Test results: Johnson's blood alcohol level was .072

[Bob Sacamano]

And again, how many people were convicted of this in Az?

Also, tolerance plays a huge role here -- at .05 the AVERAGE person is 11 times more likely -- but as you should know people vary remarkably - how can you prove that person A was impaired at .05 or some lower level?

I think that figure was produced by a study, or that's where he got his info from, I don't think he's actually speaking for anyone

 

[Hostile]

As Hostile said, it's usually an easy conviction in Arizona -- if you're charged. Scientific studies show that impairment is present with a BAC as low as .02. At .05, you're more than 11 times as likely to be involved in a fatal crash than at .00. Considering that Johnson's BAC was only .008 below the "per se" level of .08, I'd say it would be quite easy to prove that he was impaired at least "to the slightest degree," if they decide to charge him.

All you have to do is mouth off to the officer or fail to cooperate in any way and the Judge will side with the prosecution.

How many people are 100% sweet and kind and decent to cops when they've had a few?

It's a no nonsense conviction in this state because the state is so big and there are a lot of long straight roads where cars can get up to some very real speed and cause horrific crashes that no one may find for hours. I could be wrong but I think we were one of the first states to go from .1 to .08 for BAC and if they drop it even lower here I won't be shocked.

Translation, Tank may be in some very real hot water.

 

[Hostile]

Me neither. Of course, I like getting drunk, having MLK's birthday off, and not having 135 degree summer temperatures.

MLK day is a holiday in AZ. Nice try on stereotyping an entire state.

 

[AbeBeta]

I think that figure was produced by a study, or that's where he got his info from, I don't think he's actually speaking for anyone

Sure, but if you talk averages you can say the average person is impaired at .05 -- but that of course means that about half of all people aren't impaired at that level -- tough case to make to me.

 

[AbeBeta]

MLK day is a holiday in AZ. Nice try on stereotyping an entire state.

My bad. We all know that was about getting a superbowl -- otherwise you would have approved it with most of the other states in 89

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Sure, but if you talk averages you can say the average person is impaired at .05 -- but that of course means that about half of all people aren't impaired at that level -- tough case to make to me.

I think his figure was for how more likely would it be for you to get into a wreck reading a .05, as opposed to a .00, which follows the thinking that .05 is considered impaired while driving

btw, noone has answered my question, is a .05 enough to warrant a DWI charge?

 

[iceberg]

As Hostile said, it's usually an easy conviction in Arizona -- if you're charged. Scientific studies show that impairment is present with a BAC as low as .02. At .05, you're more than 11 times as likely to be involved in a fatal crash than at .00. Considering that Johnson's BAC was only .008 below the "per se" level of .08, I'd say it would be quite easy to prove that he was impaired at least "to the slightest degree," if they decide to charge him.

then what is the point of having a limit if you're going to change it as it suits your purposes?

 

[Hostile]

My bad. We all know that was about getting a superbowl -- otherwise you would have approved it with most of the other states in 89

You don't want to lecture me on my state man. I wasn't born here but my eyes aren't closed.

In case that went over your head, you're wrong on some levels.

 

[AbeBeta]

I think his figure was for how more likely would it be for you to get into a wreck reading a .05, as opposed to a .00, which follows the thinking that .05 is considered impaired while driving

btw, noone has answered my question, is a .05 enough to warrant a DWI charge?

It is the same argument -- we are still talking about averages -- that doesn't mean every single person who is at .05 is 11 times more likely.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

It is the same argument -- we are still talking about averages -- that doesn't mean every single person who is at .05 is 11 times more likely.

it was probably found out in the group that the study was conducted on then, so I see your point

and I found my answer, in Maryland, a reading between .04 and .07 and you can be charged w/ a DWI, I don't know how it is in AZ, Hos?

 

[AbeBeta]

You don't want to lecture me on my state man. I wasn't born here but my eyes aren't closed.

In case that went over your head, you're wrong on some levels.

My apologies to your um--great (come on, who believes that?) state.

You have a ticket for one free shot at California. Careful where you aim, we are a big 'un.

 

[Hostile]

My apologies to your um--great (come on, who believes that?) state.

You have a ticket for one free shot at California. Careful where you aim, we are a big 'un.

No thanks. I'm neither a biggot nor a hypocrite.

 

[AbeBeta]

but don't you think it's more likely that you'll be more susceptible to getting into an accident than if you had no alcohol in your system?

sure -- but that again begs the question -- if you are so much more likely then why isn't the limit .05? or no alcohol at all? Likely because the statistical evidence just isn't as strong as presented.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

My apologies to your um--great (come on, who believes that?) state.

You have a ticket for one free shot at California. Careful where you aim, we are a big 'un.

are you goiiing, to SAN...FRAN...CISCO

make sure you wear flooooowwwerrs, in your hair

 

[Bob Sacamano]

sure -- but that again begs the question -- if you are so much more likely then why isn't the limit .05? or no alcohol at all? Likely because the statistical evidence just isn't as strong as presented.

as I pointed out, in my state at least, probably in others, .05 is considered to be impaired while driving, but I see your point, that what is likely for a group of people, isn't likely for another group

 

[AbeBeta]

are you goiiing, to SAN...FRAN...CISCO

make sure you wear flooooowwwerrs, in your hair

SF is one of the country's finest cities. Seriously. I don't live there but it is absolutely the Western U.S.'s best.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I can drive man.

OK under that condition only!!!

 

[Bob Sacamano]

SF is one of the country's finest cities. Seriously. I don't live there but it is absolutely the Western U.S.'s best.

I actually dig that song, dude has an amazing voice, too bad he was just a one-hit wonder

 

[AbeBeta]

I actually dig that song, dude has an amazing voice, too bad he was just a one-hit wonder

Best song about the state for me is X - Los Angeles. Used to listen to that skateboarding down the streets of Echo Park.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Best song about the state for me is X - Los Angeles. Used to listen to that skateboarding down the streets of Echo Park.

best song about California that probably nobody has heard of, or I should say most slept on song about California

California by REM, on the Green CD, the drums are amazing

I also like California Love by Tupac "when I step on the scene I'm hearing hoochies screamin'" classic