Friday, Dec. 9, 2016    Login | Register        

PTC police on DUI lookout Labor Day weekend

The Peachtree City Police Department will be participating in a statewide crackdown over the Labor Day holiday to target alcohol and drug-impaired drivers.

Police will be conducting various sobriety checkpoints over the Labor Day weekend as part of Georgia’s Operation Zero Tolerance.

Impaired motorists caught driving at or above the limit of .08 blood alcohol content will be arrested, officials said.

Some 30 percent of the fatal highway crashes in Georgia are caused by impaired drivers, according to Bob Dallas, director of the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety.

“Impaired driving is no ‘accident’: It’s one of America’s most often-committed and deadliest crimes. Imagine the public outrage if twenty-nine jumbo jets -- each carrying about 400 people --crashed every year in America, killing all on board. That’s the equivalent of the death toll our country suffers due to drunk driving each year.“

In 2008, nearly 12,000 people died nationwide in highway crashes involving drivers with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 or higher.

Statistically speaking, men are the most frequent DUI violators, with 21 to 34 year-old men being the most likely impaired offenders at 34 percent, followed by 25-to-34 year-old male drivers (31%), and male drivers 35-to-44 years old (25%).

Meanwhile, state officials urge sober motorists to buckle up as their best protection against a drunk driver.

Georgia’s crash data calendar shows the summer travel period here is one of the most dangerous times on our highways.

Georgia DOT reported 2,401 traffic crashes last Labor Day, just during the 78-hour travel period around the holiday. Nineteen people died and another 1,069 Georgians were injured.

In 2008, more than a thousand people were injured while traveling on Georgia highways during the same Labor Day holiday period.



carbonunit52's picture

What is the percentage of people leaving a bar at closing time that are under the .08 limit?

[quote=carbonunit52]What is the percentage of people leaving a bar at closing time that are under the .08 limit?[/quote]

Probably well under .08% of the people...

Git Real's picture

Well it was.

<strong>Cal... CAL.... Can we have our smiley's back? And can I pick out some new ones?</strong> >insert evil grin here<

<em><strong>Stupid can't be fixed. We can only vote him out</strong></em>

Cyclist's picture

copy in the HTML code &#9786.; (take out the period between the "6" and ";") and you will get this &#9786;

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

☺ With the Num Locks ON,
Press Alt 1. (Use the 1 on the Num Locks keypad)☻

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin

Now would .08% of the people leaving be, say 100 X .0008, or .08 people out of 100?

Or, would it be .08 X 100 = 8
Or would it be 8 X 100 = 800?

My best mathematical guess is 99% and one driver! No cops for miles at closing time. Especially at country clubs.

With about 65,000 deaths and untold injuries per year from drunk driving, I have always wondered why the "crackdowns" aren't every day?

What good does such a thing do occurring once upon every other blue moon on leap year?

Maybe we should ban alcohol along with guns? And war? And cocaine? And "crackdown" all of the time!

There were only about 34,000 total deaths in 2008. Est @ 1/3 were alky related. But if you have been drinking & hit by a sobber's the drunks fault. If you drink & hit a pedi or cyclist that falls into your path.. it's your fault. As to the # of .08 leaving @ closing..just shows that a very large majority are not really impaired.

carbonunit52's picture

[quote]As to the # of .08 leaving @ closing..just shows that a very large majority are not really impaired.[/quote]

One is impaired after the first drink. At .08 one is too impaired to drive.

to be more of a hazard than drivers at the .08 limit. I agree, there needs to be a limit, and mine is zero for getting in my own car.

Just saying, it doesn't take a genius to see folks on Cell Phones in the way all day every day.

I actually estimate my level of comp. to be 25% less talking on the phone while driving. Don't text but can't imagine that they are even 1/2 aware. Even if you can touch type.. you still gotta read it. Many years ago I remember passing people on the Sawmill Pky & other roads..reading. Reading books & magazines! Made me glad to be from the "illiterate" Dixie.

Git Real's picture

Travel on a motorcycle and you really notice the cell phone users. You learn to spot and profile them from a distance with a high rate of accuracy. This has made me much more aware and cautious when using mine. Of course... I'm not a slave to mine. That helps.

A good habit to get into is to tell folks you'll call them back or just lay the phone down when the traffic gets tricky. I see people on the cell phone all the way from Fayetteville til past the airport.

<em><strong>Stupid can't be fixed. We can only vote him out</strong></em>

We are both wrong with the numbers. I apologize.

About 45,000 are killed in auto wrecks and 1-2 million injured each year.

