I just don’t understand drinking and driving

Women are used, by men like you who get pissed of with the ex Mrs and for a period of time hate women. All they are after is the quick dip when all the

Now I am going to log off and go and tell my wife how luck I am to have her in my life.

But no no no there is not such thing as drink driving..............

Drunk Driving not Drink Driving .............

Drunk: Affected by alcohol to the extent of losing control of one's faculties or behavior.

drink/driNGk/Verb: Take (a liquid) into the mouth and swallow.
Noun: A liquid that can be swallowed as refreshment or nourishment.

It a U not an I once more there is no such thing as drink driving it is drunk driving as in D*R*U*N*K...............

Drink driving does not make any sense in either meaning or English rules of usage.

Drink driving is a factor in about one in every five crashes in NSW where someone loses their life. Of the drink drivers who are killed, 97 per cent are men and 64 per cent are under the age of 40.

You don't have to be drunk to be affected by alcohol. You might feel normal but no one drives well after drinking alcohol.

Novice drivers with any level of alcohol in their blood are at a much higher risk of crashing. This is why learner and provisional licence holders are restricted to a zero alcohol limit.

Getting back to zero (sobering up), takes a long time. No amount of coffee, food, physical activity or sleep will speed up the process.

In NSW, police have the power to:
•Stop drivers at random to test for alcohol.
•Arrest drivers who have an illegal BAC level
•Arrest drivers they believe are impaired by drugs including alcohol, and conduct a blood and urine test
•Require a driver to undergo a sobriety test in certain circumstances.

Since the introduction of Random Breath Test (RBT) in 1982, fatal crashes involving alcohol have dropped from around 40 per cent of all fatalities to the current level of 19 per cent.

Last year police conducted more than 4.5 million breath tests in NSW.
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/alcoholdrugs/drinkdriving/index.html

Interesting however that in the states where they use roadblocks to search for low level BAC drivers the death rates had gone up not down and not so in the states that does not use that law enforcement tool is it not?

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in a 2002 Traffic Injury Prevention report, found that in general, the number of alcohol related crashes was reduced by 20% in states that implement sobriety checkpoints compared to those that do not.
http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/checkpoint.html

More than 17,000 people die and half a million are injured every year from an entirely preventable cause of death, alcohol-related crashes. That's one death every half hour. Research shows that the best ways to reduce these numbers are high-profile enforcement efforts, especially regularly conducted sobriety checkpoints. Recent studies found such checkpoints can cut the death toll by 20 percent...

Critics also contend increased sobriety checkpoints ignore the root cause of today's impaired driving problem, hardcore abusers. But the typical DWI is a first-time offender. Sobriety checkpoints are effective for both first-time offenders and hardcore abusers, who may repeatedly escape police detection by routine traffic patrols.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=637&issue_id=72005

Research has shown that checkpoints prevent impaired driving. A review of more than 20 studies shows that checkpoints resulted in a median 20% decrease in impaired driving crashes and deaths.
http://www.cdc.gov/Motorvehiclesafety/alcoholbrief/index.html

In 2008, only 5,000 of the total 215,000 California DUI arrests took place at sobriety checkpoints (2.3%).
■Law enforcement officials concede that DUI checkpoints are not the best way to prevent drunk driving. As Riverside County (Calif.) Sheriff Stanley Sniff told USA Today: “We make light-years more arrests on random patrols than at checkpoints.”
■A comparative study by the FBI found that saturation patrols were the most effective means of apprehending drunk drivers.
■A 2009 University of Maryland study found that checkpoints do not have “any impact on public perceptions, driver behaviors or alcohol-related crashes, police citations for impaired driving, and public perceptions of alcohol-impaired driving risk.”
This is not to suggest that DUI checkpoints do not have value in deterring drunk driving in California. However, given that they do not raise the same legal concerns as DUI checkpoints and have proven to be more effective in arresting drunk drivers, saturation patrols may be a better option.


http://www.totaldui.com/news/articles/breathalyzer/checkpoints.aspx


However, whether legal or unconstitutional, questions remain about the effectiveness of the DUI checkpoints that are conducted. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has conducted studies to determine just how effective the DUI roadblocks are in the United States and have found that officers on regular patrol duty take three times more drunk drivers off the roads than those at DUI checkpoints.

