Perceptions, Myths, Truths about Drinking/DWIs/and all other related

[Kansan]

I just had a great week of SFST and learned a crap load.

Then I read things like this on the internet

"i'm calling BS on this. it has to be a physical impossibility to drink 15 beers and blow a .10. At his weight, even if the drinks were over a period of 5 hours, the average person would still would have double a .10. If this story is not embelished, your friend is a stastitical anomaly and we should not use his experience to extrapolate.

The average man needs to start worrying about being legally impared at 3 beers, the average women at 2. You should be able to share a bottle of wine at dinner and drive home, not worrying about whether you would pass a breathalyzer test if you got pulled over. Legislation in this country about drunk driving is more often than not controlled by people that have had a personal tragedy caused by someone who is drunk driving. This isnt right. Level headedness and common sense needs to prevail. Most of these people think that one drink is too much to drive after. Some states the limit is down to .06. Not many politicians have the balls to stand up for reasonable limits, because you'll get branded as a supporter of drunk driving.

The people weaving over the road and hitting parked cars are blowing .2s and .3s, not .06s and .08s."


Now I tested not only 1, but several people who were way higher than they seemed and way lower than they seemed.

One guy for example had resting nystagmus, he had onset prior to 45 degrees, he had distinct and sustainted nystagmus as maximum deviation.
This guy even had vertical nystagmus.
He couldn't do any of the tests. Failed everything horribly on every clue. He was trashed and he blew a .07

He only had 4 beers and said he never drank. Then there were people who did pretty well on all the tests besides HGN and were incredibly high.

I guess my question here is to reinforce the things I learned and basically I hear things like what this guy says a lot ...

The people weaving over the road and hitting parked cars are blowing .2s and .3s, not .06s and .08s.

In my experience I wouldn't even want the .07 guy I tested driving. He couldn't even freaking walk. Is the public just plain stupid or am I wrong because I have heard these types of statements all my life?

[Smurfette_76]

I am physically impaired at .04 because I rarely ever drink. I am not legally impaired, but if I would attempt to drive, I could EASILY hurt myself or someone else.

[djack16]

I drink on the weekends mostly and rarely I will have a couple beers after work. I am 175lbs and have been drinking with that consistency I previously noted for about a year. I'm a beginner . After 2 beers I can feel it easily.
I've been at .08. I'm not good at .08. I'm very impaired at that level. I recently called in a DUI that blew .10. He was speeding and weaving; hitting both yellow and white lines.

Those idiots on the internet encouraging people to DUI are worse than the DUI's themselves. I learned a pretty reliable tactic to avoid DUI from a traffic cop. IF you drink that night, DON'T drive that night. Simple and works like a charm.

[texaschickeee]

Alcohol processes differantly in women then men, and also body sizes differ alot to. Toss in combo of meds (be it psych, antibiatics or whatever, then ifyou ahve eaten or not and like smurfette said, people that dont drink alot vesus thos that drink daily.

I personally about three weeks ago had taken some allerigy meds, had 2 nice size mixed drinks and asked my friend to take me home. I KNEW i was drunk after the first one. and when most people comment that I appeared...no chances with me. Its not something I want to do, let alone it takes ONE TIME to wipe out a family or something.

[Fëanor]

All drugs affect all people differently. There are many more factors than body weight and tolerance.

Your state of mind (happy vs angry vs depressed) has a huge impact. Some people's psychological set-up just doesn't go well with certain drugs. How many of you know the guy who never drinks because he knows it makes him violent every time?

Personally I have never taken a breathalyzer while drunk so I have no clue what my BAC is when I reach the level where I can't drive. I just don't drink more than a couple with my meal if I know I am driving home.

[Bing_Oh]

The people weaving over the road and hitting parked cars are blowing .2s and .3s, not .06s and .08s.

That phrase right there indicates how much that person doesn't know about OVI. In Ohio, there are multiple legal sections for OVI. One is commonly referred to by LE as "super DUI"...that being a breath test in excess of .17. Now, I'm not going to say that "super dui's" are rare (they are, unfortunately, not), they are also not extremely common. Most OVI's tend to test above the legal .08 and the "super" .17, in my experience. That includes the crashes.

Also, I seriously doubt that the person who made those comments has ever been a test subject for SFST/HGN. Personally, I have been...several times...and being one gives you a very different perspective on intoxication. At 6'01, 210 lbs, it's not an easy thing to get me above .08, especially not quickly. It takes alot of shots. And, quite franky, when I'm at .08, I'd never even consider driving. I'm absolutely sloshed. I strongly suspect that I'm somewhere in the realm of passed out at .17 or above. I've also been the breath testing machine operator on many of these training sessions, and I see how my friends and co-workers act at just over .08.

In the end, I'm totally supportive of the .08 BAC level in my state. It's definitely not too low.

[mdrdep]

Most people I've come across above .20 are barely capable of basic functions. Luckily they are not the most common DUI, although they are usually the 20 MPH pursuits. The most dangerous DUI I've come across are those at .08 to about .12. They think they are just fine when in reality their driving is the most scary. You watch them get 1/2 way through a curve before they even realize it. The biggest problem people don't take into account when they decide to drive after 2-3 beers isn't the routine driving, it's the lag in reaction time to say a child running out into the street. Most fatal accidents I've investigated with DUI's were the lower end drivers that failed to respond to a dynamic situation they faced while driving

[FNA209]

All drugs affect all people differently. There are many more factors than body weight and tolerance.

