Page 1 of 1
.491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:08 pm
by muskieman
http://www.wral.com/news/strange/story/3250027/
A level of 0.30 is classified as stupor, 0.4 is comatose and 0.5 is considered fatal, according to the health department.
No wonder we were called stupor or was that stupid!
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:17 pm
by Mr. Neutral
<<Kobierowski, 34, of North Providence, was arrested after he drove into a highway message board>>
Well, those darn message boards often look just like a two-lane highway! Fight this all the way, Mr. K!
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:36 pm
by passthepuck?
In 1985 a buddy of mine was hit head on by a guy here in Cincinnati going the wrong way on I-74. He has not physically been the same since. It was the defendant’s 5th DUI and if memory serves his bac was close to this guy’s. The dirty little truth to Mother’s Against Drunk Driving is that although anyone can get liquored up and something horrible can happen, it is the repeat offenders, who don’t care about a license or insurance who are the real problem. I am guessing our drunken friend up east has done this before.
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:43 pm
by Mr. Neutral
<< it is the repeat offenders, who don’t care about a license or insurance who are the real problem.>>
Absolutely. The only way the police could possibly keep these losers off the road would be to stop every car on every road every day, and jail the offenders. Ain't gonna happen, though it should.
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:54 pm
by passthepuck?
Mr. N: I wish there was a solution, but I believe that lowing the bac to .08 is not it, as it makes the net far to big. I would not be surprised if our drunken friend up East has a .08 bac at all times. A couple of years ago I came across a guy who had the Guardian Interlock in his car via court order (another multiple offender). He just went out and bought a used truck via private sale, got polluted and hit guy head on. Fortunately, his lower limits insurance (another real problem) followed him into the new vehicle and there was coverage at least to a limited extent. Sadly, the guy he hit suffered permanent injury and did not have any coverage of his own beyond liability.
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:26 pm
by muskieman
It always seems like the drunk is not the one hurt in an accident.
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:42 am
by brownlavender
I think i could out drink this guy, would be a good contest. Although I did learn not to drink and drive after the first dui. Instead now i just stay home and post stupid messages on here
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:00 am
by Mr. Neutral
<<Instead now i just stay home and post stupid messages on here>>
Damn! You've blown our cover! Now everyone will know why we post the goofy stuff we do!
Re: .491 BAL and we thought we were drunk
Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:33 am
by passthepuck?
Brownlavender: Do you drink and post, or just post? The former would explain a lot, the latter is just scary.