Drunk driving laws aren't hypocrisy, but our drug laws are.

6/25/2006 1:31:07 PM

Quote :

"^dont take that quote out of context please. before that i explained that the GOVERNMENT THEMSELVES has proclaimed that alcahol on any level impairs your decision making."

I didn't take shit out of fucking context. You said alcohol impairs your judgment...well you don't say. But then you went on to say that because it impairs your judgment, anything you do while drunk you aren't responsible for. That's the part I objected to, and that's the part I quoted...I couldn't have taken anything out of context when the "context" was a fucking given. Sorry for cursing, but I really don't like being told what to do, especially when it's some bitch ass "don't take my words out of context" whining shit.

Quote :

"so they are allowing places to serve you something that THEY KNOW will impair your judgement. and they leave it 100% legal for you to get your judgement impaired on a small level by this alcahol but you are responsible for the things you do after you have already legally impared your judgement. thats the hypocrisy"

Explain to me how it's hypocritical to say, "Yo, this shit will fuck you up. It will fuck up your judgment, your coordination, all sorts of shit. And that's just in the short term. But, anyway, we ask that you not drive while you're fucked up."

One last point: we are in college. We are exposed to binge drinking left and right, and it makes the problem appear pretty severe. But I need you to realize that there are millions of people out there who are able to have two to three drinks and leave it at that. I just can't support a ban that would deny those millions just because there are others who have a problem stopping at three and wind up doing stupid shit. We have AA for that.

6/25/2006 1:34:03 PM

^^^yes but in the 20s they didnt have technology. an alternative to alcohol could be easily produced. imagine the money waiting to be made for companies developing the best alcohol subsititute. sell it to anheiser busch and other companies and bam. people would barely notice the diff int heir budlite

Article on alcohol subsitute recenly developed

Quote :

"CASUAL drinkers are unlikely to have raised their glass to the news last month that most people who suffer severe alcohol-induced liver disease are social drinkers not alcoholics. Nor to the finding that moderate drinking might not, after all, help prevent heart disease. There may, however, just be a solution to our drinking woes - one that will allow us to go to a bar and drink as much as we want; get merry, not legless; wake without a hangover; and never have to worry that one of our favourite pastimes may be killing us. It's a cocktail of drugs that mimics the pleasurable effects of alcohol without the downsides. The idea is only on the drawing board, but there is no scientific reason why it could not be made right now, says psychopharmacologist David Nutt of the University of Bristol in the UK. Alcohol exerts its effects on the brain mainly by latching onto signalling molecules called GABA-A receptors. There are dozens of subtypes of these, some of which are associated with specific effects of alcohol. Memory loss, for example, seems to occur because alcohol binds to a subtype in the hippocampus called alpha-5. Nutt says it would be possible to design molecules that bind strongly to the good subtypes but more weakly to the bad ones. In fact such "partial agonists" of GABA-A receptors already exist in the form of bretazenil and pagoclone, which were developed as anti-anxiety drugs but never commercialised. These molecules also have the advantage of being instantly reversible by the drug flumazenil, which is used as an antidote to overdoses of tranquillisers such as Valium. Alcohol also inhibits NMDA receptors, which are part of a general excitatory signalling circuit, so a second ingredient of the alcohol substitute would be an NMDA antagonist such as dizoclipine, originally developed as a drug for stroke. The trick pharmacologists need to pull off is to make a mixture of molecules that deliver alcohol's pleasurable effects, notably relaxation and sociability, without the aggression, nausea, loss of coordination and amnesia that can cause drinkers and those around them so much grief. Long-term problems such as cirrhosis of the liver could also be eliminated, says Nutt, who publishes the idea next month in the Journal of Psychopharmacology, (vol 20, p 318). There would be obstacles of course. The pharmaceutical industry may be unwilling to develop and test such a complex and expensive formulation, while there would be political and moral difficulties in creating a new lifestyle drug. And drinkers might need some persuading to give up fine wine or their favourite beer. Still, it's an idea worth toasting."

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 1:36 PM. Reason : ^^^]

6/25/2006 1:34:55 PM

yes, people are going to pay 6 bucks for a non-alcoholic margarita...

yes, companies will waste time and effort making concentrates to make said drinks that 5% or less of the customers will continue to buy...

yes, having possession be nearly decriminalized will stop all drunk driving...

yes, we can thus stop having any form of dui checkpoints...

add:

yes, everyone only buys beer and alcoholic drinks for the taste...

yes, people at 95% of full capacity cant figure out that drinking more will lead to negative consequences and shouldn't be held responsible for their actions...

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 1:39 PM. Reason : .]

