Should Your Car Test if You've Been Drinking?

[Metroid]

pics

disclaimer: i would imagine going to the strip club with my wife would NOT be fun...i'd probably get the 3rd degree (maybe even 4th degree) after she saw what can go on there

Wife FAIL.

Yeah that sucks.

And they don't let you take cameras into strip clubs silly. Hell they get all upset if you set your phone on the table.

[Dan Lambskin]

pics

disclaimer: i would imagine going to the strip club with my wife would NOT be fun...i'd probably get the 3rd degree (maybe even 4th degree) after she saw what can go on there

Wife FAIL.

Yeah that sucks.

And they don't let you take cameras into strip clubs silly. Hell they get all upset if you set your phone on the table.

meh...she's got her good qualities, she's just not too keen of the idea of some skank grinding all over me...especially since the time i came home with broken glasses
my "i set them on the table and the waitress leaned on them" story worked until my buddy ratted me out on the true story

[A Fleshner Fantasy]

I have a better solution.

Instead of the car not starting if you're drunk, I think if the driver is drunk, then the seat-belt should not fasten. I'm sick and tired of reading these articles about a drunk driver crossing a the center line and taking out a van full of children, killing everybody in the van, only to walk away from their own vehicle because they were wearing a seat-belt. If you want to drive drunk, fine. It's against the law, and you're an idiot, but w/ this new method, we can ensure that a vast majority of idiots that drive drunk and hit something, only do it once.

So basically your solution is to increase the death toll everytime there is a drunk driving accident?

[knapplc]

The article also pointed out that the Governor of New York stated that it could be mandated by states, and the organization pushing this has a stated goal to make it mandated to the extreme, preferring to err on the side of making knapplc walk home.

I would most likely take the bus. It's a long walk from New York.

[StlSluggers]

The article also pointed out that the Governor of New York stated that it could be mandated by states, and the organization pushing this has a stated goal to make it mandated to the extreme, preferring to err on the side of making knapplc walk home.

I would most likely take the bus. It's a long walk from New York.

I'm sure they'd come up with a provision to prevent you from using public transportation.

Seems they have it out for you, man.

[A Fleshner Fantasy]

The article also pointed out that the Governor of New York stated that it could be mandated by states, and the organization pushing this has a stated goal to make it mandated to the extreme, preferring to err on the side of making knapplc walk home.

I would most likely take the bus. It's a long walk from New York.

I'm sure they'd come up with a provision to prevent you from using public transportation.

Seems they have it out for you, man.

Ok, so we're all in agreement that Knapp is never allowed to drink again, right?

[Art Vandelay]

The statistics on "alcohol-related" traffic accidents are severely overstated, and even with that, speed is by far the number one contributing factor in fatal traffic accidents. We could save far more lives by making it illegal to produce or drive cars that go more than 60 mph than by taking every drunk driver off the road.

Drunk driving is a dangerous, stupid, selfish, etc., etc. thing to do that costs way too many lives and I wish nobody would ever drive drunk again, but its impact is overstated by the government, the media, and groups of MADD.

[A Fleshner Fantasy]

The statistics on "alcohol-related" traffic accidents are severely overstated, and even with that, speed is by far the number one contributing factor in fatal traffic accidents. We could save far more lives by making it illegal to produce or drive cars that go more than 60 mph than by taking every drunk driver off the road.

Drunk driving is a dangerous, stupid, selfish, etc., etc. thing to do that costs way too many lives and I wish nobody would ever drive drunk again, but its impact is overstated by the government, the media, and groups of MADD.

The difference is though that the idea proposed in this thread is at least realistic. There is no way that any law is going to be passed in the near future eliminating the ability to produce cars that go faster than 60 mph. Part of the reason for this is that government wouldn't necessarily believe it to be that much of a safety improvement (there are roads with speed limits of over 60, meaning clearly they think in some situations it's okay to drive faster than 60). Another part is that speeding tickets are such a high source of government revenue that they don't want to lose out on all that money. If cars can't go faster than 60, obviously people can't speed on highways (which is where most speeding tickets are issued), and there goes a big part of the revenue. I'm not saying that it's right for the government to prioritize revenue over safety, but it still does occur.

[Art Vandelay]

I wasn't being serious with the 'no cars that go over 60' thing, just using an example that I find equally as ridiculous as the one in the original post to prove a point. If you're looking for something more realistic, though, they could put the same kind of punishments that people in this thread talked about for DUI in place for speeding and that would cut down on it greatly. If you were looking at prison and thousands in fines for going 70 in a 65, you probably wouldn't do it. The point is that drunk driving isn't the biggest threat to other motorists and the statistics used to back up such claims aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

[StlSluggers]

I've always chuckled at the little quip that the most dangerous invention in the history of mankind is the wheel.