue collar, beer and a shot places where probably 95% of the customers and workers smoke. AND you can't even smoke under an awning, canopy or umbrella, and the weather gets down to well below zero.

 

They put a LOT of people out of business. Whats so wrong with letting the owners and customers decide by requiring that an alcohol only bar, put up a sign up saying " this is a smoking establishment" and then just don't go in if it will bother you so much ?????

 

I don't believe the govt should tell hardworking business owners how to run their own place, and whether or not a LEGAL product can be used within it's doors.

 

Just my opinion

[luvmy2ns]

I live in Northern MN. Last Sunday I was at one of my favorite places. ALL bars, restaurants, etc. are now non-smoking. The place was packed! Smokers and non-smokers alike. The smokers wanted a smoke, they went outside. No biggy. And yes - it's starting to get a little chilly here in the evenings now. If ruining your health by smoking means more to you than staying warm, you'll also go outside for your cancer stick when it's 30 below. It's their choice to smoke or not. Everyone can certainly choose to not smoke, right? Now there's some freedom of choice for ya! lol

[wwjd]

Well RE; the smoking ban, I think It's downright unamerican.

 

absolutely.

 

there are some cities here in ca where you are now no longer allowed to smoke in parks. that is just ridiculous. there was also something i heard about people not being able to smoke at the beach, but i'm not sure if that was just a proposal or if said absurdity was actually enacted.

 

no smoking in the office? fine. no smoking at restaurants? whatever, fine. no smoking at bars? why the bloody hell not? no smoking at the park or beach? uh, WTF?

 

these stupid bans seriously bother me. no one is going to say that they go to a bar for some kind of "family gathering"; adults are the ones who frequent them, and as such, if there is bar where smoking is allowed and you don't like it, then do go to it.

 

the park, the beach? parks and beach are pretty big and if you are there and someone is having a smoke and you don't like it, then why can't you move to another spot, within the park?

 

because that's not fair to non-smokers? oh, and i suppose that telling smokers they can't smoke out in the open, in some parks or beaches, is?

 

:rolleyes:

[luvmy2ns]

 

these stupid bans seriously bother me. no one is going to say that they go to a bar for some kind of "family gathering"; adults are the ones who frequent them, and as such, if there is bar where smoking is allowed and you don't like it, then do go to it.

:rolleyes:

 

If you don't like not getting to smoke in the bar, don't go to it.:rolleyes:

[wwjd]

If you don't like not getting to smoke in the bar, don't go to it.:rolleyes:

 

no. perhaps you didn't understand my post. it's fine if some bars don't allow people to smoke. truly, there is nothing wrong with that. i have no problem going there and enjoying their entertainment, without smoking or complaining that i cannot smoke.

 

what i do have a problem, however, is that non-smokers are out on this seemingly un-american rampage, trying to get all bars to ban smoking. like me, a non-smoker should also accept that that particular bar does allow smokers to smoker there and should decide to go or not, and not complain about it.

 

if you don't want to smoke or smell smoke, then you should simply not go that particular bar; there are many others for you to go to. you should not, however, form complaints that make it so that every.single.bar in a given state follows your same beliefs.

 

i can understand people's distaste for smoking, so if there is an establishment where smoking is prohibited, i will go and be fine with it, or i will simply not go at all. i don't understand why some non-smokers have this differing mentality and believe that no one should smoke, ever. if it truly bothers you much, then create for yourself a large enough radius where you won't have to deal with it.

[Jinnah]

If i was Drunk go ahead flame all you want. I talk respectfully when people dont jump to conclusions and automatically assume im a bad person for a stupid mistake. I admit what I did was stupid, But I was fine to drive and only got caught because I was out 1 whole minute past curfew and I was less than a minute away from home.

 

 

I'm not here to condemn you, only help. I must point out that you contradicted yourself without even meaning to. You said you made a stupid mistake, and then in the very next sentence, you say you were fine to drive... if you were what stupid mistake did you make? Drink and then drive? Then you were not fine to drive...

