[denny]

Clerk: (slaps your wiseass face).....

[dirk_mclargehuge]

and even if I were to walk to the bar, get drunk and plan on walking home... I could still get arrested...

Currently, under Texas Law, if you are sitting in your yard and you are intoxicated, you can be arrested for Public Intoxication, because the public can see you.  In reality, you'd have to be doing something to attract their attention, say, shouting at the top of your lungs, before they would arrest you.  But the possibility exists that on a slow night, if a police officer sees you walking a not so straight line across your lawn, you could be arrested.

[gisbrewmaster]

The following seems to be reasons given for why checkpoints are allowable: (Please note, not my opinions, but what I've found from looking at past Supreme Court decisions relating to the subject. I know, nerdy, but hours of research is how I got through college -- my professors would rip you a new one if you failed to back up a paper with legiimate research and valid citing sources)

1. A checkpoint involves checking everyone that passes a specific point on a road; no one is singled out at the discretion of an officer. It’s not random with respect to who is checked, as all that pass are checked – even if but very briefly

2. The operation of a vehicle is a privilege, not a right. Your right to use the road is not being disallowed – you still have access – but there are conditions that you must meet to be allowed to operate a vehicle on public roads. Your ability to meet the conditions of that privilege can be assessed.

3. If probable cause is present, then an officer is not violating your fourth amendment rights if he/she assesses your ability to operate a motor vehicle, i.e., if you present signs of being intoxicated, it is not an “unreasonable search and seizure,” which the fourth amendment protects you against.

4. If you refuse a breathalyzer, and there is a judge present at the checkpoint, and probable cause exists, then yes, he can issue, right there and then, a warrant, supported by oath and affirmation, and which describe the “place to be secured, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Now granted, the Supreme Court may someday hear a case before it that prompts them to decide that checkpoints do somehow infringe upon personal freedoms or rights, but so far their rulings have not cast any light of unconstitutionality on the practice. Note however: one key point that has held them to support it is findings that show checkpoints are effective; the findings may prove to be wrong, or the numbers may drop to where the lack of effectiveness is outweighed by the inconveiience to motorists.

" The operation of a vehicle is a privilege, not a right."

Hmm, federal funds pay for many major highways. Since I have to pay taxes and have little to say as to where my particular taxes go, I would consider it more of a right than a privilege.

Major interstates and roads weren't built for your driving pleasure.  They were build to be able to move the military around.  We could say they are nice to let us use them.

[corkybstewart]

and even if I were to walk to the bar, get drunk and plan on walking home... I could still get arrested...

Currently, under Texas Law, if you are sitting in your yard and you are intoxicated, you can be arrested for Public Intoxication, because the public can see you.  In reality, you'd have to be doing something to attract their attention, say, shouting at the top of your lungs, before they would arrest you.  But the possibility exists that on a slow night, if a police officer sees you walking a not so straight line across your lawn, you could be arrested.

I had an employee a few years ago who decided it was better to walk the 6 blocks from the bar to his house and got arrested for being drunk in public.  But at least he didn't lose his license or kill anybody.
In NM I believe it's also technically illegal to be drunk in your own yard, or even to have a visible alcohol container like a beer can, but I've never heard of anybody getting busted for it.  I've had cops(off-duty) sitting in my yard drinking homebrew and they didn't seem concerned

[hopfenundmalz]

Major interstates and roads weren't built for your driving pleasure.  They were build to be able to move the military around.  We could say they are nice to let us use them.
[/quote]

They were built for commerce and defense.  Eisenhower had a terrible time traveling cross country as a young Army Officer.  He was impressed with the Autobahns, which were also built for commerce and to move the troops and material around.  The funding for this is known as the  "National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956".  Note the "and".

[kerneldustjacket]

Major interstates and roads weren't built for your driving pleasure.  They were build to be able to move the military around.  We could say they are nice to let us use them.

They were built for commerce and defense.  Eisenhower had a terrible time traveling cross country as a young Army Officer.  He was impressed with the Autobahns, which were also built for commerce and to move the troops and material around.  The funding for this is known as the  "National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956".  Note the "and".
[/quote]

It sure is nice that our homebrew supplies move quicker from supplier to us with interstate roads around!
Thanks Eisenhower! Now I just gotta brew an "IkePA" as a tribute! 

[oscarvan]

I went to a party last year where the "guards" were ordered to card everyone. I showed them my AARP card.

[1vertical]

One aspect, that may contribute to drunk driving in the US, is the fact that the personal car is for many the only means of transportation to and from their watering hole. In Europe settlements tend to be less spread out and public transportation is much more widely available.

This is one thing I noticed when I came to the US. Getting drunk away from home meant that I have to make arrangements for someone to drive me or plan to sober up on the hosts couch.

Kai

Yah, Sure was nice to just hop on the Zug and ride to the gasthoff.

[uthristy]

What's the EU method?.

