When I was a kid it was 0.10%. And I think it was pretty well attested by a lot of different studies that that was too high, so MADD succeeded in lobbying to get it dropped lower.
And you think 4 beers is “small” for the purposes of driving? I know some people have pretty strong tolerances, but there are definitely people I know who shouldn’t be driving after two. Maybe even one. Remember, you don’t have to be completely sloshed to be a danger to others. You just have to be a little bit slower, a little bit less observant, a little bit less in control of your muscles, a little bit more inclined to take unnecessary risks. Your body just has to respond a little bit differently than you’re used to. You just need to be a little bit more likely to nod off.
If 4 beers produces 0.08% (I have no idea if this is accurate), then it should probably be lowered by at least half as driving after 4 beers seems like a quite a bad idea.
I also have no idea if it’s accurate, I was just granting that premise. As the other person noted, with the definition of percentage being what it is, it necessarily has to be a different number of beers for people with different volumes of blood.
It depends a lot on your BMI. Larger (bother taller and fatter) people need to imbibe more drinks to get that number up whereas smaller (shorter and skinnier) folk will need fewer. Then there is also tolerance for chronic alcohol consumption which skews that number even further.
If 4 beers were universal, every bar in America would take your car keys away after serving you the third. Hence why they rely on BAC instead of a flat number of drinks consumed.
While I agree with you, I feel like the more effective way to reduce risk on the road is to take the implications here all the way to their logical conclusions. Some people ARE a little slower, a little less reactive, more likely to take risks, or less capable behind the wheel.
It seems to me that the testing process to pilot a personal road missile ought to take a page from this and be more frequent and more strict.
Sort of, but I believe someone found that the actual risk isn’t so much in the low reaction time or impulse control, it’s in the change between the inebriated person’s usual faculties and what they’re experiencing under the influence of alcohol. Drivers who are used to having a 1-second reaction time are likely to continue driving as if they have a 1-second reaction time even if their actual speed is more like 1.75-second due to alcohol.
You’re not going to get any argument from me that it’s insane we allow anyone to pilot a four-thousand-pound vehicle after only a single one-hour test, and retain that permission indefinitely, though.
I agree, but that doesn’t really work outside a city in the USA, given how little we invest in public transit. The entire economy in outlying areas would go to shit because everyone has to drive an hour to get to work.
When I was a kid it was 0.10%. And I think it was pretty well attested by a lot of different studies that that was too high, so MADD succeeded in lobbying to get it dropped lower.
And you think 4 beers is “small” for the purposes of driving? I know some people have pretty strong tolerances, but there are definitely people I know who shouldn’t be driving after two. Maybe even one. Remember, you don’t have to be completely sloshed to be a danger to others. You just have to be a little bit slower, a little bit less observant, a little bit less in control of your muscles, a little bit more inclined to take unnecessary risks. Your body just has to respond a little bit differently than you’re used to. You just need to be a little bit more likely to nod off.
If 4 beers produces 0.08% (I have no idea if this is accurate), then it should probably be lowered by at least half as driving after 4 beers seems like a quite a bad idea.
I also have no idea if it’s accurate, I was just granting that premise. As the other person noted, with the definition of percentage being what it is, it necessarily has to be a different number of beers for people with different volumes of blood.
As a bigger guy with much higher volume of blood than most of you, no way would I drive after four beers, plus I think that’s wrong
It depends a lot on your BMI. Larger (bother taller and fatter) people need to imbibe more drinks to get that number up whereas smaller (shorter and skinnier) folk will need fewer. Then there is also tolerance for chronic alcohol consumption which skews that number even further.
If 4 beers were universal, every bar in America would take your car keys away after serving you the third. Hence why they rely on BAC instead of a flat number of drinks consumed.
Quite true, I thought about this as soon as I had made the last comment.
While I agree with you, I feel like the more effective way to reduce risk on the road is to take the implications here all the way to their logical conclusions. Some people ARE a little slower, a little less reactive, more likely to take risks, or less capable behind the wheel.
It seems to me that the testing process to pilot a personal road missile ought to take a page from this and be more frequent and more strict.
Sort of, but I believe someone found that the actual risk isn’t so much in the low reaction time or impulse control, it’s in the change between the inebriated person’s usual faculties and what they’re experiencing under the influence of alcohol. Drivers who are used to having a 1-second reaction time are likely to continue driving as if they have a 1-second reaction time even if their actual speed is more like 1.75-second due to alcohol.
You’re not going to get any argument from me that it’s insane we allow anyone to pilot a four-thousand-pound vehicle after only a single one-hour test, and retain that permission indefinitely, though.
I agree, but that doesn’t really work outside a city in the USA, given how little we invest in public transit. The entire economy in outlying areas would go to shit because everyone has to drive an hour to get to work.