Cubbie Swagger wrote:
.095? So then... in other words... he wasn't even drunk.
Isn't .08 the legal limit in all states? Or is this one of those "the limit is too low/that's not drunk, it's buzzed/I'm
not drunk at .08/my tolerance is so high that blah blah blah/etc." arguments where people rationalize their drinking and driving? The world is full of billy badasses who think the legal limit doesn't apply to them, but they set these limits where they are for a reason, and it's really not realistic to expect these things to be assessed subjectively on a person to person basis.
Point is, it's unwise to get behind the wheel of a vehicle if you've had more than a drink or two, regardless of how well you might think you hold your liquor. You're an idiot if you do so and have previous DUIs, and an abject moron if you do so without having your court ordered interlock in the vehicle on top of that. No one should feel the least bit sorry for Mark Grace, or question whether he deserves the trouble he's in.
Splendid Splinter wrote:
Seriously??? Man... I blew a .3625 a couple years ago and the cops were wondering how I was able to stand...
Not to sound like a dick, but...
If I had been behind the wheel of a car after drinking that much (and I don't care how high a person's "tolerance" is or how turbocharged their metabolism is, that is [expletive] drunk), I'm not sure I'd admit it publicly. In fact, I hope you don't drink that much regularly, you'll kill yourself. That's well
into the "possible alcohol poisoning" range, and right on the cusp of possible death.
And FTR, the U.S. standard legal limit of .08 is among the highest in the world, higher than countries like Ireland, Scotland, Germany and Australia. Most set the limit at .05 or below; some have zero tolerance at all.