4 ms·

Only poor people drink drive? I'm a software engineer in the UK and I've known plenty of people who've driven home after a few.

marcosdumay 11y ago
Way to not get it. A decade after you solve your problem of how to get home when drunk, some poor fellow may still hit your because there are also irresponsible people that can not afford a self driven car.
pvdebbe 11y ago
You did not read carefully. Parent implied that the poor cannot afford self-driving vehicles any time soon.
- akerro 11y ago
  What has self-driving car to do it with? The police was called from an automates system that's in most of new cars sold in Europe for a few years now.
  - themartorana 11y ago
    Everything? If the car was self driving this woman would likely be home and not in a jail cell?
    - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
      By common sense you are right. By law, given you can be charged with drunk driving even if the vehicle is off and you are just sleeping in it, I suspect that drunk driving laws will stick around even when the car is doing the driving. This is especially true for areas that drunk driving fines are a revenue stream.
johncolanduoni 11y ago
No, but better public transportation can be used by a wider range of people than self-driving cars. It's possible some very wealthy people (read: already a minority) may feel it's beneath them, but even then I doubt that will be a universal view.
- aianus 11y ago
  Driving a car in the US is so ridiculously cheap compared to the rest of the world that only really poor people and crackheads seem to take the bus (outside SF and NYC). The difference in demographics on public transit in Seattle was striking compared to Toronto where car insurance runs $3,000 a year and gas costs 50% more. Public transportation is just not going to happen in the US unless driving gets way more expensive.
  - johncolanduoni 11y ago
    > only really poor people and crackheads seem to take the bus (outside SF and NYC) Note that you chose the top two of the cities in the US in terms of locations accessible by public transit. Of course people won't use it if it can't get them where they need to go, and they'll probably just drive if there are only a few locations it services. This tends to compound itself because the low usage means trains/buses run less often, making it even less useful (e.g. LA). The price of car ownership definitely factors in, as it results in a lack of necessity for public transportation, but it doesn't mean people wouldn't prefer it if it's available. The price difference between an unlimited metro pass ($116/month in NY, $83/month in SF) and owning a car is still very wide.
    - aianus 11y ago
      Having a car is a lot more useful and comfortable than public transit, though. So there really needs to be a huge difference in cost to justify spending money on public transit when you could just spend a bit more and have your own car. We see that in SF and NYC where the traffic and parking situations make driving very expensive in time and money. But elsewhere in the country? Even if it had great coverage, it wouldn't be worth the time and discomfort to take it just to save ~$200 a month (or less, if you routinely drive family members around).
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
wiredfool 11y ago
Ran across a PSA from the early 70's recently that advised people not to have that 5th pint before driving home from the pub. What's acceptable changes over very long time frames.
- sjcsjc 11y ago
  Think it might have been a joke: http://usvsth3m.com/post/no-this-isnt-a-real-1970s-anti-drink-driving-ad http://usvsth3m.com/post/no-this-isnt-a-real-1970s-anti-drin...
  - wiredfool 11y ago
    Damn.

marcosdumay 11y ago

Way to not get it. A decade after you solve your problem of how to get home when drunk, some poor fellow may still hit your because there are also irresponsible people that can not afford a self driven car.

pvdebbe 11y ago

You did not read carefully. Parent implied that the poor cannot afford self-driving vehicles any time soon.

akerro 11y ago
What has self-driving car to do it with? The police was called from an automates system that's in most of new cars sold in Europe for a few years now.
- themartorana 11y ago
  Everything? If the car was self driving this woman would likely be home and not in a jail cell?
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    By common sense you are right. By law, given you can be charged with drunk driving even if the vehicle is off and you are just sleeping in it, I suspect that drunk driving laws will stick around even when the car is doing the driving. This is especially true for areas that drunk driving fines are a revenue stream.

johncolanduoni 11y ago

No, but better public transportation can be used by a wider range of people than self-driving cars. It's possible some very wealthy people (read: already a minority) may feel it's beneath them, but even then I doubt that will be a universal view.

aianus 11y ago
Driving a car in the US is so ridiculously cheap compared to the rest of the world that only really poor people and crackheads seem to take the bus (outside SF and NYC). The difference in demographics on public transit in Seattle was striking compared to Toronto where car insurance runs $3,000 a year and gas costs 50% more. Public transportation is just not going to happen in the US unless driving gets way more expensive.
- johncolanduoni 11y ago
  > only really poor people and crackheads seem to take the bus (outside SF and NYC) Note that you chose the top two of the cities in the US in terms of locations accessible by public transit. Of course people won't use it if it can't get them where they need to go, and they'll probably just drive if there are only a few locations it services. This tends to compound itself because the low usage means trains/buses run less often, making it even less useful (e.g. LA). The price of car ownership definitely factors in, as it results in a lack of necessity for public transportation, but it doesn't mean people wouldn't prefer it if it's available. The price difference between an unlimited metro pass ($116/month in NY, $83/month in SF) and owning a car is still very wide.
  - aianus 11y ago
    Having a car is a lot more useful and comfortable than public transit, though. So there really needs to be a huge difference in cost to justify spending money on public transit when you could just spend a bit more and have your own car. We see that in SF and NYC where the traffic and parking situations make driving very expensive in time and money. But elsewhere in the country? Even if it had great coverage, it wouldn't be worth the time and discomfort to take it just to save ~$200 a month (or less, if you routinely drive family members around).

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

wiredfool 11y ago

Ran across a PSA from the early 70's recently that advised people not to have that 5th pint before driving home from the pub. What's acceptable changes over very long time frames.

sjcsjc 11y ago
Think it might have been a joke: http://usvsth3m.com/post/no-this-isnt-a-real-1970s-anti-drink-driving-ad http://usvsth3m.com/post/no-this-isnt-a-real-1970s-anti-drin...
- wiredfool 11y ago
  Damn.