To be charged with a DUI you have to have 0.08% BAC minimum. Virginia tech did a study into the effects of BAC content and how it affects you (source). They found that the effects of 0.08% BAC were...

Changes in Feelings and Personality.

• Blunted Feelings
• Disinhibition
• Extroversion
• Impaired Sexual Pleasure

Physical and Mental Impairments.

• Reflexes Impaired
• Reasoning
• Depth Perception
• Distance Acuity
• Peripheral Vision
• Glare Recovery

0.08% will also cause you to double your reaction time from 1.5 seconds to 3.0 seconds (source). In fact as low a 0.04% your reaction times are effected. Doubling reaction times has to cause more road accidents surely, safe driving is all about good reaction times. 

Here is a graph which shows ass a percentage the accidents caused by alcohol (grey line), look how sharply it rises from 0.04% to 0.08%, you are 80% more likely to be involved in an accident at 0.08% BAC...

(Source)

Perhaps if you were more sober you would have had more control over the passengers in your car too, so that the cops would have never pulled you over. It wasn't out of your control at all imo. Not all drunk drivers are going to crash and kill someone, but they are more likely to be involved in an accident. fact.

I'm not trying to be a dickhead, but if you've had friends killed from drunk driving then you would feel the same way as me.

hey you know what, you're right. I was a drunk moron and I got what I deserved. I deserved to have my license suspended for a year, to be placed on probation for 3 years, to attend alcoholic (because I am such an alcoholic) drunk driving classes, AND to pay the hefty fines associated with it. All of the punishments totally fit the crime.

Dude seriously, I am in college, and believe it or not, about 90% of the people I know have drank and drove before. The only ones that haven't are the ones that don't drink at all. I get it, you think drunk drivers are morons, but if you read what I said several posts ago, I explicitely said that I don't do it anymore. So please, put a lid on it. If you really want to try and stop someone from drinking and driving, go to a high school and preach your 'empirical evidence' and 'factual basis' all you want. I'm sure you'll be heard by a few people.

I'm the OP and I say...LOCK THIS THREAD please.

Well of course you don't do it any more, you're banned from driving. I would also imagine that when you get your licence back you wont do it again.

Jeez, you have a go at people for being "judgemental", you can't take the fact that people oppose drink driving and you have to act condescending towards them, despite them just being honest. You make a thread looking for sympathy after you committed three crimes and got your keys taken away, it will never happen.

Also, drinking is legal in the UK from 18, the age you go to University, and I've been at University for four years and I should be there for four more, but I've never seen 90% of my Uni mates drive drunk. Perhaps 10%, maybe 20%, but certainly not 90%. I drink quite a lot, but I've never had the urge to drive after I've drank and I would describe myself as an average University student.

And I never suggested you be placed on probation for 3 years or attend alcoholic driving classes... Hell, I never even suggested you were and alcoholic. You just put words in my mouth. Quite frankly I thought a year ban was too harsh for you, but you've obviously assumed I wanted you to have a harsh punishment.

Haha I love how this thread turned out. One of the funniest reads all day.

i've only read bits of this thread, because tbh i think highwaystar101 has said everything i wanted to say.. but just to clarify for those up the back who were wondering if and why a drunk person would be responsible for an accident committed whilst they were under the influence..

in scots law, anyway (i dont know how it works everywhere else) self-induced intoxication is not a defence in a court of law. there's this thing called causation, whereby if it can be reasonably assumed that the accused's actions caused the incident, whether by reckless driving (not paying attention) or reduced/impaired judgement, or a damn stupid turn or whatever, something that links the act of the accused to the outcome, then they're guilty.

Simonsays, i hope you don't drive foolishly again. your parents must just be worried about you

everybody thinks theyre right about everything. that is the part that i find the most funny.

Pretty sure he wasn't asking for sympathy.. That has been pretty clear from at least a few of his posts.

but i want to respond to what is bolded.

This is NOT the mentality of anybody who I have ever drank with. Never have I been in a situation and the conversation went like:

'hey im pretty fucked up, how about you.'

'pretty fucked up bro'

'dude, bro, i have the urge to drive and shit, how fun would that be'

'shotty!'

It just isn't like that. A lot of people who are in drunk classes are there because they had a beer or two somewhere and then had to go home.I drink at my friends houses from time to time, but there is always a point where it is time to go home. I don't expect to stay the night somewhere every night I decide to have a drop of alcohol. What do you do in these situations?

Also, what about people in bars? What are they expected to do? Even if they aren't getting shitfaced, you have to assume that they have had at least a beer.

Also, there is one last thing I would like to consider, and that is the validity of the breathalyzers that cops use. does anybody know the accuracy of them?

@angrypoolman. People in bars should have a sober driver or get a taxi home. It's moronic to go to a bar with the intention of drinking and not having a plan how to get home - same with a mates place.

Even when you think you're reasonably sober after a few drinks - most likely your reactions are slowed down and so you're a danger on the road.

As for the breathalyzer thing - they do give false positives sometimes (I've heard of ethanol in cough drops setting them off) but at least in NZ you can get a blood test if you think you've been done wrong.

Reasonable because they figure if they can just keep you outta trouble for 1 month they can finally get you out of the house.

Lol finally someone back on topic ^

@ highwaystar101

Alright, I see what you mean by subconsciously wanting a little sympathy, but honestly, that is not what I was getting at at all. I was simply trying to say that the punishment doesn't match the crime...which goes against our 8th amendment (yes I know that doesn't 'technically' qualify for cruel and unusual punishment, but the idea is the same). And I also understand that you have a personal vendetta with drunk drivers, but the thing is, is that we're not all bad people. Yes there are some idiots out there with more than twice the legal limit of alcohol in their bodies while they drive, but how can you sit there and say we all fit into that category? How would you feel if you had, say, 2 beers at a restaurant with friends and then you drove home and on the way passed through a sobriety checkpoint and they breathalyzed you and found out you had just had a few, but you didn't even feel a buzz?....guess what, they don't care, and you're going to jail with a misdemeanor charge of driving under the influence. And I'd say that's a hefty chunk of the cases too.