5 Dead in Wrong-way Crash on Lodge

**Pam** · October-25-11, 01:29 PM

Sorry Gannon, I don't feel sorry for people who put others' lives at risk because they can't make the responsible choice. Whether you are a problem drinker or a social drinker you can still have a designated driver or call a cab.

**Bong-Man** · October-25-11, 01:34 PM

As the comedian once said, "If you're not supposed to drink and drive, what are all those parking spaces doing at the bar ?"

Trust me folks.....I was in a one car drunken crash [[.23) and it took me 10 surgeries and 3 years, and a lot of personal embarrassment to recover. You don't want to go there. Do yourself a favor and don't learn an easy lesson the hard way like I did. Drinking and driving truly don't mix.

**Ray1936** · October-25-11, 01:41 PM

Getting drunk was an extremely rare event for me, as I never was much of a drinker. One beer with dinner was usually it. But the day I retired from the DPD I took a gang to Chuck Joseph's on Grand River and really tied one on. But I lived on Warwick in Rosedale Park, so I walked....un, staggered.....home.

I was in such a celebratory mood I even bought a round for the house. Cost me about $150. Whaddahell, that was on top of my own $150 bar bill. Hey, how often to you retire?

**iheartthed** · October-25-11, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by Detwa

I'm from Chicago - they have mass transit, always have, between 24 hour buses and the L, in addition to a huge taxi cab industry. They have a huge drunken driver problem. Can't find stats but I can tell you from personal knowledge that its as worse if not moreso than here. I see stats that show that Illinois fatality rates from DUI are higher than MI. So that kills your theory right there.

http://www.dui.com/dui-library/illinois/statistics/illinois-dui-statistics-for-2009
http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics.html
http://www.edgarsnyder.com/drunk-driving/statistics.html

Latest data is for 2009. I could go on but it would be redundant. Every chart I found shows Illinois at least 25% higher than Michigan, and I'm willing to be that's attributable to Chicago.

Okay, let me just put this out there: Chicago's transit system ain't all that great. Much better than Detroit, yes, but overall it's a decent system at best relative to the population. That said, your links really don't prove anything. Non-fatality DUI stats are affected by enforcement policies. If the cops aren't catching the people then they aren't being reported. It's not an apples to apples comparison.

But the drunk driving fatality reports actually kind of prove my point: New York State had 321 DUI fatalities compared to 319 in Illinois, yet New York State is 1.5 times the size of Illinois. Michigan had 246 fatalities, or roughly 75% that of New York, yet Michigan has half the population of New York State. California, a state with a little less than twice the population of New York State, had three times as many alcohol fatalities. California has some of the strictest drunk driving enforcement in the country, but little in the way of public transit except for San Francisco.

**Detroitnerd** · October-25-11, 01:51 PM

It's fair to say the availability of mass transit is a contributing factor. As are density, walkability, zoning, etc.

**Scottathew** · October-25-11, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by downtownguy

On the third attempt, the state policed answered with a question: "Wrong way driver on 75?" "Yep," I said. "Got it" said the state cop and hung up.

That's pretty funny. Not the that dangerous element, but the fact that they answered the phone that way to efficiently handle the flood of calls.

**Gannon** · October-25-11, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Pam

Sorry Gannon, I don't feel sorry for people who put others' lives at risk because they can't make the responsible choice. Whether you are a problem drinker or a social drinker you can still have a designated driver or call a cab.

Right, because everyone makes such 'responsible choices' after drinking...what universe do you live in?! In my estimation, most people go to the bar to avoid responsible choices...and it's a common joke that the more one drinks the less worthy their decision making. Why then punish them for their bad choice AFTERWARDS?

With that attitude, let's just bring back the Prohibitionists!

That is why most people don't relish the 'job' of being the designated driver. When that term is brought up, it is usually as a joke anyways. Nobody wants to be seen as the stick-in-the-mud, and it is frankly not fun to hang around with your friends getting buzzed...no matter HOW honorably responsible you know you're acting.

I understand your sentiment, it is all too common. We all want everyone to be as reasonable as we think we are, even in our least lucid times retrospectively. My main point is, the non-reasonable piling on of emotion exacerbates each individuals inability to function within reason. For those inclined to drink, they will just drink more in their incorrect and poor reaction to it. And then they'll hide their bad behavior, where it is likely to merely fester and worsen.

If we chase them to stay hidden at home, they just might wake their young daughters to drive them to the store for smokes...

Cheers!

**bailey** · October-25-11, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by Bong-Man

As the comedian once said, "If you're not supposed to drink and drive, what are all those parking spaces doing at the bar ?"

Trust me folks.....I was in a one car drunken crash [[.23) and it took me 10 surgeries and 3 years, and a lot of personal embarrassment to recover. You don't want to go there. Do yourself a favor and don't learn an easy lesson the hard way like I did. Drinking and driving truly don't mix.

Just to keep this in perspective to those who seem to be saying that any amount of alcohol at any time during the evening should preclude driving :

BAC = .02 = Drinkers begin to feel moderate effects.

BAC = .04 = Most people begin to feel relaxed, mildly euphoric, sociable, and talkative.

