Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I apologize for bringing politics into this, Denny. I should have refrained from posting on this thread from the get-go. I'll keep my politics to myself in the future.The government claims they want to lower the limit to save lives and protect us from ourselves, but their true agenda has always been zero tolerance and Big Brother controlling yet another aspect of our lives.
This is getting dangerously close to political and I may end up deleting this response, but you;d be hard pressed to prove the bolded part.
I'm really tired of random numbers the government pulls out of its you-know-what. I trust myself on the road with a 0.15% BAC a lot more than some of the drivers I just encountered today.
did you read the article? it's hardly a random number. it's been well tested and studied in real world situations it sounds like.
I know that I do not trust myself at .08 in fact I don't think I would trust myself at .05. for me, at... let's just go with 200 lb. it's close enoughI can have a drink and then drive or two or three drinks over an evening with food and drive. that's where I feel safe and I think I likely am, although not as safe as I would be on no booze at all.
very nearly everyone that get's behind the wheel when they shouldn't thinks that THEY can be trusted more that those other guys. I am not saying that you are an unsafe driver but if I was hanging out without and you had enough booze to be at .15 I would not get in a car with you and I would STRONGLY suggest that you at least wait a while before driving.
If everyone would be responsible, rational, and honest with themselves and others about their current level of safe driving ability all the time then we wouldn't need BAC limits but they aren't and we do. and it does in fact reduce fatalities. Driving in public is a privilege not a right.
I don't disagree that someone at .15 should not be behind the wheel. But, the article also pointed out that lowering the legal limit from 0.1 to 0.08 hasn't done much to reduce drunk driving related fatalities, and the move from 0.08 to 0.05 likely would not either. I agree with the statement made in the article that focusing on repeat offenders and those who are clearly above the legal limit would be more affective than targeting someone who had a pint at dinner.
I could support this if it came with other changes to the laws.
2. Rezone to allow more bars near houses. The closest brewery to my house is about nine miles away. The nearest pub is over four miles. The nearest place to buy packaged beer is the grocery store over a mile away. If there was a bar in my neighborhood we would hang out there, now we just rotate houses between about five families. I miss living in the city
In the PA coal region, neighborhood bars that literally double as people's homes are a common thing. However, a friend of mine was busted for trying to walk home, which was three doors away from a bar. An undercover liquor control guy followed him outside.
What was the charge? Walking while intoxicated? Public staggering/shuffling? Excessive eye watering?
Paul
I could support this if it came with other changes to the laws.
2. Rezone to allow more bars near houses. The closest brewery to my house is about nine miles away. The nearest pub is over four miles. The nearest place to buy packaged beer is the grocery store over a mile away. If there was a bar in my neighborhood we would hang out there, now we just rotate houses between about five families. I miss living in the city
I'm a member of JbreW (reg. AHA club) Johnson & Wales Univ. in Providence, RI. I moved so I don't participate any longer in brew days or events, but I still receive emails and participate in online discussions. We held the Ocean State Homebrew Competition and the RAW Benefit (Real Ales for clean Water) event. We paid no dues. We brewed in the brewing lab in the Culinary Center. The University paid for ingredients on brew days, which were paid for by the activity fee we all paid. We had to pay for field trip busses and for beer we drank in tastings. We also were expected to volunteer for the two events I mentioned previously. We had 10 or so fully active members who attended 95% of all of the events out of the 50 or so students who signed up for the club. I would have paid for membership if the club by-laws allowed it. Faculty and staff were welcomed to tastings and events as long as they paid the fee.We've kept the dues low to keep the club accessible. Dues are basically to cover our liability insurance to have a stand at a local brewfest. We're in PA, north of Harrisburg. We're a rural area, but the only game in town as far as clubs go. We've set a June 30th deadline for dues and I don't mind weeding out the deadwood. I'd be thrilled with the 20-25 members we have if they were active, but to get anything done is like pulling teeth--as they say.
You're obviously near Philly so are you in NJ, PA, DE, MD or DC? How many other clubs are there in your area? $15 yearly dues seems too reasonable. I feel that you should give delinquent members 30 days to pay up or they should be ejected for non-payment of dues. Do you have that in your by-laws? Let them know you mean business. Plus in the next cycle increase the dues amount (as long as you and the top 5-6 and other 25 paid members can afford it) to weed out members who just don't participate. Make 'em "Put up or shut up." With this you can, as you wrote, "accept the reality" and concentrate on the great members in good standing that you have.
Maybe you could have the two pillars of membership philosophy. There are the "Pillars" who pay a higher dues level. These members hold up and care for the club's structure. They also reap the highest benefits for their service to the club. Then there's the "Catterpillar" level for those who just crawl in and out or become moths and burn in the flame. They pay a modest dues (like your $15) and can participate in brew days, certain events and are non-voting members. On collective brew days they can't reap any of the beer brewed unless they pitch in with or pay for proportional ingredients for a share of the beer. They can attend tasting or other events, but have to pay a modest amount to attend to cover their share of the beer needed for tastings. They get the basic benefit package. They get the privilege to call themselves members. Hell! - it's just like Cable! Then again... someone has to administer this bureaucracy.
Sláinte
I'm from Klickitat, our beer geeks still use the term "barley pop"
"Friends don't let friends drink bad beer"