 

Plus, all the people I have heard about that drank and then drove and hurt or killed someone said they really thought they really were... you guessed it... "fine to drive." I personally am wasted after one drink... seriously... and I'm 26. Small amounts can make an inexperienced drinker drunk... or are you experienced? If you are, you are making a world of trouble for yourself. There is no way you should be experienced with drinking at 17.

 

No matter what you believe, you have to follow the laws of this country until you don't live here anymore. You have said you won't leave your parents, so you better get used to following the laws of THIS country. I am not trying to bash you, I am just giving an honest, respectfully given, opinion. I am glad the legal age to drink is 21... I bet if it were lowered, there would be a lot more alcohol related deaths. In the countries where it is lower, these people are taught how to drink responsibly and they follow it. Here in America, the spoiled "I can do what I want" attitudes will make the results a lot different.

 

I recently hears a story about a drunk driver that hit a limo bringing a family home from another family member's wedding. Some of people inside were seriously injured. The mother was found on the side of the road holding her young daughter's decapitated head. Things like this happen all the time and you just don't hear about it. I believe you can find this story on Oprah.com. Would you want to be responsible for something like this? I know you wouldn't. Laws are in place for a reason. Just accept it... it will greatly benefit you.

 

It does not matter that you say you were not drunk... everyone says that. In my opinion, no one should drive at all if it would be detectable on a breathalizer (sp?). It would save so many lives.

[Jinnah]

absolutely.

 

there are some cities here in ca where you are now no longer allowed to smoke in parks. that is just ridiculous. there was also something i heard about people not being able to smoke at the beach, but i'm not sure if that was just a proposal or if said absurdity was actually enacted.

 

no smoking in the office? fine. no smoking at restaurants? whatever, fine. no smoking at bars? why the bloody hell not? no smoking at the park or beach? uh, WTF?

 

these stupid bans seriously bother me. no one is going to say that they go to a bar for some kind of "family gathering"; adults are the ones who frequent them, and as such, if there is bar where smoking is allowed and you don't like it, then do go to it.

 

the park, the beach? parks and beach are pretty big and if you are there and someone is having a smoke and you don't like it, then why can't you move to another spot, within the park?

 

because that's not fair to non-smokers? oh, and i suppose that telling smokers they can't smoke out in the open, in some parks or beaches, is?

 

:rolleyes:

 

It's because smoking causes all sorts of health problems... especially second-hand smoke. It could affect a person with asthma to the point where they need to go to the hospital, it raises the risk of cancer, it raises the risk of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) in babies greatly, etc. The person with the asthma or the baby should not have to avoid public places to avoid the consequences because another person decided to do the unhealthy thing. The smoker, on the other hand, should have to find somewhere suitable, not the rest of the population.

 

Hurt yourself all you want, but don't make someone else (who didn't choose to) have to suffer the consequences.

[Jinnah]

I am LOVING the smoking ban in my area!!!!!

 

I am in total agreement with you here. I wish it was like that everywhere.

[woodsfield]

i've been an on and off again smoker. started in high school, quit 7 years ago, started back last year and have not had a smoke since last thursday. my ex boss smoked Kool 100s in the office!

 

the city where i live in GA just recently baned smoking in ALL public buildings...they had it where you could smoke 11 to closing but it was argued that it was still detrimental to public health.

 

point is: i'm torn on this one. i like being able to go places and not come home smelling like an ash tray. however, i don't think it is right for the government to ban it in establishment where there is no food being served and the only underage thing in there is the booze.

 

i get freaked out when i go to other cities and they say "smoking or non"....what? i think of AIRPLANE! when Ted Striker gets the "smoking" ticket. sorry.

[Trialbyfire]

I think the smoking ban is fair.