6/25/2006 1:36:29 PM

Quote :

"-10/10 STUPIDEST FUCKING THING I HAVE EVER HEARD "

6/25/2006 1:43:40 PM

^^not only would this substitute taste the same. it would make you feel the same "tipsy" high

Quote :

"a mixture of molecules that deliver alcohol's pleasurable effects, notably relaxation and sociability, without the aggression, nausea, loss of coordination and amnesia that can cause drinkers and those around them so much grief"

when this becomes more concrete expect to see movements towards prohib in the next 10 years. funny thing is nobody will know the difference. this is the same thing as trying to get car companies to switch from oil to a cleaner more availible substitue fuel its bound to happen some day

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 1:49 PM. Reason : this is a nobrainer. now that the tech is in place its time to start thinking about it]

6/25/2006 1:46:40 PM

im not seeing all of that in said article. it appears to be a hypothesis based on psych and emergency drugs. id imagine that would be both expensive and have some questionable side effects (why werent they commercialized?).

it would seem to me that the "lowered inhibitions" section of alcohol is what makes it so enjoyable and causes increased social behaviors and a general high. they seem to be focussing on the physical side effects more than social or psychological.


quick wikipedia look, though we know how credible it is someetimes:

Quote :

"However, while less addictive than diazepam[2], long-term use of bretazenil would probably result in an addiction more severe than alcohol addiction; while the physical effects of of bretazenil addiction are minor, a consequence of long-term use of such an alcohol substitute would probably be mental deterioration more severe than seen in long-term recreational alcohol users. Bretazenil, were it to be made commercially available, would probably be classed as a controlled substance"

the other hasnt been fully tested but is showing some promise. im just not convinced


[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 2:22 PM. Reason : .]

6/25/2006 2:16:36 PM

Face facts, most americans just don't like the reality of soberness

thus they seek out ways to alter reality

alcohol, drugs

6/25/2006 2:54:54 PM

Quote :

"many of the same drinks can be made with substitue concentrates instead of liquir. and youd be surprised how similar they taste too."

ok who let campus crusade get loose on TWW

6/25/2006 3:27:40 PM

^No, dude, he's talking about some new compound that supposedly has all the good of alcohol and none of the bad.

I think they're calling it "magic."

6/25/2006 3:40:38 PM

none of you have watched star trek

6/25/2006 3:53:46 PM

Quote :

"I think the government kinda traps you here."

Well, I do kinda agree. What you're talking about specifically isn't hypocritical, but the government does basically set up alcohol laws so that pretty much everything but the physical act of drinking is a crime.

Did you get drunk at a bar? OK, you definitely can't drive home -- that's DUI. Want to walk home? Nope, that's public drunkenness. Oh, and the bars are required to kick you out onto the streets at last call (thus forcing you to be publicly drunk). Your only real option is to call a cab, which is dicey depending on the time of night you're out (try to get a cab at closing time). And while you're waiting for one you're breakin' the law!

Oh, and then the DUI laws -- the legal limit for drunken driving keeps getting lower and lower. Why? Well, apparently the human body is becoming more sensitive to alcohol consumption every two years.

Basically alcohol laws are prohibition, they just work through a thousand different means rather than one monolithic one. Sure, you can drink. But it's potentially a huge liability to you.

Next on the topic: city governments that want to have thriving bar/restaurant districts, and which want to set up DUI checkpoints right outside them, but they don't want to provide any kind of public transit. Competing goals, huh? They want to be both the source AND the destination for DUI offenses.

6/25/2006 4:08:34 PM

Quote :

"once i have a drink in my system my judgement is already in jepordy and the domino effect has started."

pussy ass lightweight

6/25/2006 5:00:10 PM

Quote :

"Oh, and then the DUI laws -- the legal limit for drunken driving keeps getting lower and lower. Why? Well, apparently the human body is becoming more sensitive to alcohol consumption every two years."

not that we'd want to continually err on the side of safety or have obtained new information that proves the old measures werent strict enough.

i agree that public drunkeness charges are pretty silly, but they generally dont just sit around waiting to give those to ppl. the act of being drunk isnt the issue, it is the act of being a loud, abnoxious pain in the ass.

6/25/2006 5:20:00 PM

i've never been abnoxious, but i've sure been obnoxious

6/25/2006 6:19:12 PM

Forgive government for trying to regulate just societies problems.

Very few people every day get arrested for DUI, yet alcohol is consumed by millions every day. If you feel the two cannot co-exist then it seems to me we must legalize driving while intoxicated.

hcnguyen, what is wrong with people enjoying alcohol in the privacy of their own homes? And if your "substitute" gets you tipsy all the same does this also not mean you should not be held responsible for your actions? Using your logic, should not the "substitutes" be just as illegal?