European Union

* Austria: 0.05% and 0.01% for drivers who have held a licence for less than 2 years and drivers of vehicles over 7.5 tonnes
* Belgium: 0.05%
* Bulgaria: 0.05%
* Czech Republic: Zero
* Denmark: 0.05%, imprisonment if over 0.08%, zero if involved in an accident
* Estonia: 0.02%
* Finland: 0.05%
* France: 0.05%
* Germany: zero for beginners (less than 2 years' experience and drivers under the age of 21) as well as drivers making commercial transportation of passengers; 0.03% in conjunction with any other traffic offense or accident; 0.05% without evidence of alcoholic impact; penalty for 0.11% is driver licence withdrawn for about one year; for 0.16% regranting of the licence requires a successful medical-psychological driver assessment
* Greece: 0.05% (BrAC 0.25 mg/L)% and 0.02% for drivers who have held a license for less than 2 years, motor cycle and professional drivers
* Hungary: Zero
* Ireland: 0.08% to be reduced to 0.05% or 0.02% for learner and professional drivers.
* Italy: 0.05%
* Latvia: 0.02% for drivers with less than 2 years of experience and 0.05% for those with more than 2 years of experience
* Lithuania: 0.02% for drivers with less than 2 years of experience and 0.04% for those with more than 2 years of experience
* Luxembourg: 0.05% and 0.02% for professional drivers and drivers with less than 2 years of experience
* Malta: 0.08%
* Netherlands: 0.05%, 0.02% for drivers with less than 5 years' experience
* Poland: 0.02%
* Portugal: 0.05%
* Romania: Zero
* Slovakia: Zero
* Slovenia: Zero for drivers with 2 years or less experience and professional drivers, 0.24 mg/l (0.05%) for all others.
* Spain: 0.05% and 0.03% for drivers with less than 2 years experience and drivers of freight vehicles over 3.5 tonnes, and of passenger vehicles with more than 9 seats.
* Sweden: 0.02% (up to 6 months imprisonment), 0.10% (imprisonment, maximum 2 years)
* United Kingdom: 0.08%
--
This is part two of the "EU method"
 

In the UK, its the same 0.08 BAC limit.  Its the same in that officers cannot pull you over simply to check your licence.  They require probable cause or suspicion of intoxication. But, get convicted, and its automatic loss of licence for 12 months, jail time and fines.  After that you have to re-sit your driving test (extended, harder test) and good luck finding an insurance company that will take you on.  Its also much less socially accepted, and people will not hesitate to take the keys from someone who's been drinking..

My friends in NL-Be. will not get behind the wheel after drinking as the cost is too much to risk. But here in the states theres plenty of loopholes to wiggle your way out of even if your guilty as hell- $$$$$ or who you know.

If you get busted I think it should be 1yr no- if`s or buts, second time 5yrs, hurt or kill somebody 25 to life, no early release.
Far too many times does a drunk with a proven record get his/her DL back only to go on and kill sombody,


But treating everybody as "guilty till proven innocent" is wrong plain & simple.

---------
Anybody want to defend cell phones or texting while driving??  Both have been shown to be major threat to drivers, but its treated with a nod & wink.

Its socially acceptable behavior

[majorvices]

I think texting while driving is at least as dangerous than driving drunk, personally. I'm certainly not going to defend it at all, and lots of places are cracking down. But  its really hard to enforce.

[Kaiser]

* Germany: zero for beginners (less than 2 years' experience and drivers under the age of 21) as well as drivers making commercial transportation of passengers; 0.03% in conjunction with any other traffic offense or accident; 0.05% without evidence of alcoholic impact; penalty for 0.11% is driver licence withdrawn for about one year; for 0.16% regranting of the licence requires a successful medical-psychological driver assessment
 

What you are seeing here is the push and pull between various interests that have a stake in this. Largely the German brewing industry opposes any law that wants to set a 0 alcohol limit. That’s true for pretty much any Country but it seems in Germany this has led to a fairly complicated law.

Kai

[nicneufeld]

Dangit if I want to brush my teeth while driving, that's my right!  Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was 'Mercuh, not communist China!

[dirk_mclargehuge]

I think texting while driving is at least as dangerous than driving drunk, personally. I'm certainly not going to defend it at all, and lots of places are cracking down. But  its really hard to enforce.

That's why Austin Police Chief Art Arcevedo wants to eliminate the blood alcohol limit laws, and replace them with "Driving Impaired" laws.  The police would have to see the crime being committed, rather than stopping everyone, taking police away from other duties.

[denny]

I went to a party last year where the "guards" were ordered to card everyone. I showed them my AARP card.

Nice!  Now I know what mine is good for!

[majorvices]

I went to a party last year where the "guards" were ordered to card everyone. I showed them my AARP card.

Nice!  Now I know what mine is good for!

That and 15% off a 20 pack of Preperation H.