Herbert Graf wrote:

> On Thu, 2004-09-23 at 14:45, Mike Hord wrote:
> 
>>>Many people have NO CLUE how many drinks comprise the "legal limit",
>>>which dramatically increases the number of drunk driving occurrences
>>>because people simply "didn't know" they were over the limit. On top of
>>>that the limit isn't even a constant, it depends on person, physical
>>>activity, time, heck even genetics.

Which is why the guys on Mythbusters didn't get easily drunk.
They're both large heavy men so lots of blood volume and fat
to dilute the blood alcohol.

>>A lot of that also depends on the person.  I have no idea what I would need
>>to drink to reach the legal limit, or what the legal limit "feels"
>>like, and so I
>>just don't drive after drinking.  Period.  At all.  I wait about a
>>half hour after
>>a single beer before driving.
> 
> That's exactly what I do. If I know I'm driving home that night I don't
> even have ONE drink, no matter how many hours my drive home might be.
> It's just not worth it.
> 
> I just wish the law would be changed to FORCE people to do it that way.
> I've seen people at the limit, and trust me, you DON'T want them driving
> ANYWHERE near the limit. I've seen others who were at the limit and
> still had pretty normal motor control. The fact is alcohol reacts with
> everybody differently, to set an arbitary line is simply foolhardy. TTYL

If the arbitrary line is ZERO, then there is no argument or debate.
If they can have zero tolerance for drugs in sport, why not for driving
(including cannibis [pot]). There would be a LOT fewer deaths.

R

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist