Examples to the contrary can be pointed out, however. Individuals have been arrested for public intoxication despite field tests proving their blood/alcohol content was zero.
Sure. Running into corrupt cops is always a possibility. That makes it even more important for me to make sure my BAC is always at zero.
Given the importance of the second amendment and of a person having access to a gun to defend themselves from threats in modern america. Given that you would face the same threats (if not more) after having a beer or a couple, shouldnt a gun rights activist be arguing that any laws that prevent people from having a gun whilst drunk is both in breach of the second amendment and bad for their individual safety? Or is the answer banning alcohol now? Are we alcohol banners!!!?
http://www.statesman.com/news/crime...-man-arrested-for-dwi/E3zmGQWj1oSeo980fvTiyH/ To Austin attorney Daniel Betts, driving while intoxicated can sometimes be what he calls “an opinion crime.” Law enforcement must decide, sometimes within only a matter of minutes, whether a person is intoxicated and should go to jail — or be allowed to simply drive way. On the night Austin police arrested his client, they made the wrong choice, he says – his opinion bolstered by a voluntary breath and blood test showing Larry Davis wasn’t intoxicated when he was arrested Jan. 13, 2013. He tested 0.00 on a Breathalyzer – the lowest possible reading — and the blood test, which took months to be tested, came back negative. “My reaction was just shock that it happened,” Betts said of the arrest, after watching a police dash cam video and reviewing the evidence. The arrest meant Davis spent a day in jail, and he was left with a criminal case looming over him for more than a year. Because he was declared indigent at the time, the county picked up his legal fees of a few hundred dollars. Police stand by their decision to arrest Davis. They contend it is still possible he was intoxicated with a drug, including marijuana, that may not have shown up in the blood test. Police say the case highlights a judgment call they have to make often; yet defense lawyers, including Betts, say it shows how overzealous Austin police can be in making DWI arrests. In 2011, we wrote that Travis County has dismissed a higher percentage of drunken driving cases than other major Texas counties — in part because prosecutors said police filed weak charges or prosecutors allowed suspects plead to other crimes. At the time, prosecutors cited cases against suspects whose breath test was below the legal limit of 0.08. Police have said, however, that they must abide by a take-no-chances policy in the interest of public safety. Their position: If you look drunk, you will be arrested and the court system will work it out in the future. That practice typically leads to about 30 percent of DWI cases getting dismissed. I learned about Davis’ case this month, and it stood out for its numerous red flags. Police arrested him near U.S. 290 and Interstate 35 after he ran a stop sign, and officers wrote in an arrest affidavit that Davis, who told them he’d had only one drink, appeared intoxicated based on his performance in a field sobriety test. When they got him to the jail, Davis blew a 0.00 on the breath test. “I told them I would take a blood sample as well, just to prove that I didn’t have anything in my system,” Davis told me in a recent interview. That test came back negative, too. Cmdr. David Mahoney, the arresting officers’ supervisor, said he supports the decision to arrest Davis. “If there is someone who is possibly impaired, we don’t want them driving,” Mahoney said. “We need to get them off the road, so that was probably (the officer’s) mindset.” Prosecutors dismissed the case against Davis in early February. “I was arrested for nothing, really,” he said. “It was suspicion of drunk driving, which I wasn’t so I was surprised and hurt at the same time.” Davis is now working to have his arrest record wiped clean, a process that could take several more months.
I always have my Gun with me ... Always. But when I'm going out to drink, I make sure I have my Nano Lock Box in the Car, especially if I'm driving the Corvette. That's two things that keep me sober ... One I have a Gun and Two, I'm driving the Vette.
True. A person runs a stop light sober, hitting and killing someone it is probably just chalked up to an "accident." But if a drunk person runs a stop light and kills someone, it's manslaughter or worse. Identical facts EXCEPT the DUI factor.
Unsubstantiated, baseless nonsense. There has been no evidence presented to show that such is the case. There is no evidence to suggest that firearms ownership causes an individual to be more prone to abuse of alcoholic beverage than those that do not have access to firearms.
Read it and weep: "Binge drinking, chronic heavy alcohol use, and drinking and driving were all more common among gun owners generally than among non-owners, even after adjusting for factors such as age, sex, race, and state of residence." http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/5416
Pray tell why are there almost no accounts whatsoever, of those who are legally carried a concealed firearm, ever being in a state of intoxication while in public? The article claims that such is apparently common, but arrest records and law enforcement reports for such incidents are almost nonexistent.
So anonymous phone interviews from 20 years ago where there was no discernment between legal and illegal gun owners isn't sufficient of you?
Correct. Random telephone surveys are devoid of legitimacy, as individual results cannot be verified. They are no more accurate, than the willingness of the randomly contacted individual is motivated to be completely honest with a total stranger.
Doesn't make it right. Same with guns. Why is it that the gun rights movement atleast on this forum appears to always be on the defensive (i.e. dont take our guns away it wont work / dont make such laws). Instead of being on the offensive - positive, allow people to have guns whatever the circumstance, people with guns are a safer people, we will see more safety, less deaths etc etc, ie get rid of gun sobriety laws, felony gun ownership laws etc etc.
Not a good idea. Drinking & Driving = Bad results. Guns + Defensive shooting = Bad results. Guns + Drinking + Target shooting = Bad results. Guns + Drinking + Hunting = Bad results. Drinking + Anything = Bad results.
