OSU's Adolphus Washington cited for solicitation...

[Across The Field]

Wow. You're a pretty arrogant individual. Calling me a "kid" when you're the one condoning driving under the influence above the legal BAC. Maybe you should be the one doing some growing up? Again, I hope you don't have kids.

I find it inappropriate to condone driving under the influence. I have my own personal reasons why I vehemently despise it. Sorry if I don't want his line of thinking trickling down.

So you have your own personal reasons. Guess what? That doesn't mean I have to share your views. By your line of thinking, .079 is fine but .08 is completely different. In my mind, that's fucking stupid. There's a huge difference between being slightly over the limit and being dramatically over the limit. I don't condone drunk driving, but I condone what JT did because in his instance, it was clear that he wasn't a danger to anyone by his actions.

Saying I condone drunk driving because I don't think being slightly over the limit is a danger is the same as me saying you condone reckless speeding because you have no problem with being slightly over the speed limit. Same fundamental line of thinking, but you're the one being sanctimonious about it.

 

[Wamu]

Don't forget that it's ok to nail hookers.

Only in Sin City though! Hey what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.

 

[Across The Field]

Don't forget that it's ok to nail hookers.

Judging by the way you post on here, I find it extremely hard to believe you have a fundamental moral objection to hookers. You strike me as the type of guy who hasn't fucked a prostitute, but if in your younger age, you were in Vegas and the opportunity presented itself, you would strongly consider it.

 

[7Samurai13]

I don't disagree with both of them being stupid and idiotic, look at what it cost each respective guy. For people in their shoes, yes it was extremely stupid.

At what level is it not okay to drive drunk? Is .10 ok? I have a high tolerance so .15 should be ok for me, right?

 

[Wamu]

So you have your own personal reasons. Guess what? That doesn't mean I have to share your views. By your line of thinking, .079 is fine but .08 is completely different. In my mind, that's fucking stupid. There's a huge difference between being slightly over the limit and being dramatically over the limit. I don't condone drunk driving, but I condone what JT did because in his instance, it was clear that he wasn't a danger to anyone by his actions.

Saying I condone drunk driving because I don't think being slightly over the limit is a danger is the same as me saying you condone reckless speeding because you have no problem with being slightly over the speed limit. Same fundamental line of thinking, but you're the one being sanctimonious about it.

Sorry but drunk driving is drunk driving, plain & simple. Doesn't matter if you're slightly over the limit or totally shitfaced.

 

[7Samurai13]

Only in Sin City though! Hey what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.

Except herpes, that shit will stay with you.

 

[Across The Field]

Sorry but drunk driving is drunk driving, plain & simple. Doesn't matter if you're slightly over the limit or totally shitfaced.

I strongly disagree. Two completely different frames of mind and two completely different abilities in terms of reaction time and decision-making.

 

[Wamu]

Except herpes, that shit will stay with you.

Not if ya double wrap yer Jimmie!

 

[7Samurai13]

Judging by the way you post on here, I find it extremely hard to believe you have a fundamental moral objection to hookers. You strike me as the type of guy who hasn't fucked a prostitute, but if in your younger age, you were in Vegas and the opportunity presented itself, you would strongly consider it.

In my younger days, I was broke.

No, morally I am not against pros or weed. Legalize it, regulate it, tax the ever loving shit out of it. It won't effect me and maybe Michigan can get some decent roads

 

[Across The Field]

At what level is it not okay to drive drunk? Is .10 ok? I have a high tolerance so .15 should be ok for me, right?

Can't tell you exactly, but at thousandths of a percentile above the legal BAC, no I don't consider that dangerous. I have to imagine there are more than enough studies done that examine the frequency of accidents or citations at different BAC levels.

 

[Wamu]

I strongly disagree. Two completely different frames of mind and two completely different abilities in terms of reaction time and decision-making.

Alrighty then. I still say if you're drunk you're drunk. Ones decision making is impaired once ya get behind the wheel after drinking. Doesn't matter how much someone has had.

 

[Across The Field]

In my younger days, I was broke.

No, morally I am not against pros or weed. Legalize it, regulate it, tax the ever loving shit out of it. It won't effect me and maybe Michigan can get some decent roads

So was I. I'm actually going to Vegas for the first time ever next February with a couple of old college friends. I'm looking forward to it but at the same time, at 31, I am unsure how I should approach the situation.

 

[Wamu]

At what level is it not okay to drive drunk?

When someone has puked on their shoes? Anything before that is a-o-k!

 

[Across The Field]

Alrighty then. I still say if you're drunk you're drunk. Ones decision making is impaired once ya get behind the wheel after drinking. Doesn't matter how much someone has had.

It simplifies it, I'll give you that. I guess I look at it like speeding. 70 in a 65 and 120 in a 65 are both speeding, but I'm sure you don't view them in the same light, right?

 

[bamabear82]

So was I. I'm actually going to Vegas for the first time ever next February with a couple of old college friends. I'm looking forward to it but at the same time, at 31, I am unsure how I should approach the situation.

Surely you've seen The Hangover. I'd go with that as my baseline.

 

[Wamu]

It simplifies it, I'll give you that. I guess I look at it like speeding. 70 in a 65 and 120 in a 65 are both speeding, but I'm sure you don't view them in the same light, right?

Only if the person speeding is drunk!

 

[chy1127]

Dude I don't care about "this one guy" you know. I know a guy who got in a car accident going 67 in a 65, so does that mean you're now going to condemn anyone who drives 2 MPH over the speed limit?

What Barrett did wasn't a big deal, and if you actually read the story and watched the video, he was clearly fine. He wasn't slurring his speech, he was very lucid, he was respectful, and he didn't even get pulled over for a moving violation.

Yes. The "I was clearly fine defense" to drunk driving.

 

[7Samurai13]

So was I. I'm actually going to Vegas for the first time ever next February with a couple of old college friends. I'm looking forward to it but at the same time, at 31, I am unsure how I should approach the situation.

I went to Vegas at 28, but was broke, and went out there for Ultimate frisbee and to win 10k. Sadly we Michigan State'd it and only lost to both teams in the finals by a combined 3 points. But we won the party at the fields.

 

[Across The Field]

When someone has puked on their shoes? Anything before that is a-o-k!

Common DUI/DWI Myths - National Motorists Association

Myth: Lowering the legal BAC limit for DWI will get the “drunks” off the road.

Truth: People at .1 or .08 are not automatically “drunks” and they are not the people who should be targeted for DWI enforcement. The average DWI violator is arrested with a BAC of .15 to .17 percent. Even in countries with extremely low legal BAC limits (e.g. Sweden at .02), the average DWI arrest involves a BAC of at least .15 percent.

I know you don't agree, but this is the kind of logic I use when looking at DUI arrests. Probably the reason I feel so adamant about it is because the repercussions for driving even at the lowest possible BAC over .08 can be completely devastating to someone when it shouldn't be, meanwhile the average cost for a texting and driving citation (which has been proven time and time again to be far more dangerous than driving at a .08), is about $150.

 

[Across The Field]

When someone has puked on their shoes? Anything before that is a-o-k!

https://abionline.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/05+Legal+BAC+One+Sheet.pdf

Here's another one

Out of the over 32,000 U.S. traffic fatalities in 2011, less than one percent were caused by drivers between .05 and .08 percent BAC...Over 70 percent of drunk driving fatalities are caused by drivers with BAC levels of .15 percent or higher. The average BAC of a drunk driver involved in a fatal crash is .16 percent—twice the current legal limit. A .05 limit targets social drinkers instead of the hardcore drunk drivers who cause the vast majority of alcohol-related traffic fatalities.