That is true. I know a few people that shouldn't drive after one drink. I also know of a few out-and-out alcoholics that function quite well with a .20+ BAC. For them, it's a natural state.

Your state of mind (happy vs angry vs depressed) has a huge impact. Some people's psychological set-up just doesn't go well with certain drugs. How many of you know the guy who never drinks because he knows it makes him violent every time?

Same truth. I have a friend that is the ugliest person I've ever seen if he drinks. Luckily, he figured it out on his own and doesn't drink anymore. Probably why he still is a friend.

[Gene L]

I think it's possible to drink 15 beers and blow a .10, but only if pound them down and you're tested right after the 15th beer. Takes a while for all that liquid to enter your bloodstream.

Those people weaving a .02 etc. are porbably high on pot or pills as well as alcohol.

The test where I live is "impared" regardless of the BAC. So you could get charged with DUI even if you blow an .02. The legal presumption is you're impared at .08, at .07 there is no presumption but evidence may prove otherwise, and below that the presumption is unimpaired, unless evidence shows otherwise.

[Gene L]

I am physically impaired at .04 because I rarely ever drink. I am not legally impaired, but if I would attempt to drive, I could EASILY hurt myself or someone else.

If you are physically impaired, you're also legally impaired and could be charged. At least in my state. Glad you recognize that you shouldn't be driving!

[StudChris]

The most dangerous DUIs are the ones that blow .08-.12. They are the guys that don't drink all that often, so they aren't really use to the effects. There are times where someone will have above a .25, and the only time you can tell they're above the limit is the HGN. These are the guys that are professional alcoholics, their body's are a lot more used to it, and they probably drive with well above a .08 a few times a week, and are usually caught on a fluke, not because they're swerving and hitting curbs and such.

[Gene L]

I arrested a guy whose BAC was in the forties. He was passed out in a ditch, and had slid from under the wheel. And this was from a blood test, of course and he was too drunk and unconscious to blow the tube.

That was the highest I or anyone else had ever seen. The guy went into convulsions and had to be taken to the hospital. He nearly died.

Because he was not under the wheel, and his feet had slid over to the passenger side along with the rest of him. the judge found him not guilty.

Later on, I asked the guy if he was driving. He said, "To tell the truth, I don't know if I was driving or not. I was too drunk."

[SgtScott31]

I just had a great week of SFST and learned a crap load.

Then I read things like this on the internet

"i'm calling BS on this. it has to be a physical impossibility to drink 15 beers and blow a .10. At his weight, even if the drinks were over a period of 5 hours, the average person would still would have double a .10. If this story is not embelished, your friend is a stastitical anomaly and we should not use his experience to extrapolate.

The average man needs to start worrying about being legally impared at 3 beers, the average women at 2. You should be able to share a bottle of wine at dinner and drive home, not worrying about whether you would pass a breathalyzer test if you got pulled over. Legislation in this country about drunk driving is more often than not controlled by people that have had a personal tragedy caused by someone who is drunk driving. This isnt right. Level headedness and common sense needs to prevail. Most of these people think that one drink is too much to drive after. Some states the limit is down to .06. Not many politicians have the balls to stand up for reasonable limits, because you'll get branded as a supporter of drunk driving.

The people weaving over the road and hitting parked cars are blowing .2s and .3s, not .06s and .08s."


Now I tested not only 1, but several people who were way higher than they seemed and way lower than they seemed.

One guy for example had resting nystagmus, he had onset prior to 45 degrees, he had distinct and sustainted nystagmus as maximum deviation.
This guy even had vertical nystagmus.
He couldn't do any of the tests. Failed everything horribly on every clue. He was trashed and he blew a .07

He only had 4 beers and said he never drank. Then there were people who did pretty well on all the tests besides HGN and were incredibly high.

I guess my question here is to reinforce the things I learned and basically I hear things like what this guy says a lot ...

The people weaving over the road and hitting parked cars are blowing .2s and .3s, not .06s and .08s.

In my experience I wouldn't even want the .07 guy I tested driving. He couldn't even freaking walk. Is the public just plain stupid or am I wrong because I have heard these types of statements all my life?

Absolutely right Kansan. Those that quote things like what you put in bold are clueless when it comes to DUI's. Many people can blow .06 or .08% and be well too impaired to drive. I have taken the NHTSA DUI Detection and NHTSA Instructor schools. I have heard all the excuses and all the gripin from those that say they can't have a drink at a restaurant. Anyone (over age 21) can have 2 or 3 drinks with their meals at O'Charley's/Applebee's. Those that make such excuses drink more anyway and pay the price.