Other studies have been done and have concluded that the 11 states that do not have DUI sobriety checkpoints actually have fewer alcohol related fatalities than those states that use their police resources to conduct the DUI roadblocks. These statistics certainly give further indication that police on regular patrol duty have a better chance of keeping drunk drivers off the road that police officers who conduct DUI checkpoints.

alcohol-related crashes.

Sobriety checkpoints are effective for both first-time offenders and hardcore abusers, who may repeatedly escape police detection by routine traffic patrols.

Officers staffing a checkpoint in Murrieta over the weekend nabbed 19 people, most of them for license violations, a sergeant said.

Patrol officers swarming the city also arrested one motorist suspected of driving while impaired on drugs and one passenger suspected of being under the influence of drugs.

The checkpoint was staffed between 8:15 p.m. Friday and 2:30 a.m. Saturday on Clinton Keith Road, west of Interstate 215. according to Murrieta police Sgt. Jay Froboese.

Officers pulled 33 vehicles -- out of 701 screened -- into a secondary location for closer inspection; of those 33 drivers, 12 were ticketd for allegedly driving on suspended licenses.

Another four were cited for allegedly driving without valid licenses; two were arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence, and one passenger was arrested for alleged possession of methamphetamine.

Officers staffing a checkpoint in Murrieta over the weekend nabbed 19 people, most of them for license violations, a sergeant said.

Patrol officers swarming the city also arrested one motorist suspected of driving while impaired on drugs and one passenger suspected of being under the influence of drugs.

The checkpoint was staffed between 8:15 p.m. Friday and 2:30 a.m. Saturday on Clinton Keith Road, west of Interstate 215. according to Murrieta police Sgt. Jay Froboese.

Officers pulled 33 vehicles -- out of 701 screened -- into a secondary location for closer inspection; of those 33 drivers, 12 were ticketd for allegedly driving on suspended licenses.

Another four were cited for allegedly driving without valid licenses; two were arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence, and one passenger was arrested for alleged possession of methamphetamine.

i find it hilarious that so many liberals are fine with spot checks to see if drivers are on the road legally, but these same people have a fit if the police use the same exact tactic to screen and check to see if people are in America legally.

Is there a REASON that u don't capitalize the beginnings of your sentences??

Drink Driving is one of the main causes of road deaths in South Australia. Each year over a third of drivers and riders killed in road crashes have a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over the legal limit of 0.05 - the majority more than three times over the legal limit.

Of these drivers and riders killed who were over the legal limit of 0.05:

•86% are male
•39% are aged 20-29 years
•60% are killed on rural roads
•65% are at least three to four times over the legal limit.

Everyone had a study Firefly but is seem beyond question if you get those officers out on the road instead at a road block you get far far better results.

Critics also contend increased sobriety checkpoints ignore the root cause of today's impaired driving problem, hardcore abusers. But the typical DWI is a first-time offender. Sobriety checkpoints are effective for both first-time offenders and hardcore abusers, who may repeatedly escape police detection by routine traffic patrols.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=637&issue_id=72005

This is not to suggest that DUI checkpoints do not have value in deterring drunk driving in California. However, given that they do not raise the same legal concerns as DUI checkpoints and have proven to be more effective in arresting drunk drivers, saturation patrols may be a better option.
http://www.americanlawyeracademy.com/california-dui-checkpoints-effectiveness

Definition: Saturation patrols involve law enforcement deploying additional police officers to targeted roadways during select time periods to detect and apprehend impaired drivers.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding (Greene, 2003). The intention of this heavier police presence is to increase motorists’ perception that they will be arrested if they drive drunk. Saturation patrols are legal in all 50 states, and do not present many legal issues beyond those associated with routine traffic stops.

