I feel like we are straying farther away from the original intent and the danger of drunk driving, which is impairment.
I feel like a roadside coordination test in combination with the breathalyzer should be performed. So you have someone who feels perfectly fine to drive, passes the coordination test, but hits 0.05 and gets in trouble.
I suppose it depends on the test, but there are so many reasons why someone entirely sober may not be able to be successful that its even another layer of mess. If kids can invent high school science projects to detect date rape drug why can't we build a better breathalyzer?
I suppose it depends on the test, but there are so many reasons why someone entirely sober may not be able to be successful that its even another layer of mess. If kids can invent high school science projects to detect date rape drug why can't we build a better breathalyzer?
That's a good point. But if we can construct something that requires similar skills to driving then if people fail it sober maybe they shouldn't drive.
This is making a huge assumption that we can isolate skills required in driving to a test. It's also assuming police officers won't abuse it, which seems unlikely.
An environment in which a person encounters only beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own, so that their existing views are reinforced and alternative ideas are not considered.
IMHO over the next 20 years we'll see a sea change over how alcohol use is regarded similar to the change in attitudes around smoking from 1970 to 1990.
This isn't the first time you have said this. Yet booze has been around as long (longer?) as smoking and there hasn't been a change.
This isn't the first time you have said this. Yet booze has been around as long (longer?) as smoking and there hasn't been a change.
I'm not saying drinking will go away. Smoking is still around - it's just not nearly as common as it once was.
Alcohol consumption in Canada peaked in the mid-80s. Fewer young adults and fewer new Canadians drink, so long-term demographic trends are already pointing down. The question is whether we'll hit an inflexion point, like we did for smoking, where changing social norms drive usage down dramatically in the span of a couple decades.
Why did smoking go down dramatically?
* Increasing concern about the personal health effects.
* Increasing concern about public impact in terms of health care costs.
* Increasing cost due to ever-increasing taxes.
All three of those apply to drinking. It's unhealthy, imposes a heavy public burden in health care, policing, etc. And it's more and more expensive with each passing year, as governments find alcohol taxes an attractive source of revenue.
As I've already noted, drinking is less and less popular among young adults and new Canadians. The poor and working class are also moving away from drinking as it has become ever more expensive, and cheaper alternatives like pot more readily available. Throw in the emerging zero tolerance of alcohol consumption and driving, in a country where the great majority of people live in suburbs, and drinking is up against some heavy headwinds.
If it seems ridiculous to imagine drinking coming to be regarded as an unhealthy indulgence the way smoking is, keep in mind that from the vantage point of 1970, the public attitudes by the 90s around smoking would be scarcely believable.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Yeah, I am pretty turned off drinking and drunk people in general these days. I have maybe 4 drinks a week, which still seems like a lot, but those delicious natural wines are just so delicious.
Yeah, I am pretty turned off drinking and drunk people in general these days. I have maybe 4 drinks a week, which still seems like a lot, but those delicious natural wines are just so delicious.
Ya, the natural wines are way better than the synthetic ones.
Yeah, I am pretty turned off drinking and drunk people in general these days. I have maybe 4 drinks a week, which still seems like a lot, but those delicious natural wines are just so delicious.
i've gone from getting pretty trashed multiple times a week with my friends from the ages of 14-23 or so to having a drink maybe once a month and getting drunk maybe once a year in my early 30s, i just dont like the feeling of getting drunk anymore at all. guinness remains delicious however
and yeah drunk people are the worst
The Following User Says Thank You to stone hands For This Useful Post:
Pretty sure they have to administer a blood test if you blow over. Hopefully that would prevent anyone from being wrongfully charged. If you absolutely know you haven't consumed anything I think insistence on a blood test would be a wise move.
Quote:
Originally Posted by speede5
Correct me if I'm wrong but the roadside screener isn't the determining factor in charges, it just gets you taken in to the station for the more accurate one right? Or are the roadsides considered accurate enough to lay charges?
If my understanding is correct anything over 0.08 (Criminal charge) involves a blood test before charges are layed. However in Alberta if you blow 0.05-0.08 it is a roadside licence suspension and vehicle impoundment.
So a breathalyzer is enough to lose your licence and vehicle. No criminal charge but a significant impact.
I'm not saying drinking will go away. Smoking is still around - it's just not nearly as common as it once was.
Alcohol consumption in Canada peaked in the mid-80s. Fewer young adults and fewer new Canadians drink, so long-term demographic trends are already pointing down. The question is whether we'll hit an inflexion point, like we did for smoking, where changing social norms drive usage down dramatically in the span of a couple decades.
