18-20 year-old can drink in the company of parent

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by mosgood
While I know you can't keep them from doing it, let their brains develop a little more before helping them kill off brains cells eh?

Originally posted by GScholtz
Actually the well known "fact" that drinking alcohol kills brain cells is just a myth.

Originally posted by Cliff Clavin, the mailman from "Cheers"
"Well you see, Norm, it's like this... A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo and when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessive drinking of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. And that, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers."
 

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by rpm
Personally, I think breathalizers should be factory installed on ALL vehicles. A pre-emptive strike against DWI's. Law enforcement and government won't go for it, tho. Would cut into their cash cow.

I emphatically agree.

Karaya

[stiehl]

Did most of my hard drinking when I was 17-19.  Alcohol is easy to get, let the kids have their fun.

[Siaf__csf]

Mora before you judge americans too much, remember that finland also has one of the highest drinking related murder levels in the world.

People get drunk -> they kill. No guns needed, just an axe to the neighbours head is enough.

[Redwing]

legal drinking age for beer and wine is 16 here, 18 for liquor.

you can get a driving license at 18, in some states at 17 as long as an adult is driving with you.
I don't know how drinking related car accident statistics compare to the US or other countries and can't be bothered to find out right now. But by some of your definitions, the amount of such related deaths should be significantly higher here.
The difference in # of cars per capita isn't much lower than in the US and we definately do have high speed interstates that we're free to use. And we can even drive as fast as we want to in most places, drunk or not

I still kinda doubt that we have many more alcohol related deaths here. If someone's able to correct me on that, feel free.

I still think it's kinda odd to label someone who's eligible to vote or who could be a soldier in iraq a "kid" when talking about his legal status towards alcohol consumption.

[mora]

Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Mora before you judge americans too much, remember that finland also has one of the highest drinking related murder levels in the world.

People get drunk -> they kill. No guns needed, just an axe to the neighbours head is enough.

Yes I know that. We also have one of the most strickest alcohol laws in the world! And look where it got us... You don't have to go very much south to see that liberal alcohol laws and crime don't go hand in hand.

About the only thing we have done right is the fight against drinking and driving, which is very low when compared to alcohol abuse. and we can thank education received in school for that.

[JB88]

Originally posted by Redwing


I still think it's kinda odd to label someone who's eligible to vote or who could be a soldier in iraq a "kid" when talking about his legal status towards alcohol consumption.

an age old arguement here.

[storch]

Originally posted by rpm
BZZZZ, wrong. Fines and court costs are not the only money municipalities make from DWI's. Probation fees ($40 per visit x 24-36 months), Manditory Drug Testing Fee ($30 per test), DWI Victim Impact Panel Fees ($60), DWI Driver Education Class Fees ($250), Rehabilitation Class Fees ($24 x 2 x 16 weeks), plus any other classes your Probation Officer may decide to send you to at his sole discretion. These are all LOCAL fees paid to the City and County and do not include any State fees or surcharges related to your Driver's License. Texas has a surcharge ranging from $1000 - $2000 per year for up to 3 years for an Essential Need License. That license is only good to drive straight to and from work on a designated path. No side trips.

Been there, done that, got the certificates. They are a cash cow.

Unbudgeted revenue.  States and municipalities live for that.  It is a ready and reliable source of easily squandered and grafted income.  It's not only associated with DMV, can anyone say building permits, fishing licenses hunting licenses, alarm permits etc. ad nauseum.

[Mickey1992]

Originally posted by Lizking
If you are interested enough, google it and see how many fewer children die on our roads since it went into effect.

How many fewer would be killed if the drinking age was 25?  How many fewer if the interstate speed limit was 40?  How many fewer if the driving age was 18, or 21?

[rpm]

Originally posted by Maverick
RPM, read the post again. None of the money goes to the Law Enforcement side. BTW I suppose you'll now state they have to falsify the DUI to make sure they get enough. Kind of hard to build a budget based on how many get arrested then convicted.

Perhaps you wouldn't have those "certificates" if you made better choices.

I suppose the Department of Public Safety isn't a part of law enforcement? I've never said they falsify DWI's, just that they have become addicted to the income. Nice try at belittling me. I'm not proud of getting a DWI, I should have recieved one years earlier than I did. I would like to see more prevention in place for public safety. Is prevention wrong?

[Creamo]

Originally posted by Maverick
None of the money goes to the Law Enforcement side.

Are you sure?

 Not according to dui.com, but this may be a state by state dependant breakdown, as certainly the penalties vary. I didn't read into enough to find out, just stopped when I saw what I considered 'law enforcement' type agencies getting a percentage. Some of it quite a bit actually. Maybe Peace Officers aren't coppers or something, I thought it was a fancy word for them though. Maybe it's splitting hairs, but aren't Public Procecuters under the same ideal as law enforcement?


% .38 - FISH AND GAME
PRESERVATION
FUND ($5.00)

22.12 - RESTITUTION FUND($260)

27.15 - PEACE OFFICER TRAINING
FUND ($320)

29.73 - DRIVER TRAINING PENALTY
ASSESSMENT FUND( $340)

9.12 - CORRECTIONS TRAINING
FUND ($106)

.90 - LOCAL PUBLIC PROSECUTORS
AND PUBLIC DEFENDER
TRAINING FUND ($11)

10.00 - VICTIM-WITNESS ASSISTANCE
FUND($118)

[Maverick]

RPM,
Prevention is an individual responsibility. Havern't you learned that yet? Using Government as a nanny was tried and that experiment failed, fortunately IMO.

[rpm]

Get government out of the extremely profitable nanny business by all means. I'm for it. That's why factory installed breathalizers would be a very good thing. It would keep drunk drivers off the road, free up police to patrol more and do less paperwork, and last but not least save lives and property. What's the problem?

You said anyone could bypass the system. That is true. I say if they are caught doing so it should be a felony. Again, what's the problem?

Maybe you think you have the right to drink and drive, and endanger innocent people.  You might think you can handle yourself better than the other guy behind the wheel after a few beers. You are dead wrong, period.

You want to drink? That's cool. You want to drink and get behind the wheel? That's not cool.

[Maverick]

RPM,

I agree with what you said about the drinking and driving part 100%. I've been hit by a drunk, fortunately all it cost me was money and time in getting my bike repaired. Like I said before, if the manufacturer could make it foolproof I'd have absolutely no problems with a breathalyzer in a car. How they could make it work for drugs as well I have no clue as a regular breathalyzer doesn't work there. There is a definate need for detection of drugs as an impairment to driving.

I'd love to see more felony sentencings for DUI but it won't happen. It's classified as a "victimless crime" by a lot of folks and there would be even more of a shortage of jail space. It pissed me off more than once to see a dui driver walk with a minimal fine and 4 hours served in jail at court when it took me almost that long to process him through the test etc. when he got arrested. Other factors play into it as well like the Dianna Ross case (from my own home town agency) where she got very preferential treatment by the court.

Prosecutors would dismiss the case for any reason they could find simply to clear the docket as the trials take a tremendous amount of time. If they didn't dismiss they'd plea down to reckless driving and the original DUI wouldn't get recorded on the offenders record. Several defense attorneys got fairly well off doing dui's almost exclusively. One of my favorite classes of sublife forms.

I honestly wish there was a way to stop them from driving like that but there isn't at this time. All that can be done is pick up the pieces from the wrecks, arrest the offender when possible and deal with the crap from the courts about the cases. It does get old real fast arresting the same flake more than once and watching as 2 of the 3 cases are plead away so they won't have to go to trial and only the minimal penalty for one offense is handed down.