BAC = .05 = Judgment, attention, and control are somewhat impaired. Ability to drive safely begins to be limited. Sensory-motor and finer performance are impaired. People are less able to make rational decisions about their capabilities [[for example, about driving.)

BAC = .08 = This is legal level for intoxication in some states. There is a definite impairment of muscle coordination and driving skills.

BAC = .10 = This is legally drunk in most states. There is a clear deterioration of reaction time and control.

BAC = .12-.15 = Vomiting usually occurs, unless this level is reached slowly or a person has developed a tolerance to alcohol. Drinkers are drowsy.Drinkers display emotional instability, loss of critical judgment, impairment of perception, memory, and comprehension. Lack of sensor-motor coordination and impaired balance are typical. Decreased sensory responses and increased reaction times develop. The vision is significantly impaired, including limited ability to see detail, peripheral vision, and slower glare recovery.

BAC = .15 = This blood-alcohol level means the equivalent of 1/2 pint of whiskey is circulating in the blood stream.

BAC = .18-.25 = Drinkers are disoriented, confused, dizzy, and have exaggerated emotional states. Vision is disturbed, as is perception of color, form, motion, and dimensions.Drinkers have increased pain threshold and lack of muscular coordination. Drinkers stagger or lose the ability to walk and have slurred speech. Apathy and lethargy are typical.

BAC = .25-.30 = Drinkers display general inertia, near total loss of motor functions, little response to stimuli, inability to stand or walk, vomiting, and incontinence. Drinkers may lose consciousness or fall into a stupor.

BAC = .30-.50 = Symptoms are complete unconsciousness, depressed or absent reflexes, subnormal body temperature, incontinence, and impairment of circulation and respiration.

Death may occur at .37% or higher. BACs of .45% and higher are fatal to nearly all individuals.

I'm not bagging on you but, .23 is closer to being passed out drunk than it is to being mildly impaired. .23 would put most people down for the count or their head in a trash can long before they thought about driving. If .23 is just a regular Saturday night for someone, they should probably be seeking treatment.

**Detroitnerd** · October-25-11, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by bailey

If .23 is just a regular Saturday night for someone, they should probably be seeking treatment.

The good news is that I am seeking treatment.

The bad news is that the treatment involves drinking whiskey.

**Islandman** · October-25-11, 02:41 PM

Wow, Bong-Man, gotta agree with bailey on this one. I got arrested by Shore Patrol on base years ago for disturbing the peace [[crazy party at the barracks) and that was my BAC. I could barely walk. Ah, to not be 21 again.

**Scottathew** · October-25-11, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

The bad news is that the treatment involves drinking whiskey.

I'm looking to snag a bottle of whiskey for consumption at home. Never really drank the stuff before. Any recommendations?

**Detroitnerd** · October-25-11, 03:01 PM

I depends. Jack Daniels is a little sweet for mine, scotch is a little too smoky and sharp. And, frankly, a lot of the hubbub over whiskey amuses me. For instance, all my friends are crazy for rye whiskey these days. But then, over in Canada, where rye has predominated, they want fancy bourbons. The grass is always greener, I guess...

You can get insanely involved in whiskey these days. Lots of product and marketing. Lots of my friends swear by Jameson. Personally, a glass of regular corn liquor like Jim Beam sits well with me, and Jim Beam does have a rye that's a bit better, for the price. Both go down well with a cigarette. Or, if you do like scotch, a bottle of Red Breast is a fine treat for the home sipper.

The best advice is experiment, see what you like, what you don't, and don't let other people influence you too much. Everybody's palate is different -- and changing.

**Scottathew** · October-25-11, 03:06 PM

Thanks DN. I gave up drinking a while back, but that's mainly because I hate beer and all the other stuff leaves me too hungover. I might try a little Jack Daniels soon, especially since kid number two is just 98 days away...

**Detroitnerd** · October-25-11, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by 48091

Thanks DN. I gave up drinking a while back, but that's mainly because I hate beer and all the other stuff leaves me too hungover. I might try a little Jack Daniels soon, especially since kid number two is just 98 days away...

Don't overlook the medicinal value. Whiskey is good for toddies to help coughing kids sleep, and a dab of it helps with teething...

**Jimaz** · October-25-11, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by Gannon

...The prudes of the world perpetuate the very behavior they despise...by shunning those who stumble and fall. When indeed we should be helping everyone back up instead.

Damn. You sure do have some interesting perspectives on life.

I would add that American puritanism also often creates the very forbiddenness of tempting forbidden fruits. That can backfire.

And no, I'm not in favor of drunk driving. LOL!

**Meddle** · October-25-11, 03:51 PM

BAC = .08 = This is legal level for intoxication in some states. There is a definite impairment of muscle coordination and driving skills.

BAC = .10 = This is legally drunk in most states. There is a clear deterioration of reaction time and control.

Unless you're Dr. Johnny Fever.

