4 ms·

Not quite as taboo as many other countries [1], unfortunately. You give two excuses to drink and drive. Both are indefensible. The first excuse is "need a ca

Not quite as taboo as many other countries [1], unfortunately. You give two excuses to drink and drive. Both are indefensible. The first excuse is "need a car to get around, have car". I live in a sparsely populated area as well, and everyone uses a car to get around. When we go out drinking, we plan ahead. The most common options are designated drivers, taxis, sleeping over, walking, or cycling. The second excuse is "can't expect to make good decisions while drunk". That's a bit intellectually dishonest. The decision to think about how to get back later, knowing you're going to be drinking, is a bad decision made while entirely sober. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_in_the_United_States#International_Comparisons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_in_the_United_St...

m-j-fox 10y ago
Walking and cycling are going to get you killed at the same rate if not higher as driving. I guess you're not as likely to kill someone else.
- Griffinsauce 10y ago
  You guess? That is the whole thing with drunk driving. You endanger others. With a conscious choice I might add, when you go somewhere and drunk driving is the only way home.
- jlarocco 10y ago
  The point of DUI being illegal isn't to protect drunk drivers; it's to protect everybody else (and everything) nearby.
- lsc 10y ago
  Yup. I think that as a culture, we need to think more about the risks we take with other people's lives. I think this is best demonstrated by the minimum liability insurance required to operate a car. In California, right now, you can drive a car with only $35K in liability insurance... which is crazy. Sure, that will cover most cars, but it won't even cover a moderate injury. Very few people have the assets required to pay for a serious injury, and therefore, the victim is usually under-compensated. Right now, cars are essentially being subsidized by the people who are getting hurt who get under compensated, because few people have enough liability insurance (or assets) to cover the cost of really hurting someone. If the injuries per mile were better factored into the cost of driving (which could be done by increasing the liability insurance minimum) driving would be a lot more expensive; quite possibly, once you factor in injuries, other, safer forms of transport would start looking practical.
  - mschuster91 10y ago
    > In California, right now, you can drive a car with only $35K in liability insurance... which is crazy. Sure, that will cover most cars, but it won't even cover a moderate injury. Very few people have the assets required to pay for a serious injury, and therefore, the victim is usually under-compensated. In Germany, there are regulations for this. The mandatory insurance has a minimum coverage of 7.5M € for injuries, 1.12M € for property damages and 50 k€ for other accident related costs. And yet our car insurances are affordable AND the insurers make really nice profits.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    The minimum insurance won't cover that much vehicle damage, it's mostly bodily injury coverage ($5000 property).
- pluma 10y ago
  I think that's also something that's different in the US: individualism. I wouldn't normally call e.g. Germany a "collectivist" society but in comparison to the attitudes I frequently hear about from Americans (especially in politics) Germans apparently genuinely care more about their fellow citizens. Not being as likely to kill someone else is the entire point. Heck, drunk cycling is only slightly better than drunk driving because you're less likely to run someone over (but might still cause an accident when a driver has to do something dangerous to avoid you).
  - B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
    > different in the US: individualism It's funny, but in the US it's common for college freshmen to have two choices of lodging: either in a fraternity (Animal House, the movie ;-) or in a dorm room, two people per room (hence the 'Roommate from Hell' stories that grace the internet). Not big on leaving individuals alone.
    - cableshaft 10y ago
      Just because you share a room with someone doesn't mean you do the same social activities as them. First roommate in college we kinda did, second roommate we barely did anything together other than be present in the same room (there was a point where we were playing Tony Hawk together regularly).
  - rugffgbv 10y ago
    >Heck, drunk cycling is only slightly better than drunk driving because you're less likely to run someone over (but might still cause an accident when a driver has to do something dangerous to avoid you). Drunk cyclists killed 1 person between 2007-2011 in Poland. Drunk pedestrians killed 3 persons. http://ibikekrakow.com/2012/03/28/ile-osob-zabili-pijani-rowerzysci/ http://ibikekrakow.com/2012/03/28/ile-osob-zabili-pijani-row... Drunk drivers killed hundreds. 50% of people caught for DUI are riding bicycles. And until recently, they were getting exactly the same prison sentences as drunk truck drivers. Almost half of people imprisoned for DUI were riding bicycles. I think drunk cycling is completely harmless, and should be legal. If someone is too drunk, he can't keep balance on bicycle anymore and problem automatically fixes itself. There is a lot of moral panic about drunk driving, but at BAC under 0.5 permille (vast majority of people caught) it's completely harmless or even safer than riding sober. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/WHO_BAC_Relative_risk.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/WHO_BAC_... Only truly drunk people in cars should be punished.
- CalRobert 10y ago
  You're being downvoted, but you make a good point. Here's some more commentary in support of your statement. http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/28/the-perils-of-drunk-walking/ http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/28/the-perils-of-drunk-walki... It's a damn shame the US has decided to build streets that are safer to drive on drunk than walk on.
- ams6110 10y ago
  Cycling while intoxicated can also get you a DUI, though in practice it's probably rare. Even walking can be risky. If you are seen falling down or even staggering a bit you can get a public intoxication charge.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
A lot of people simply don't care. They feel they can make it, they're skilled enough. It's actually similar to speeding, which incidentally is responsible for more traffic deaths and accidents - drivers don't give a fuck, they're smarter than the system. The only way I know of actually beating some reason into people thinking like that is through heavy and sure penalties. Lots of alcohol spot-checks. Automatic ticketing for speeding measured via average, not instantaneous speed. DUI, you lose license. Speed, you're half-way to losing one. Politically untenable perhaps, but I could see it making a dent in deaths on the roads.
- rmc 10y ago
  Exactly, it's more socially acceptable in the USA.
nommm-nommm 10y ago
Cycling while drunk is illegal in some places.

m-j-fox 10y ago

Walking and cycling are going to get you killed at the same rate if not higher as driving. I guess you're not as likely to kill someone else.

