DUI checkpoint

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ

According to the online blood alcohol calculators, a man my size can enjoy two glasses of wine over a one and a half hour dinner out and my blood alcohol level would be only 0.17%, less than 1/4th the legal DWI limit, and less than half the "impaired" level.


Correction to my post above, my blood alcohol level after two glasses of wine with dinner would be 0.017% (not 0.17%).

Tom NJ
 
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI

I have zero tolerance for anyone who takes even one drink and then drives. No excuse for it. If you will get behind the wheel leave the booze alone and that includes just 1 glass of wine at diner. Again, no excuse for it.


So you are suggesting we all have to drink only at home? And if we have guests over we should not serve any alcohol? And we should have to walk to bars and restaurants? Moderate drinking is a perfectly normal social behavior, has been for thousands of years, and provides great enhancement to life, not to mention health. The problem is drinking too much.

According to the online blood alcohol calculators, a man my size can enjoy two glasses of wine over a one and a half hour dinner out and my blood alcohol level would be only 0.17%, less than 1/4th the legal DWI limit, and less than half the "impaired" level. This does not make me dangerous on the road, in fact I can argue I drive better when a bit relaxed. I have been enjoying a couple of glasses of wine with dinner virtually every night for over 40 years and never had an accident or even a ticket after drinking.

The important question in my mind is whether government authorities have the right to stop and search ordinary citizens without any probable cause whatsoever. The catch-all excuse of "for the public safety" is far too broad and vague to justify violating our rights under the forth amendment, and can be used to rationalize just about any such intrusive activity.

Tom NJ


No, I am suggesting if you are going to drink do not get behind the wheel and drive after. If that means drinking at home fine. It can also mean a designated driver. If you want to drink then drink. I pass no judgment and never said people can't drink who wish to. Just do it responsibly. You can't drink responsibly and drive right after. Sorry, can't be done.

There haven't been automobiles for thousands of years so your using that to justify it as you did doesn't work. I could care less if someone gets drunk and jumps on their horse. Getting drunk( or just drinking "moderately" as you put it )and then getting behind the wheel of a car though is a whole different thing.

Again if you drink and then drive I find that wrong and IMO the person should face stiff consequences if caught. I didn't say if you drink it is wrong though. Lots of ways to enjoy your alcoholic beverages and not drive.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
I have zero tolerance for anyone who takes even one drink and then drives. No excuse for it. If you will get behind the wheel leave the booze alone and that includes just 1 glass of wine at diner. Again, no excuse for it.

The important question in my mind is whether government authorities have the right to stop and search ordinary citizens without any probable cause whatsoever. The catch-all excuse of "for the public safety" is far too broad and vague to justify violating our rights under the forth amendment, and can be used to rationalize just about any such intrusive activity.

Tom NJ

+1000%
 
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
The important question in my mind is whether government authorities have the right to stop and search ordinary citizens without any probable cause whatsoever. The catch-all excuse of "for the public safety" is far too broad and vague to justify violating our rights under the forth amendment, and can be used to rationalize just about any such intrusive activity.Tom NJ


Totally agreed that this is the important question.

But the question has been answered. It's happened. The only thing that an apathetic populace react to is fear and they have been played by power and money seeking politicians, law enforcement and media empires and personalities.

Played to the extent that if you stand up for civil rights, you will be accused of being pro drunk drivers and anti victim.
 
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
You can't drink responsibly and drive right after. Sorry, can't be done.

Again if you drink and then drive I find that wrong and IMO the person should face stiff consequences if caught.


There is such a thing as responsible drinking and driving, and legal BAC limits are set at levels to account for this. To suggest a 0.000% BAC limit is as unnecessary and unenforceable as prohibition was.

Tom
 
It's an issue that can be improved, but never eliminated. Much like other such issues, education, not enforcement is the key. The ones out there who do it habitually will still do it no matter what. So, the best possible outcome is reducing the number of those who enter the ranks of the reprehensible.

This is what I call a pragmatic point of view. There are many things people do that I don't like. Some of those things are dangerous, even life threatening, to others.

You can't fix sociopathy.
 
Originally Posted By: jimbrewer
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI


I also wish when people are caught driving drunk they would be penalized a lot more harshly. Mandatory jail time, a HUGE fine, and loss of license for say 1-2 years minimum on the FIRST offense not only after multiple DUI's. Get caught twice and you are done behind the wheel period.


Wealthy 7X DWI offender avoids jail time

It varies from state to state.