 

As for the DUI or DWI laws, I can't agree with them more. No matter what level of blood alcohol you blow, there will be people who are impaired. There's no way a law that protects lives, can be adapted to suit everyone's alcohol tolerance level.

[luvmy2ns]

A friend of mine was hashing the issue over - he didn't want to just "agree to disagree" as I recommended we do. He said, "Why are your rights so much more important than mine?!" I said, "Because my NOT smoking isn't going to hurt anybody."

[woodsfield]

"Because my NOT smoking isn't going to hurt anybody."

 

good point...that's why i won't fight the laws.

 

however, should we ban automobiles and other toxen makers that affect me even if i did not drive??? or how about cooking with charcoal??? i guess we are not driving inside or grilling with charcoal inside either.

 

smoking is such a nasty, disgusting bad habit that does affect others. i guess the arguement is that it is not neccesary like driving and cooking is. i dunno...i just HATE the MAN trying to tell me what i should do, what is safe for me and where i can and can not go.

[blind_otter]

Laws exist for a reason, if everyone who broke the law got off because they were "nearly 18" or they were "only just" over the limit, the laws would be pointless and flouted even more than they are now.

 

i think that there are a lot of stupid laws out there. The ones against sodomy for instance, are just plain stupid. Moronic laws exist in every state, every county, and lord knows they exist nationally.

 

The fact that our children can be drafted and murdered before they can legally drink alcohol? Stupid.

 

Admittedly, the OP is a little off in his interpretation of the situation but that doesn't negate some interesting points that he made. I also agree that driving while impaired at any level is stupid.

 

But just because someone made it a law doesn't mean that it makes any goddamn sense. Let's just hope that our populace is intelligent enough to question authority wisely.

[luvmy2ns]

i just HATE the MAN trying to tell me what i should do, what is safe for me and where i can and can not go.

 

But that is already done in so many facets of life and law. It's just that I, as a non-smoker, have had to put up with the wretched, nasty stink long enough. It's our turn now, and I'm enjoying it TOTALLY! I can hear whatever band I want to hear no matter where they're playing. I can go do karaoke in whichever bar I prefer. Because they are ALL no smoking now! Yee Haw!!!

[blind_otter]

no. perhaps you didn't understand my post. it's fine if some bars don't allow people to smoke. truly, there is nothing wrong with that. i have no problem going there and enjoying their entertainment, without smoking or complaining that i cannot smoke.

 

what i do have a problem, however, is that non-smokers are out on this seemingly un-american rampage, trying to get all bars to ban smoking. like me, a non-smoker should also accept that that particular bar does allow smokers to smoker there and should decide to go or not, and not complain about it.

 

if you don't want to smoke or smell smoke, then you should simply not go that particular bar; there are many others for you to go to. you should not, however, form complaints that make it so that every.single.bar in a given state follows your same beliefs.

 

i can understand people's distaste for smoking, so if there is an establishment where smoking is prohibited, i will go and be fine with it, or i will simply not go at all. i don't understand why some non-smokers have this differing mentality and believe that no one should smoke, ever. if it truly bothers you much, then create for yourself a large enough radius where you won't have to deal with it.

 

I agree with this POV RE: smoking bans.

 

I just quit smoking in January of this year. Hell, my beloved father died on lung cancer less than a year ago.

 

But if people want to smoke, they should have that right. Period, end of story. And IMHO there are some serious totalitarian nazi-like attitudes regarding not smoking.

[Jinnah]

I agree with this POV RE: smoking bans.

 

I just quit smoking in January of this year. Hell, my beloved father died on lung cancer less than a year ago.

 

But if people want to smoke, they should have that right. Period, end of story. And IMHO there are some serious totalitarian nazi-like attitudes regarding not smoking.

 

I think people should be able to smoke, just not in places where it can hurt/affect someone else. Heck, my husband used to smoke and I have to admit I thought it was super sexy (lol) but I encouraged him to quit for his health and the health of our family, and he did.