**Meddle** · October-25-11, 03:58 PM

But seriously folks, even if the law, road cops and the temeperance movement don't recognize it, there IS a tolerance factor. Someone who drinks heavily often is more likely to be able to maintain control of their abilities beyond those static limits. I used to be able to go to a bar, have a few beers and shots and never even feel it. That was many many years ago. During the last 10-15 years, I've rarely had more than a shot in a cup of coffee or hot chocolate once or twice a year. Maybe some Triple Sec in orange juice on a hot summer day. NOW, if I have more than one or two shots, I can barely stand.

Back then, a lot didn't hardly faze me. Now, just a little and I really feel it.

**Gannon** · October-25-11, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Damn. You sure do have some interesting perspectives on life.

I would add that American puritanism also often creates the very forbiddenness of tempting forbidden fruits. That can backfire.

And no, I'm not in favor of drunk driving. LOL!

I just see what doesn't work and postulate positive alternatives. It tickles me when they work, even moreso if anyone else ever notices.

Hopefully nobody imagines my take on this as being in favor of driving under the influence, though. That would be the worst illogical conclusion from my words. I merely favor a more compassionate solution than throwing the force of the courts at a person. That only enriches lawyers and insurance agencies...two of the biggest enemies of a free society, as far as I'm concerned. At least two of the greatest profiteers and free-loaders...

...both en force largely due to propogation of fear, as far as I can fathom. Hell, at least the doctors practise and operate under the illusion they're out for our good! LOL...

Cheers,
John

**Pam** · October-25-11, 05:15 PM

Right, because everyone makes such 'responsible choices' after drinking...

Make the choice before drinking.

That is why most people don't relish the 'job' of being the designated driver. When that term is brought up, it is usually as a joke anyways. Nobody wants to be seen as the stick-in-the-mud, and it is frankly not fun to hang around with your friends getting buzzed...no matter HOW honorably responsible you know you're acting.

Being in a deadly car crash is even less fun.

**kryptonite** · October-25-11, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by 48091

I'm looking to snag a bottle of whiskey for consumption at home. Never really drank the stuff before. Any recommendations?

48 - I'm a southerner, to me you cannot do better than Knob Creek bourbon.

**MikeM** · October-26-11, 11:36 AM

Well, it's official:

http://www.detnews.com/article/20111...-examiner-says

**Gannon** · October-26-11, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by Pam

Make the choice before drinking.

Being in a deadly car crash is even less fun.

Easy to say about those choices. You don't drink, do you?!

As for being in a crash, I've had my share of 'em. Still feel the one from September of '82 when the weather changes. We don't know if that was alcohol-related, because it was a hit-and-run on Telegraph. He only left a few parts of his Chevy Caprice grill on the road, and a BIG dent in the back of my new Rabbit.

I've been there. I've lost precious family to drunk drivers...especially my two Polish-side male cousins who were my same age. Don't think you can school me on this.

The harsh judgemental attitude you own causes more harm than good. On aggregate, it is part of the scourge of 'polite society'. Congratulations!

Sincerely,
John

**Detwa** · October-26-11, 12:10 PM

Gannon, your argument could be applied to just about any problem that a person has. Criminals all have issues and addictions that lead them to make bad decisions. Do we just hug them and make them feel loved? You can't be against penalizing people who commit dangerous and illegal acts because they're pissy drunk, but not apply that same concern for every other poor soul who was lead down a path of crime and drugs because of their inner demons. Where do you draw the line?

**Pam** · October-26-11, 12:16 PM

Easy to say about those choices. You don't drink, do you?!

No.

I've been there. I've lost precious family to drunk drivers...especially my two Polish-side male cousins who were my same age. Don't think you can school me on this.

The harsh judgemental attitude you own causes more harm than good. On aggregate, it is part of the scourge of 'polite society'. Congratulations!

Sorry for your loss. I don't care if people drink as much as they want as long as they stay off the road. I don't think that makes me "harsh and judgemental" because I don't want to be killed by a drunk driver. I'm really surprised at all the people arguing about this. Come on folks, it's a no brainer.

**English** · October-26-11, 12:37 PM

I seriously had to walk away from this thread for a while. I drink but I impaired my social life -- on purpose -- when I lived in Ann Arbor and many of my sorority & young Detroit professional events were on weeknights when I knew I couldn't get a ride home or crash with others. I just didn't go, for many years. I also don't like dating men who toss back a few and then drive, for personal reasons I will not elaborate here. So this hits all kinds of buttons for me.

Have I ever driven after having had one beer or one glass of wine? Sure. Was I wrong? Heck yeah! Just because buzzed driving is something "everyone does" doesn't make it right. Some of the same people on this thread who think driving after even one beer or one glass of wine is OK are the hardest on inner city Detroit residents who have ruined their lives because of a bad choice -- or a series of bad choices. It's a slippery slope, folks.

It's not a question of either-or when it comes to dangerous drivers who are texting, eating, reading, changing a kid's diaper, having sex, or doing anything else other than driving behind the wheel. All of it is dangerous. Yes, we definitely need to have better public transit options, but that's not an either-or issue, either. It's both-and.

Maybe this is a business opportunity for someone in metro Detroit. I don't know. But maybe one of the [[many) reasons why there isn't a demand for mass transit is because there is such a norm of driving in this region, no matter what one's personal condition/fitness to operate a motor vehicle might be, no matter the weather, etc.