I have had professional athletes, celebrities, and legitimate 1%ers as clients. I've installed in a Rolls Royce with the $400,000 window sticker still in the car.

KIMG0014.jpg


I've installed two Gallardos. beautiful machines. Very simple to install.

I haven't been beaten by a car yet. I am sure there is something out there, probably a hybrid, that the wiring is just so multiplexed and doesn't have a starter, that it cannot be installed. The ultra-wealthy will just buy that.


Is it true the Chevy Trailblazers are the hardest to install? If not, what kind of car is?


TrailBlazers are very easy.

Every installer has their own, "I hate..." car.

One of my techs hates Pontiac G6es. They are pretty easy to me, but he hates them.

Another doesn't like Nissan Altimas. The wires are easy to access but getting through the firewall is a nightmare. The bracket for the parking brake pedal is razor sharp. Literally. It will mutilate your hand.

Another tech hates the Mercedes ML-class. I don't like them myself but the only thing I really dread is Audi.

Audi puts things in stupid places.

Relay panel? Put it under the windshield washer reservoir.
Wiring harness? Run it right below the wiper arms.
But we have all this room here.
Nein. run the harness less than a centimeter below the moving metal parts.
 
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

I have seen a couple of them...and honestly, I suspect that I could bypass most in a few minutes. Offhand, I could start my wife's truck-1986 K-5 Blazer-in ten seconds with a long screwdriver. I once bypassed a (malfunctioning) alarm in an Astro the same way...told the dude not to shut it off until he got back to the shop that was fixing it. (He was impressed...I recall the tip was $30.)

Serious question: could you put one in a Tesla?


I haven't had a Tesla yet.
21.gif
I think I can through the brake switch and a hold module.

IIDs can be bypassed in much the same way that you would bypass an aftermarket alarm.

The device will record the bypass and will quickly go into an early recall state.

About 15 years ago, you could by-pass most breathalyzers with a simple 12v compressor

By-pass techniques have made the devices very complex. The best manufacturers have facial recognition, photo identification, measure the breath sample temperature/humidity, biometrics.....a crazy amount of stuff to make certain that it is a human taking the test and that the person taking the test is the driver.

The crazy amounts of anti-circumvention technology have made the devices more difficult to use. Because a few people cannot behave themselves.


No...I mean simply start the car without using the ignition switch (key on, then jump the solenoid), therefore bypassing the thing completely.
 
Do you understand how this works? I weigh 225# I can drink one beer/hour and my body will metabolize the alcohol nearly as fast as I drink it. It would take 75 hours of drinking at that pace to hit the legal limit.

If I drank 1/hour for 24 hours, my projected BAC would be 0.024% or less than 1/3 of the legal limit in the US and still less than Shannow's legal limit of 0.05%

The adult male who has two drinks over a two hour restaurant visit, or three beers during a three hour tip to the baseball game is likely not anywhere close to impared.

The typical adult male can metabolize one drink/hour. A good rule of thumb for women is 1/2 that. A 115# woman will hit 0.045 BAC after two glasses of wine during that two hour dinner. Her date, 0.002 BAC if he's a 225# male.

Now if you are going to a beer pong tournament, don't drive, get a driver, etc. But if you can pace yourself to one drink/hour as a man and 1/2 a drink/hour as a woman, you are not likely a danger to society behind the wheel.

If you can't monitor, pace or control your consumption, then I agree, make arrangements to stay the night, take a cab, arrange a DD. But if that's a recurrent theme in your life, perhaps you should give up alcohol totally. If you find you are repeatedly in situations where you are not safe to drive, then you may have a problem with alcohol.

Like everything else, YMMV.

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: Tom NJ
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI

I have zero tolerance for anyone who takes even one drink and then drives. No excuse for it. If you will get behind the wheel leave the booze alone and that includes just 1 glass of wine at diner. Again, no excuse for it.


So you are suggesting we all have to drink only at home? And if we have guests over we should not serve any alcohol? And we should have to walk to bars and restaurants? Moderate drinking is a perfectly normal social behavior, has been for thousands of years, and provides great enhancement to life, not to mention health. The problem is drinking too much.

According to the online blood alcohol calculators, a man my size can enjoy two glasses of wine over a one and a half hour dinner out and my blood alcohol level would be only 0.17%, less than 1/4th the legal DWI limit, and less than half the "impaired" level. This does not make me dangerous on the road, in fact I can argue I drive better when a bit relaxed. I have been enjoying a couple of glasses of wine with dinner virtually every night for over 40 years and never had an accident or even a ticket after drinking.