6/25/2006 6:25:08 PM

^dude the substitutes wont impair your coordination. everything good. nothing bad. and this is just the tip of the iceburg. give ti 10 years i swear this will be 100% AVAILIBLE. then all we have to do is get contracts with the companies and soon after can prohibit regular alcahol.

i want to hear you guys refute the idea of a good substitute.

and what exactly do you think the % of drunk drivers who actually get pulled is? im pretty sure its less than 10. there are drunk drivers out there lurking everynight

governments that care about their people usually get rid of things that harm them even though its what they want.

6/25/2006 6:37:55 PM

you'd have to prove that there are alternatives for us to dispute it. your hypothesized article and speculation combined doesnt do much for me.

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 6:41 PM. Reason : some concoction of expensive psych drugs 20 years from now doesnt fit the bill]

6/25/2006 6:40:25 PM

This kind of thinking is what is wrong with the U.S. if people would take responsibility for their own fucking actions instead of looking for some bullshit loop hole in the system the government wouldn't have to fuck the 1/2 of the population (the ones with brains) out of their freedom just because a few people are retarded and try to beat the system.

God only knows how many beers it takes me to blow a .081 (2,3 Budweisers?) but i know on the Budweiser scale... i don't feel ANYTHING at all until after six (i'm a big guy who drinks 3 microbrew beers 3 nights a week). but since some dumbass can't just follow "don't drive drunk" i have to be told in specific numbers when i am incapable to drive... numbers that i could reach casually drinking beer over a 3 course dinner.

6/25/2006 6:41:32 PM

^^^dont go there with LoneSnark, Ive had that conversation with him before. All he will do is find a way to implement economics into the argument. He just wants to legalize every drug known to man, and pray that it will have good results

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 6:42 PM. Reason : .]

6/25/2006 6:41:55 PM

face it sumfoo, laws designed to cater to the individual are silly and nearly impossible to enforce currently. it will never happen eitherr.

6/25/2006 6:43:52 PM

Quote :

"Real Name : Han Age : 21 Sex : M Hometown : Raleigh Class : Junior Major : EI (ei, ei, uh oh!) Homepage : http://www.goheels.com Biography : tarheel: fed and bread Interests : parking, making 10/10 threads, and trolling Favorite Quote : goal is to make the tourney. if we do that, weve already surpasssed the herb era."

6/25/2006 6:44:58 PM

so suspend him and we can get on with our lives.

6/25/2006 6:46:13 PM

If only I had the power.......

I can't believe that this made it through a page and a half.

6/25/2006 6:48:44 PM

ok so i want to know what is hard or wrong with making it illegal to consume alcohol outside of residences?

this would cut down a lot on drunk driving, and drinking would still be legal, albeit inside homes.

6/25/2006 6:51:53 PM

Because that would be islamo fascist

6/25/2006 7:02:13 PM

Quote :

"ok so i want to know what is hard or wrong with making it illegal to consume alcohol outside of residences? this would cut down a lot on drunk driving, and drinking would still be legal, albeit inside homes."

What is hard or wrong with drinking in public? People might drive drunk? If we're gonna take individual actions like that into account, we might as well outlaw it all together.

Drinking in public? Cool. Drinking in public and driving drunk? Not cool.
Drinking at home? Cool. Drinking at home and beating your wife? Not cool.

So because of all the drunk driving and drunken domestic violence, we should totally outlaw alcohol. That's basically what you're saying.

In other words, if we're going to take into account drunk driving when deciding how to regulate alcohol consumption, we should take into account all the other personal, individual decisions that people make. And that puts us at prohibition.

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 7:06 PM. Reason : sss]

6/25/2006 7:05:35 PM

Quote :

"Because that would be islamo fascist"

no you racist ignoramus

islamo fascist would be a total ban

actually, that would be islamic

islamo fascist would be something such as discrimination against non-muslims

get your facts straight

6/25/2006 7:12:52 PM

so you all agree that when a substitute is fully developed it should become the new "alcahol" and outlaw the old one?

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 7:16 PM. Reason : when/if but its really just a matter of time.]

6/25/2006 7:16:33 PM

No, I haven't agreed to that. I don't think anyway else has either.

^^You respond to the troll but not to me. That's smart.

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 7:26 PM. Reason : sss]

6/25/2006 7:25:48 PM

i just wanna hear why you think people should get loss of coordination, nasea, violence and all the bad things that come with alcohol for no reason. you must be a hippy that wants to legalize EVERYTHING.