Auto safety features have helped in recent years but I am afraid the little doodle bugs being made now will prop it back up!

No one will say just how many are caused by alcohol. Good alcohol lobby, I suppose.

However strong the alcohol lobby is, it is clear that MADD is stronger.
.08 seems to be a rather arbitrary #, that the strong lobby got lowered from 0.1. It is a 1 size-fits-all. A 110# woman compared to a 175# man is just one example. Obviously most at closing time make it home every night w/out incident. A vast majority have done so numerous times. I am sure no records can be found but my guess is that there are more w/ DUI's than those that have had an accident. It is strange how many DUI's result from a minor infraction (tail / tag light out), than an observed impaired action.

Git Real's picture

I mean... the way you hate and attack your Christian neigbors. The way you hate and attack law enforcement personell. The way you defend the bad guys and now you somehow try to defend drunk drivers. You are mess dude. LOL! Just sayin.....

<em><strong>Stupid can't be fixed. We can only vote him out</strong></em>

My life isn’t a mess but we can open up another can ‘o worms. I don't recall attacking any "Christian" nbs. or hating the LE. I do defend the "bad guys" because YOUR rights get trampled everyday along w/ thems (sic). Let’s leave the DUI and how that will cost you probably $10,000 w/ lawyers, fines, court & probation cost, DUI skool (what legislator’s relative thought that 1 up?), possible loss of job or future employment (irregardless [sic] driving has anything to do w/ your job [ie: teaching]). By the way you won’t be driving anywhere for 120 days. & fergit about that golf cart bc in PTC you don't have to have a lic. to drive 1 until you don't.
We won’t discuss that the officer’s word is sanctosancat (Palinism), no matter how ridiculous his observation. The crime becomes very punitive.
Because that is not me.
Let’s talk about a 40 yr failed War on Drugs started during the Nixon Admin. Started because 19 y/o were sent to see things no 19 y/o should see and guess what? Pot & heroin dulled the pain. Why doesn’t the govt just do what it has become so good at.. Once in a war that can’t be won & shouldn’t have been fought (‘Nam & Iraq), …Declare Victory & go home. Why do we not realize that after 40 yrs, the police still find pounds & pounds of pot on the highway? The police find acres & acres of pot growing. DUH, the price of pot has not gone up in 30 yrs. Paris still has coke. Why is the US of A the country that has the highest % of incarcerated citizens? Now you put ‘em jail for too many years (sometimes more than murder & certainly for most Violent crime). You finally let them out and somehow these felons of a non-violent crime are to find gainful employment? Then society wonders why there are so many single family mother head of household? Now that dude’s life is a mess. LEGALIZE NOW

Cyclist's picture

So that way mothers can poison their babies through breast feeding.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

NUK_1's picture

Same as feeding your kids Big Mac's and wondering why they weigh 200lbs at age 9. Or, Mom and Dad ain't got jobs so the kids are poor. Or, there is no Dad and Mom is an illiterate and totally worthless so the kids suffer. Or, Dad IS around and happens to be a violent SOB or lets the kids live in total squalor.

Legal/illegal drugs isn't the issue. There is a segment of the population that is going to fail, fail, and fail no matter what the laws are or what drugs are out there, and that means they are likely going to drag their children down a lot while they are growing up. That's Darwin and reality.

There are going to be "losses" no matter what the laws are and legalizing or banning stupidity or whatever isn't going to change that.

The War on People has been colossal disaster that makes Prohibition look like a great idea of the past. While law enforcement loves this "war" because it provides a TON of jobs and billions and billions of dollars that get wasted year after year, it's terrible public policy and has been a miserable failure for decades.

Even former Sec of State Shultz has called for legalization. The Nixon era War on Drugs started because of hatred for Hippies & the growing drug problem w/ the kids in country in 'Nam. The failure in "persecuting" this war is going to lead to Mexico either becoming a narco-state or spin into total chaos. This country is the market that drives the trade. My prediction is that w/ state's budget crisis that finally money will talk. 1st the growth industry in prisons is costly. & 2nd the states are going to want to tax it for the revenue. Calif will be 1st & the rest will fall into line..eventually.

Git Real's picture

And if we legalize drugs then can we legalize fully auto weapons so I can get my testosterone fix whenever I so desire? How about legalizing me owning multiple lives and legalizing sharia law so I can put them in their rightful places. While you're at it. Can I marry my dog? Did we legalize that yet?