More Detail: Measured in arrests per working hour, these blanket patrols are viewed by some as the most effective method of apprehending drunken drivers (Greene, 2003). Saturation patrols can be as effective, or more effective than sobriety checkpoints in apprehending hardcore drunken drivers who often evade checkpoints. Many police departments favor them over sobriety checkpoints for their effectiveness, reduced staffing, and the comparative ease of operating saturation patrols. Adequate publicity is needed though, to reap the deterrence effect more commonly associated with sobriety checkpoints.
http://duijusticelink.aaa.com/issues/detection/saturation-patrols

States that do not have road blocks are having less deaths then those who do as the police in those states are out on patrol instead looking for the hammer drivers not the .08 drivers.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in a 2002 Traffic Injury Prevention report, found that in general, the number of alcohol related crashes was reduced by 20% in states that implement sobriety checkpoints compared to those that do not.
http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/checkpoint.html

There is a wealth of other evidence to support the use of sobriety checkpoints as a way to reduce alcohol-related deaths. In a two-year study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a statewide sobriety checkpoint program in New Mexico resulted in a 26 percent decline in alcohol-related fatalities.9 In New Jersey, sobriety checkpoints, along with educational programs, resulted in a 10-15 percent decrease in single-vehicle nighttime crashes.10 In Tennessee, NHTSA sponsored a program of highly publicized weekly checkpoints that resulted in a 20 percent reduction of alcohol-related fatalities that continued for 21 months after the program's end.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=637&issue_id=72005

Drink driving - don't do it - law is law

Is there a REASON that u don't capitalize the beginnings of your sentences??

My keyboard is dying and I am too busy to deal with it.

one study found that only 38% of drivers with a BAC of 0.08 or above were detected during a routine sobriety checkpoint (Wells, 1997), indicating the challenges law enforcement have in consistently detecting hardcore and other drunk drivers.
http://duijusticelink.aaa.com/issues/detection/sobriety-checkpoints

A systematic review of 15 studies conducted for The Community Guide to Preventive Services concluded that strong evidence exists for the effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints in decreasing the incidence of DUI (CDC, 2002). These checkpoints were found to decrease fatal crashes between 20% and 26%, and property damage collisions by an average of 24% (Elder et al, 2002).While sobriety checkpoints have been shown as effective, one study found that only 38% of drivers with a BAC of 0.08 or above were detected during a routine sobriety checkpoint (Wells, 1997), indicating the challenges law enforcement have in consistently detecting hardcore and other drunk drivers. http://duijusticelink.aaa.com/issues/detection/sobriety-checkpoints

one study found that only 38% of drivers with a BAC of 0.08 or above were detected during a routine sobriety checkpoint (Wells, 1997), indicating the challenges law enforcement have in consistently detecting hardcore and other drunk drivers.
http://duijusticelink.aaa.com/issues/detection/sobriety-checkpoints

Not that you're being dishonest, or deliberately deceptive, in what you post, naw, BillRM would never stoop to that, just to win an argument, would he? Oh yes, BillRM certainly would stoop to being deliberately deceptive--and he has. Let's look at the entire paragraph you took that sentence from...

Quote:

A systematic review of 15 studies conducted for The Community Guide to Preventive Services concluded that strong evidence exists for the effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints in decreasing the incidence of DUI (CDC, 2002). These checkpoints were found to decrease fatal crashes between 20% and 26%, and property damage collisions by an average of 24% (Elder et al, 2002).While sobriety checkpoints have been shown as effective, one study found that only 38% of drivers with a BAC of 0.08 or above were detected during a routine sobriety checkpoint (Wells, 1997), indicating the challenges law enforcement have in consistently detecting hardcore and other drunk drivers. http://duijusticelink.aaa.com/issues/detection/sobriety-checkpoints

Funny how you omitted the first part of the paragraph, about the effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints. Your desire to win an argument is greater than your regard for the truth.

Do you enjoy making yourself look like a fool, BillRM?

STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO ADMIT YOU ARE WRONG, BILLRM.

U think THAT is a plausible answer????? Anyone can actually BELIEVE that????