6/25/2006 7:29:54 PM

Gah. Lets get rid of cars because they kill 40,000 people a year. Might as well while we're at it....

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 7:57 PM. Reason : dumbass]

6/25/2006 7:56:07 PM

^^ you again are just assuming that the wonder drug exists, has 0 consequences, and is handy dandy. WHEN something else exists we can look into it and decide from there.

Quote :

"ok so i want to know what is hard or wrong with making it illegal to consume alcohol outside of residences?"

cuz that doesnt solve the problem. people being irresponsible is the problem. what stops people from getting drunk and then driving around? correct, absolutely nothing. if people really cared about getting drunk safely they probably just would do it at home and then stay there, but that isnt the case.

6/25/2006 8:06:35 PM

Quote :

"governments that care about their people usually get rid of things that harm them even though its what they want."

That's why cars, natural gas, bath tubs, stairs, cigarettes, pets, and other people have been outlawed.

6/25/2006 8:28:40 PM

^all those things are essential to life. if every town had enough public transportation to take everybody everywhere (basically a subway system like new yorks that spanned every block of the country and busses that stopped on every block then fine. get rid of cars.

6/25/2006 8:56:52 PM

How about moving goods? Can't put a bunch of stuff on metros. And thank goodness, I was having trouble making it through life without cigarettes.

6/25/2006 9:05:59 PM

LoneSnark's argument doesn't really hold up because the things he listed don't impair judgment, but since hcnguyen rolled with it, I'll roll with it too.

hcnguyen, since when did cigarettes, bathtubs, and pets become essential to life? Shit, I could make an argument that natural gas, stairs, and cars aren't essential either.

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 9:09 PM. Reason : sss]

6/25/2006 9:08:39 PM

o ya, didnt notice that. cigs are the same thing get rid of them too. how do pets cause harm? harmful pets are banned. and the purpose of bathtubs is to wash. ur getting ghey with it be careful. anything can be used for the wrong reason. were talking about things that the use of them for their purpose is harmful.

6/25/2006 9:15:30 PM

Hey, I've got an idea!

Whenever someone does something stupid and irresponsible, we should make a law against that stupid and irresponsible thing, and then ban whatever items were used to do that stupid and irresponsible thing.

Quote :

"Real Name : guru Age : 21 Sex : M Hometown : Raleigh Class : Junior Major : hundalay hundalay mama ei, ei, uh oh! Homepage : http://www.goheels.com Biography : tarheel: fed and bread Interests : parking, making 10/10 threads, and trolling Favorite Quote : goal is to make the tourney. if we do that, weve already surpasssed the herb era."

[Edited on June 25, 2006 at 9:20 PM. Reason : oh, yeah]

6/25/2006 9:17:35 PM

A troll or an idiot?

6/25/2006 10:38:24 PM

Quote :

"hcnguyen: i just wanna hear why you think people should get loss of coordination, nasea, violence and all the bad things that come with alcohol for no reason. you must be a hippy that wants to legalize EVERYTHING."

I think this thread is pretty much done, but I still feel like sharing on this matter of the "perfect" alcohol substitute, and I'm also trying to keep myself awake.

Every once in a while, maybe about four times a year, I drink to get trashed. Blitzed. Sloshed. Smashed. Destroyed. Barreled. Plastered. Bombed. Loaded. Toasted. Hammered. Wasted. Plowed.

To achieve this state, I might consume a fifth and a half of liquor or perhaps a couple cases of beer. I enjoy not being able to see straight. I enjoy not being able to stand up to walk or move my tongue to form words. I enjoy nearing complete facial numbness. I love waking up the next day with a blinding headache. I love feeling completely dehydrated. I love vomiting all day until what appear to be chunks of my stomach lining start coming up. I love feeling sore all over like a small village of people spent the night, taking turns beating me with baseball bats.

I just love abusing myself, taking my body to its weakest before recovery. I don't expect anyone to understand it, especially when I'm not sure I understand it. I know that as I start to recover, I feel refreshed, satisfied, and meek. I also know that, while I may take more pleasure in it and do it more often than most, I'm not alone in this propensity. Right at this very moment, there is a man saying, "Man, I need another beer. I'm gonna drink til I forget I was ever married to that cheating bitch."

So, no, do not replace my poison with some pussy ass social lubricant. There are too many philandering spouses that need forgetting.

[Edited on June 26, 2006 at 6:41 AM. Reason : sss]

6/26/2006 6:31:32 AM

^ I'll drink to that

6/26/2006 7:08:15 AM

you'd really enjoy getting off heroin then bridget...

6/26/2006 9:04:42 AM

^^AHA

^LOL

6/26/2006 2:26:34 PM