I should have brought the safety stuff into this earlier because I think it makes my point much better and takes the personality issues out of it. Maybe I’ve been living this stuff in the field for so long I’ve assumed that others understand it. Read my last post. Enough people having beers at lunch will inevitably lead to such tragedies. Sorry, but I am right and you are wrong.
A link to a typical safety pyramid.
What am I back pedaling on? I’ve admitted that a normal person is unlikely to be intoxicated by just one beer, if not explicitly, then implicitly.
Since almost all automobile collisions are caused by drivers, you should never drive.
Uzi, just because you do not have sufficient mental ability to think rationally does not mean that most other people suffer the same problem. Expecting everyone to be restricted to the lowest common denominator is not reasonable. Does it mean that harm will be caused by people of limited mental ability? Yes. That is the price of living in a world in which we can make our own reasonable decisions, rather than being managed as if we were idiots.
A better chart
Expain that to me, please. You can safely start from the assumption that I have no idea what it means.
Dio HAS been training you!
Unlike your analogy of not allowing people to drive, all I’m asking them to do is not drink alcohol before driving. Who has the limited mental ability here again? Wasa matter? Baby, can’t have their bottle?! Waaaahh!!
Check out the chart I linked to. It is one of the principles of effective safety. If you take care of the little things it will help to avoid the big things.
For example: A workman drops hammer when on a scaffold. Say it doesn’t hit anyone and and then say that you don’t do anything to prevent it happening again. Eventually, a dropped hammer will land close to someone (a near miss), or it will hit someone. By doing something before you get to a near miss, you stop the near misses. By stopping a near miss, you end up stopping a hit. The more of the lower stuff you stop, the less chance that bigger and more serious stuff will occur. I’d be surprised if there was a industrial safety initiative on the planet that didn’t follow this in some form or another.
You are still hung up on this fixation that everyone who drinks any amount of alcohol is immediately rendered incapable of driving safely and must therefore refrain from driving for some indeterminate amount of time, which apparently only you are capable of determining.
And that "accident pyramid’ is totally irrelevant to this discussion. By your “logic” (and I hesitate to use that term with regard to anything you say) nobody should ever do anything which has any chance of having an unfortunate result. Should I not eat because there’s a chance I might choke?
How much time should pass before driving?
Muffin mentioned in post 225 that he is a non-drinker. *
- Had I stopped in Thunder Bay, I’d have been over to his neighbor’s house so fast it would have made his head swim, 'cause while I could have–guest-like–followed the house rules on tobacco–boy howdy!–after that drive around Lake Superior, I was ready for a drink, and I had to wait till I got to Dryden. Oops, I’ve said too much.
Augustus Gloop couldn’t resist the chocolate river, so he was sucked up a pipe. Violet Beauregarde couldn’t resist the chewing gum, so she inflated into a blueberry. Veruca Sault couldn’t resist the nut-cracking squirrel, so she was tossed down a garbage chute. Mike Teavee couldn’t resist the television equipment, so he was shrunk.
Now you are telling us that people can not resist excessive drinking if they have one drink. Sorry, but this is not a children’s book.
Given the winter storm that was chasing you, Frank, a St. Bernard with a flask would have been in order.
Oh I get it, you’re saying that making something illegal will stop it from happening. Brilliant! We should outlaw drinking all together! I wonder why no one has ever tried that…
I can entertain audiences in Missouri with the tale of that drive, though I downplay that the ice on the road cleared up after Winnipeg, and that I only had to knock a couple of cms of snow off my car when I left Lloydminster. Still, it was one heck of a road trip.
One supposes until the “subtle effects” that are so negligible as to require “special tests” to be detected have worn off.
As some anecdotal evidence, I haven’t drank more than a couple of sips at a time in about 10 years now; I have almost zero tolerance for alcohol. If I drank a regular beer, I’d feel completely loopy and buzzed off of it; I don’t think for a second that I could drive when I was feeling so out of it. I don’t think I’d be over 0.08%, though. Since I’m a responsible person, I don’t drink a beer for lunch then go driving when I’m all buzzed and weird-feeling.
Of course that would lead to higher rates of heart attacks, dementia, and stroke, so we might as well outlaw people.
Then by comparison to me, you are a binge drinking alcoholic. I drank a few beers in 1979, so I’m just a run of the mill souse.