The important question in my mind is whether government authorities have the right to stop and search ordinary citizens without any probable cause whatsoever. The catch-all excuse of "for the public safety" is far too broad and vague to justify violating our rights under the forth amendment, and can be used to rationalize just about any such intrusive activity.

Tom NJ


No, I am suggesting if you are going to drink do not get behind the wheel and drive after. If that means drinking at home fine. It can also mean a designated driver. If you want to drink then drink. I pass no judgment and never said people can't drink who wish to. Just do it responsibly. You can't drink responsibly and drive right after. Sorry, can't be done.

There haven't been automobiles for thousands of years so your using that to justify it as you did doesn't work. I could care less if someone gets drunk and jumps on their horse. Getting drunk( or just drinking "moderately" as you put it )and then getting behind the wheel of a car though is a whole different thing.

Again if you drink and then drive I find that wrong and IMO the person should face stiff consequences if caught. I didn't say if you drink it is wrong though. Lots of ways to enjoy your alcoholic beverages and not drive.
 
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

I have seen a couple of them...and honestly, I suspect that I could bypass most in a few minutes. Offhand, I could start my wife's truck-1986 K-5 Blazer-in ten seconds with a long screwdriver. I once bypassed a (malfunctioning) alarm in an Astro the same way...told the dude not to shut it off until he got back to the shop that was fixing it. (He was impressed...I recall the tip was $30.)

Serious question: could you put one in a Tesla?


I haven't had a Tesla yet.
21.gif
I think I can through the brake switch and a hold module.

IIDs can be bypassed in much the same way that you would bypass an aftermarket alarm.

The device will record the bypass and will quickly go into an early recall state.

About 15 years ago, you could by-pass most breathalyzers with a simple 12v compressor

By-pass techniques have made the devices very complex. The best manufacturers have facial recognition, photo identification, measure the breath sample temperature/humidity, biometrics.....a crazy amount of stuff to make certain that it is a human taking the test and that the person taking the test is the driver.

The crazy amounts of anti-circumvention technology have made the devices more difficult to use. Because a few people cannot behave themselves.


No...I mean simply start the car without using the ignition switch (key on, then jump the solenoid), therefore bypassing the thing completely.


NHTSA standards require the unit to be able to read and log those starts as a violation.

Many states require the unit to sound the horn upon a bypass.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Do you understand how this works? I weigh 225# I can drink one beer/hour and my body will metabolize the alcohol nearly as fast as I drink it. It would take 75 hours of drinking at that pace to hit the legal limit.

If I drank 1/hour for 24 hours, my projected BAC would be 0.024% or less than 1/3 of the legal limit in the US and still less than Shannow's legal limit of 0.05%

The adult male who has two drinks over a two hour restaurant visit, or three beers during a three hour tip to the baseball game is likely not anywhere close to impared.

The typical adult male can metabolize one drink/hour. A good rule of thumb for women is 1/2 that. A 115# woman will hit 0.045 BAC after two glasses of wine during that two hour dinner. Her date, 0.002 BAC if he's a 225# male.

Now if you are going to a beer pong tournament, don't drive, get a driver, etc. But if you can pace yourself to one drink/hour as a man and 1/2 a drink/hour as a woman, you are not likely a danger to society behind the wheel.

If you can't monitor, pace or control your consumption, then I agree, make arrangements to stay the night, take a cab, arrange a DD. But if that's a recurrent theme in your life, perhaps you should give up alcohol totally. If you find you are repeatedly in situations where you are not safe to drive, then you may have a problem with alcohol.

Like everything else, YMMV.



You are absolutely correct sir
thumbsup2.gif


Except most establishments do not serve a (in my case TABC) serving of alcohol.
Most places don't serve a 12oz glass of beer. Beer ranges from 16oz to 20oz (Imperial pint is something like 19 1/4 US oz)
If you are served a 1oz shot, your bartender is probably receiving a similar size tip. You usually get a jigger size...about an ounce and a half.
4 oz of Pinot Noir looks pathetic next to a Porterhouse. It just does. I am not taking away from how awesome a good Pinot is with a really good steak. It's one of my favorite things. But a 4 oz serving just looks pitiful.

I just don't risk it anymore. If I drive, I do not drink. I know how much I can drink and still stay well under .08, but I just don't.
I know from literally thousands of clients how easy it is to be charged with a DWI. How expensive it is even if you are exonerated. I know the techniques the cops use. I don't sweat it at all when that DWI Enforcement Tahoe gets dangerously close to my rear bumper and hits his high beams (to make the driver deviate from his lane for "probable cause") I just think to myself, "C'mon. Pull me over. You don't have a thing on me."
 