Griffinsauce 10y ago
You guess? That is the whole thing with drunk driving. You endanger others. With a conscious choice I might add, when you go somewhere and drunk driving is the only way home.
jlarocco 10y ago
The point of DUI being illegal isn't to protect drunk drivers; it's to protect everybody else (and everything) nearby.
lsc 10y ago
Yup. I think that as a culture, we need to think more about the risks we take with other people's lives. I think this is best demonstrated by the minimum liability insurance required to operate a car. In California, right now, you can drive a car with only $35K in liability insurance... which is crazy. Sure, that will cover most cars, but it won't even cover a moderate injury. Very few people have the assets required to pay for a serious injury, and therefore, the victim is usually under-compensated. Right now, cars are essentially being subsidized by the people who are getting hurt who get under compensated, because few people have enough liability insurance (or assets) to cover the cost of really hurting someone. If the injuries per mile were better factored into the cost of driving (which could be done by increasing the liability insurance minimum) driving would be a lot more expensive; quite possibly, once you factor in injuries, other, safer forms of transport would start looking practical.
- mschuster91 10y ago
  > In California, right now, you can drive a car with only $35K in liability insurance... which is crazy. Sure, that will cover most cars, but it won't even cover a moderate injury. Very few people have the assets required to pay for a serious injury, and therefore, the victim is usually under-compensated. In Germany, there are regulations for this. The mandatory insurance has a minimum coverage of 7.5M € for injuries, 1.12M € for property damages and 50 k€ for other accident related costs. And yet our car insurances are affordable AND the insurers make really nice profits.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  The minimum insurance won't cover that much vehicle damage, it's mostly bodily injury coverage ($5000 property).
pluma 10y ago
I think that's also something that's different in the US: individualism. I wouldn't normally call e.g. Germany a "collectivist" society but in comparison to the attitudes I frequently hear about from Americans (especially in politics) Germans apparently genuinely care more about their fellow citizens. Not being as likely to kill someone else is the entire point. Heck, drunk cycling is only slightly better than drunk driving because you're less likely to run someone over (but might still cause an accident when a driver has to do something dangerous to avoid you).
- B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
  > different in the US: individualism It's funny, but in the US it's common for college freshmen to have two choices of lodging: either in a fraternity (Animal House, the movie ;-) or in a dorm room, two people per room (hence the 'Roommate from Hell' stories that grace the internet). Not big on leaving individuals alone.
  - cableshaft 10y ago
    Just because you share a room with someone doesn't mean you do the same social activities as them. First roommate in college we kinda did, second roommate we barely did anything together other than be present in the same room (there was a point where we were playing Tony Hawk together regularly).
- rugffgbv 10y ago
  >Heck, drunk cycling is only slightly better than drunk driving because you're less likely to run someone over (but might still cause an accident when a driver has to do something dangerous to avoid you). Drunk cyclists killed 1 person between 2007-2011 in Poland. Drunk pedestrians killed 3 persons. http://ibikekrakow.com/2012/03/28/ile-osob-zabili-pijani-rowerzysci/ http://ibikekrakow.com/2012/03/28/ile-osob-zabili-pijani-row... Drunk drivers killed hundreds. 50% of people caught for DUI are riding bicycles. And until recently, they were getting exactly the same prison sentences as drunk truck drivers. Almost half of people imprisoned for DUI were riding bicycles. I think drunk cycling is completely harmless, and should be legal. If someone is too drunk, he can't keep balance on bicycle anymore and problem automatically fixes itself. There is a lot of moral panic about drunk driving, but at BAC under 0.5 permille (vast majority of people caught) it's completely harmless or even safer than riding sober. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/WHO_BAC_Relative_risk.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/WHO_BAC_... Only truly drunk people in cars should be punished.
CalRobert 10y ago
You're being downvoted, but you make a good point. Here's some more commentary in support of your statement. http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/28/the-perils-of-drunk-walking/ http://freakonomics.com/2011/12/28/the-perils-of-drunk-walki... It's a damn shame the US has decided to build streets that are safer to drive on drunk than walk on.
ams6110 10y ago
Cycling while intoxicated can also get you a DUI, though in practice it's probably rare. Even walking can be risky. If you are seen falling down or even staggering a bit you can get a public intoxication charge.

TeMPOraL 10y ago

A lot of people simply don't care. They feel they can make it, they're skilled enough. It's actually similar to speeding, which incidentally is responsible for more traffic deaths and accidents - drivers don't give a fuck, they're smarter than the system. The only way I know of actually beating some reason into people thinking like that is through heavy and sure penalties. Lots of alcohol spot-checks. Automatic ticketing for speeding measured via average, not instantaneous speed. DUI, you lose license. Speed, you're half-way to losing one. Politically untenable perhaps, but I could see it making a dent in deaths on the roads.

rmc 10y ago
Exactly, it's more socially acceptable in the USA.

nommm-nommm 10y ago

Cycling while drunk is illegal in some places.