Why did smoking go down dramatically?
* Increasing concern about the personal health effects.
* Increasing concern about public impact in terms of health care costs.
* Increasing cost due to ever-increasing taxes.
All three of those apply to drinking. It's unhealthy, imposes a heavy public burden in health care, policing, etc. And it's more and more expensive with each passing year, as governments find alcohol taxes an attractive source of revenue.
As I've already noted, drinking is less and less popular among young adults and new Canadians. The poor and working class are also moving away from drinking as it has become ever more expensive, and cheaper alternatives like pot more readily available. Throw in the emerging zero tolerance of alcohol consumption and driving, in a country where the great majority of people live in suburbs, and drinking is up against some heavy headwinds.
If it seems ridiculous to imagine drinking coming to be regarded as an unhealthy indulgence the way smoking is, keep in mind that from the vantage point of 1970, the public attitudes by the 90s around smoking would be scarcely believable.
Heavy drinking is a real health problem both physically and mentally. Many people use alcohol as a coping mechanism and self medication. Mental health awareness and advanced treatments will assist with some of the heavy binge drinking.
I don't think people's attitudes towards having a few glasses of beer or wine with dinner have changed at all, in fact I find it more common now that people will order an expensive bottle of beer or wine with dinner. The difference is they have one or two drinks, not 9.
As laudable as the government's objective is, I don't feel particularly comfortable with them trampling all over the presumption of innocence in this way. Slippery-slope argument holds true here.
If my understanding is correct anything over 0.08 (Criminal charge) involves a blood test before charges are layed. However in Alberta if you blow 0.05-0.08 it is a roadside licence suspension and vehicle impoundment.
So a breathalyzer is enough to lose your licence and vehicle. No criminal charge but a significant impact.
That's a good point. But if we can construct something that requires similar skills to driving then if people fail it sober maybe they shouldn't drive.
This is making a huge assumption that we can isolate skills required in driving to a test. It's also assuming police officers won't abuse it, which seems unlikely.
I was thinking along the lines of someone not used to dealing with police who never gets pulled over having a panic attack trying to walk in a straight line, or a drunk faking one. Obviously someone driving a modified vehicle because they have no legs can't walk in a straight line, but then would that mean they could get away with drinking and driving easier?
Sterilized and sealed individual roadside blood-test I think is the only way to go. Like the blood sugar monitors that don't even draw blood, except for booze.
Heavy drinking is a real health problem both physically and mentally. Many people use alcohol as a coping mechanism and self medication. Mental health awareness and advanced treatments will assist with some of the heavy binge drinking.
I don't think people's attitudes towards having a few glasses of beer or wine with dinner have changed at all, in fact I find it more common now that people will order an expensive bottle of beer or wine with dinner. The difference is they have one or two drinks, not 9.
I would say wine with dinner is way more common than it was decades ago. While beer consumption may be slightly declining wine and spirits are increasing.
Last edited by Erick Estrada; 01-31-2020 at 12:36 PM.
I would way wine with dinner is way more common than it was decades ago. While beer consumption may be slightly declining wine and spirits are increasing.
I think that it depends on the circles you socialize in. Definitely among urbanized, upper-middle class circles, drinking is something you do at dinner and only with craft wine and spirits.
In the 'burbs, my experience is that binge-drinking cheap alcohol is still very common.
I guess to Cliff's point that follows more or less the same pattern as cigarettes.
I think that it depends on the circles you socialize in. Definitely among urbanized, upper-middle class circles, drinking is something you do at dinner and only with craft wine and spirits.
In the 'burbs, my experience is that binge-drinking cheap alcohol is still very common.
I guess to Cliff's point that follows more or less the same pattern as cigarettes.
I was in a big outdoor party in Washington over the summer and one thing I noticed was that a lot of people down there drink those lower calorie spiked seltzers as there would be more of those than beer cans in the coolers. Hell I drank a bunch and they weren't that bad actually in a social setting. I think beer being associated with high carbs is probably a reason in younger people choosing to drink other types of alcoholic beverages.
I think that it depends on the circles you socialize in. Definitely among urbanized, upper-middle class circles, drinking is something you do at dinner and only with craft wine and spirits.
In the 'burbs, my experience is that binge-drinking cheap alcohol is still very common.
I guess to Cliff's point that follows more or less the same pattern as cigarettes.
I binge-drink expensive spirits. I think that just makes me an idiot.
The Following User Says Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