Originally Posted By: hpb

Has your limit been dropped from .08 to .05? That will definitely catch a few people out!


Yes, but the check points are saying people are catching on pretty quick. Aust and NZ have a drink culture that goes back many decades, and it seems to be getting worse with younger drinkers and longer opening hours. When I was young ('70's) drunken driving was just normal...being unable to walk but still able to drive was something to aspire to...and for me that meant on a motorcycle as well. They've got to hammer it into these young guys that it's not acceptable anymore, just like smoking.
 
I agree, times have changed, some things that were considered OK in the past just aren't socially acceptable today. I think on the whole the message is getting through. Most young guys, unbelievable as it sometimes seems, do actually have enough brains to know right from wrong! Anyway, I have no issues with RBT sites, get the drunks off the road.
 
A lot of interest with this thread. DWI/DUI had ALWAYS been a big problem and I've read stories/articles from 50-60 years ago that have pretty much the same discussion, but the problem remains. Many say they can 'hold their liquor' and 'know their limit' but actually lose count after 'a few'. The idea of spending hours in a bar and driving home is not good. The bar/restaurant lobby is strong and this scenario continues. Cops sometimes around here would park outside bars and tell those coming outside stumbling around looking for their their car that they are impaired and to get a ride or likely be arrested='thank you officer, I'll do that'. They go back inside and come back out in a bit looking around for the cops and try to sneak away and then do get arrested. I've know some 'smart' alcoholics that never had a conviction as they drink at home or have another driver. Lots of denial of self evident history in this.
 
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI

If you have not been drinking what do you have to fear from a checkpoint? How is it a big violation of anyone's rights? If you haven't been drinking then you wait in line for a few minutes, get a quick check, and you move on with your life. What is the big deal?



Did you not read my post above??? It can be a stunning waste of time. That waste of time can have unplanned results. It ruined my vacation and cost me hundreds of dollars. I ended up driving from FL to VT to a particular destination. I was held up in line, detained, searched and I did not make my destination before they closed. The multi hour detention was problematic for me, my family and yes, I'm still angry about it.

One more thing. I don't ever drink (or use drugs)
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

I have seen a couple of them...and honestly, I suspect that I could bypass most in a few minutes. Offhand, I could start my wife's truck-1986 K-5 Blazer-in ten seconds with a long screwdriver. I once bypassed a (malfunctioning) alarm in an Astro the same way...told the dude not to shut it off until he got back to the shop that was fixing it. (He was impressed...I recall the tip was $30.)

Serious question: could you put one in a Tesla?


I haven't had a Tesla yet.
21.gif
I think I can through the brake switch and a hold module.

IIDs can be bypassed in much the same way that you would bypass an aftermarket alarm.

The device will record the bypass and will quickly go into an early recall state.

About 15 years ago, you could by-pass most breathalyzers with a simple 12v compressor

By-pass techniques have made the devices very complex. The best manufacturers have facial recognition, photo identification, measure the breath sample temperature/humidity, biometrics.....a crazy amount of stuff to make certain that it is a human taking the test and that the person taking the test is the driver.

The crazy amounts of anti-circumvention technology have made the devices more difficult to use. Because a few people cannot behave themselves.


No...I mean simply start the car without using the ignition switch (key on, then jump the solenoid), therefore bypassing the thing completely.


NHTSA standards require the unit to be able to read and log those starts as a violation.

Many states require the unit to sound the horn upon a bypass.


Would it "know" it had been bypassed if no attempt was made to use the regular starter circuit?
 
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: Spazdog

No...I mean simply start the car without using the ignition switch (key on, then jump the solenoid), therefore bypassing the thing completely.


NHTSA standards require the unit to be able to read and log those starts as a violation.

Many states require the unit to sound the horn upon a bypass.


Would it "know" it had been bypassed if no attempt was made to use the regular starter circuit?


Are you suggesting popping the clutch with the key on?
laugh.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
Mailbox hit by drunk driver
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
2K
D60
Hillbilly Deluxe
Watch out, being oblivious will get ya
Replies
14
Views
664
Toy4x4
billt460
My Dog Passed Away Yesterday
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
2K
billt460
F
Abandoned TRW World Headquarters Lyndhurst OH - Demolished
Replies
10
Views
2K
Carmudgeon
shortyb
Guess its my turn, lost a dog buddy
2
Replies
26
Views
593
alarmguy
Back
Top