More Drinking Hours, Fewer Accidents

[Timshel]

This does not imply that drinking is harmless, regardless of what idiots like pmp, yoda or taft will claim. Prohibition and/or the attempt to regulate behavior oftens lead to unintended consequences and only makes matters worse.

http://www.cato.org/blog/more-drinking-hours-fewer-accidents

Does restricting access to alcohol reduce traffic accidents? Not necessarily, according to a recent study by economists from the University of Lancaster:


Recent legislation liberalised closing times with the object of reducing social problems thought associated with drinking to “beat the clock.” Indeed, we show that one consequence of this liberalization was a decrease in traffic accidents. This decrease is concentrated heavily among younger drivers. Moreover, we provide evidence that the effect was most pronounced in the hours of the week directly affected by the liberalization; late nights and early mornings on weekends.
The authors also suggest that the restrictive closing times caused more traffic congestion (everyone left the pubs at the same time), increasing the scope for accidents.


So more freedom seems to generate better outcomes, presumably because most people use increased freedom sensibly.

 

[J Craft]

What if standard equipment on automobiles was a breathalyzer? Too much to drink car won't start.

 

[cawacko]

They've had this discussion here recently in San Francisco where all bars close at 2 but there has been debate whether they should stay open to 4. The obvious concern, which the above article addresses, is public safety and drunk drivers along with costs. I saw someone in the California state senate is trying to pass a bill that would allow those places that already stay open until 4am but don't serve alcohol past 2am to serve alcohol to 4am.

It would be interesting to see a direct comparison between cities like SF which close at 2am and Chicago and New York which close at 4. I'm all for the staying open later.

 

[cawacko]

What if standard equipment on automobiles was a breathalyzer? Too much to drink car won't start.

Meaning someone has to blow into it every time they get into their car for it to start? Would you really want to do that?

 

[leaningright]

Wow...2 am and 4 am. The only time I am up that late/early is if I'm fighting a fire or getting out of bed to go fishing.

Edit: Added "early"

 

[DigitalDave]

Ehhh, Self Driving Cars will be out soon... case solved.

 

[J Craft]

Meaning someone has to blow into it every time they get into their car for it to start? Would you really want to do that?

Not sure, probably wouldn't love it, but I'm sure if it were standard equipment I'd get used to it. I'm sure innovation could come up with a sleek and innocuous styling. Maybe auto insurance rates would drop as fewer drunks would be on the road. Maybe we could even reduce the number of cops needed to patrol the highways and incarcerate the drunks?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

They've had this discussion here recently in San Francisco where all bars close at 2 but there has been debate whether they should stay open to 4. The obvious concern, which the above article addresses, is public safety and drunk drivers along with costs. I saw someone in the California state senate is trying to pass a bill that would allow those places that already stay open until 4am but don't serve alcohol past 2am to serve alcohol to 4am.

It would be interesting to see a direct comparison between cities like SF which close at 2am and Chicago and New York which close at 4. I'm all for the staying open later.

that would be interesting. when i used to bar hop etc...we never stopped at two...we simply went somewhere else to drink.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Not sure, probably wouldn't love it, but I'm sure if it were standard equipment I'd get used to it. I'm sure innovation could come up with a sleek and innocuous styling. Maybe auto insurance rates would drop as fewer drunks would be on the road. Maybe we could even reduce the number of cops needed to patrol the highways and incarcerate the drunks?

i would never get used to blowing into a breathalyzer everytime i drove. i often drive with clients or associates and it would be a major inconvenience for little benefit. i have no doubt they would be easy to turn off.

 

[J Craft]

i would never get used to blowing into a breathalyzer everytime i drove. i often drive with clients or associates and it would be a major inconvenience for little benefit. i have no doubt they would be easy to turn off.

It's hard to say how innovative it could get. I can't dismiss the benefit as littlle in light of drunk driving deaths, arrests, and the ensuing costs.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Not sure, probably wouldn't love it, but I'm sure if it were standard equipment I'd get used to it. I'm sure innovation could come up with a sleek and innocuous styling. Maybe auto insurance rates would drop as fewer drunks would be on the road. Maybe we could even reduce the number of cops needed to patrol the highways and incarcerate the drunks?

Or we'd just disable it. Fuck you and your fascist idea.

 

[Airstrip One]

I'm all for removing the legal curfew. That said, if the bars stay open 24 hours, then drunks are going to be wandering out into the morning commute, rather than simply into the dead of night. The idea that this will actually limit damages, DUIs, and deaths seems highly unlikely. The curfew is an unncessary government intrusion, though. It's bad enough that adults under the age of 21 are prohibited from being allowed to partake.

 

[J Craft]

Or we'd just disable it. Fuck you and your fascist idea.

Tell me how you really feel.

Safety equipment already has its fascist ass planted in automobile designs. The lawful rationale for such designs is that costs associated with not having them justified their requirements. I only theorized about this dude, as it aligns with other similar safety equipment.

 

[cawacko]

Tell me how you really feel.

Safety equipment already has its fascist ass planted in automobile designs. The lawful rationale for such designs is that costs associated with not having them justified their requirements. I only theorized about this dude, as it aligns with other similar safety equipment.

I'm not a fan of the idea at all. If we want to put breathalyzer's in cars for people who have received DUI's then that's one thing and I can understand that argument. Otherwise do not like.

 

[J Craft]

UNCLE on the breathalyzer.

 

[cawacko]

UNCLE on the breathalyzer.

And to be clear by saying I'm against the breathalyzer's in all cars I'm not saying I'm in support of drunk driving. You didn't accuse me of that I'm just making a general statement. My sister lost four of her best friends when she was younger to drunk drivers so I know how serious of an issue it can be.

 

[Teflon Don]

I'm not a fan of the idea at all. If we want to put breathalyzer's in cars for people who have received DUI's then that's one thing and I can understand that argument. Otherwise do not like.

Do you want dead kids? Or do you want to be free to drive drunk?

If only one life can be saved what does it matter if you have to give a blow?

 

[Teflon Don]

The Drinking Age Is Past Its Prime | TIME.com
http://time.com/72546/drinking-age-alcohol-repeal/

I agree with Camille

Also I had not heard this about marijuana feminizing men but its would explain Jarod, Topspin, Grind and Billy possessing lady parts.

 

[Timshel]

I'm all for removing the legal curfew. That said, if the bars stay open 24 hours, then drunks are going to be wandering out into the morning commute, rather than simply into the dead of night. The idea that this will actually limit damages, DUIs, and deaths seems highly unlikely. The curfew is an unncessary government intrusion, though. It's bad enough that adults under the age of 21 are prohibited from being allowed to partake.

Why would they leave during the morning commute? There is no basis for that.

 

[The Dude]

Louisiana doesn't have the 2am rule.
People just go out later
In college I worked 9 pm to 6am