[Just]

The thing about DWI is that, while it is a strong concern to protect citizens from people driving dangerously on the roads, there is still no fool proof way of an LEO determining if someone is actually DWI. Like for instance, the LEO witnesses a driver crossing lines. This happens all the time for numerous reason. Then the LEO states he smells a strong odor of alcohol (most LEOs say this, however alcohol has no odor). Well, what if that person was drinking non-alcoholic beer. Okay, now the LEO asks said person to perform some tests, which are uncredible to say the least. They are supposed to be used to determine PC to arrest when actually they are building evidence. Since most decisions to arrest a suspected DUI are made at the driver's window, the LEO now makes a subjective decision, in most cases, to decide whether a person has passed or failed the FST's. Any human will see what he expects to see. If the LEO has already made the call to arrest at the driver's window, I suspect that person will fail the FSTs. But let's just say the officer witnesses the suspect perform generally well on the FSTs. Now comes the PBT, which have been discredited as accurate in the courts and the readings are inadmissable. However, the LEO can still mention that the suspect refused or agreed to take it and if it gave PC to make the arrest. So, given that the Alcosensor (hand held breathalyzer) may be inaccurate, how would a .08 reading be enough PC to make an arrest, given that a person passed the FSTs and smelled of alcohol (probably beer, but could be non-alcoholic). Let's just say the suspect is then arrested and taken to the jail to submit to the evidentiary breath test. Now these things are usually calibrated regularly and a certified LEO has to be the one to administer the test. There are a number of things that have to take place before the test can even be given, such as reading of implied consent law, 20 min. warm up in which the machine runs dry tests to see if it is working properly, monitoring of suspect for belching or any contact with the mouth, new breath tubes, and so on. Then the suspect takes, let's just say, the Intoxilyzer 5000. The suspect has to blow for approximately 20 sec. and hard enough for the machine to read it. Sometimes, it is required for two tests to be administered and the results have to be within .02 range of each other. If the range is higher than .02 for the first two tests, the LEO must give subsequent tests until a result is within .02 of either of the first two test results. I wonder why? Some states only require one. But anyway, the suspect completes these tasks and the machine spits out a piece of paper with the results, certified LEO signature, date, and time. The results for this one read .09. The suspect is then booked and held on bond.

You also have to remember that the Intoxilyzer 5000 does not take into consideration of mouth alcohol, deep lung air (hence, LEO telling suspect to blow harder), absorptive or elimination stage of alcohol in a suspect (impossible to detect) , chemical make up of suspect, health of suspect (diabetes), design defects of the machine, possible errors by the certified LEO administering the test, any malfunctions in the machine, radio frequency interference, and so many more things that I won't list that could affect the results of the machine. Also, over the years PDs have sworn by the fail safe accuracy of breathalyzers and use blood tests only as backups or for drugs. That being said, why do manufacturers keep changing them claiming to be more accurate than the next? Also, why do they feel the need to add mouth alcohol detectors if they are so accurate without them? Do you remember the Breathalyzer 900? How about the Intoxilyzer 8000? These were considered inaccurate and unusable. The Breathalyzer 900 was probably the first breathalyzer ever used and the Intoxilyzer 8000 is probably the newest and put the convictions of thousands of DUI convictions at risk in Florida not too many months ago. Now why would the Phoenix PD decide to use blood tests at DUI stops. I can't believe it either, but cops are actually going to have the authority to stick a suspect with a needle. WHOA!!

With all this being said, the latest figures from MADD and NHSTA claim that drunk driving deaths have risen. WHY? For the past 13 years the stats have remained pretty much the same, some years lower and some higher. Even with the push for tougher laws and penalties, nothing has really changed. In the pursuit of DUI convictions, our constitutional rights are fading away rapidly. US Sup. Courts have even made a "DUI Exceptions to the Constitution."

I'm not an advocate of drunk driving, but I am an advocate for constitutional rights. You may say, "Well, if I'm not doing anything illegal, it won't matter." Until it happens to you. Who is to say other "Exceptions to the Constitution" won't be made. As Americans, I don't see how we can allow this to happen. It isn't the LEOs fault. It is America as a whole. In fact LEOs have incentive to make DUI busts. Ask William Lindsey Jr., who received a salary of about $72,000 last year, but Lindsey’s total income was more than $172,576 from the Houston Police Department. The difference came from court appearances related to DUI court hearings in which he accumulated overtime. He is assigned to the DUI task force. Do you think he is manipulating DUI charges? This is just plain crazy, but can you blame the guy?

One other thing. Google "Dave Albo." He is a Virginia Delegate. He basically writes the DUI laws in VA. Guess what. He is also a DUI attorney. It is the "Albo Cycle of Life." This is very interesting to me. He was also caught slipping a provision into a law that would have lowered the penalty for child rape in 2006. This is just absurd to me.

That's it.

[LuvedMyMotor]

Back when I was a young, hard-charging pretty new cop (about 27 years old), I was a member of our DUI team. A friend of mine who was a nurse in the local ER got hired as a policeman. I was at his going-away-from-the-hospital party and got lit. There was no way I could have driven. We were pretty close to the station and I had my wife drive me there so I could blow on the machine. I blew a .05. Good God! From then on, I had no sympathy for those folks I popped who were "borderline", which was .10 at the time. But like others have said, I arrested people who blew in the .20's and did pretty well on their FST's.