Okay...I fully admit I sound like $$$ with that reply. But I'm sincerely curious. At what point do we draw the line? If we keep lowering the standards and condoning 'each going his own way'..... then what are the consequences? I'm for eliminating helmet laws. But in the same breath I am also in favor of not paying for the treatments of head injuries for those who choose not to use them. So let's legalize drugs then. At what point do we hold those individuals responsible for the consequences of their choices and the harmful results that my fall upon the innocent?

Answer these questions please. I can fully appreciate the legalization argument. I just want to understand what accountability and consequences accompany the issue.

I find it real easy to shout out legalize it.

In fact...I think when law enforcement captures a million dollars worth of pot they ought to sell it and give the drug dealers some competition. Then use the money to offset law enforcement expenses. Pay for such items as... let's say.... helicopters.

<em><strong>Stupid can't be fixed. We can only vote him out</strong></em>

NUK_1's picture

I am NOT in the crowd that wants to "just" legalize pot....I take the entire Libertarian buy-in on "drugs." Make them all legal to consume and let Darwin sort out the people and society deal with the sure fall-out short-term. We will survive after a lot of rough moments and sad stories and come out of it for the better. Anything goes when it comes to getting rid of the philosophy that "it's legal, it's OK" and "it's illegal, it's wrong." Didn't the recent financial meltdown convince people that legal/illegal isn't a "standard?" It should have never been in the first place.

The government and society do not "own" people and what they want to ingest is up to the person, not the government. Employers certainly should have the "right" to decide differently or hold people to a higher standard, but criminalization of drugs is a huge failure and efforts to combat it have only made the problem infinitely harder to manage.

I am all for re-directing a small portion of the billions wasted on drug enforcement each year into meaningful treatment and education, which would be a paltry sum compared to the massive jobs and welfare program the War on Drugs long ago took, and have better long-term results. Of course, law enforcement would see their numbers drop by about half and it's like telling seniors that SS needs reforming with all the pitiful howling that would ensue, but so be it.

This country doesn't need any more "law enforcement" and doesn't need any more "laws" for that matter that continues the parasitic yet mutually beneficial relationship of cops-criminals. You have less "criminals" and you need less "cops." One side of this equation is scared of this outcome because they will be unemployed and that goes to the federal level also. Loads of jobs eliminated once the "war" ends.

TinCan's picture

Legalize them all and let nature resolve the problem. No sure what percentage of crime and inmate populations are drug related, but I believe it's probably the largest portion. Just tax the h--- out of it and keep the "normal" folks safe from the crazies.

Pot is no threat to society, no matter what is portrayed in "Reefer Madness". Inexpensive coke will dry up what enforcement has created in the "crack" & meth epo-demic. I promise that they will put down the crack pipe & going thru the rig-a-mo-roll of cooking. Heroin is easy, clean needles will elininate a whole host of problems from HIV to Hep. All will lessen the motivation for prostitution. All will reduce all crimes both property & violent. I know it is a scary new world for some of you but really what's been going on for 80+ years ain't working... for anyone. Prohibition came to an end, not the world.

hutch866's picture

So here we have old Billy Bob, hooked on heroin, but he has a stash of clean needles, but no money. What's a guy to do? Lets see, does he endure the shakes till payday, no wait, ain't no payday, he got fired for shooting up at work. Whats left, I know knock over a store, roll some old lady, yeah that's the ticket, less resistance. You say it will reduce property and violent crime, bull, if they have no money, they're gonna steal, just because the drug is legal doesn't mean the means of acquiring the money will be.

I yam what I yam

over to the clinic. How many junkies' habit could be satisfied w/ 1 cop's salary & all he wears. It's really a cheap drug and at 1 time was available at any drug store. Less than 4 million have probably even tried it. How many addicts do you think there are? Give'm all they want. Never seen a guy on the nod give anyone any trouble.

hutch866's picture

So now we've gone from just legalizing drugs to supplying drugs, and that's in just one night. Boy, what a system.

I yam what I yam

Legalize any drug you want just as long as I get to use the abusers as target practice.

You want to use smack, that's fine with me. If you want to use smack and drive, target practice.

You want to smoke crack, that's fine with me. If you want to smoke crack and drive, target practice.

You want to shoot heroin, that's fine with me. If you want to shoot heroin and drive, target practice.

You want to smoke pcp, that's fine with me. If you want to smoke pcp and drive, target practice.

You want to drink alcohol, that's fine with me. If you want to drink alcohol and drive, target practice.

Get a state issued vehicle tag that says you have requested the right to use drugs. Abuse that right and I get to use you as target practice; any questions?

Problem solved!

I propose legalizing marijuana. One of the most asisine laws on the books today is the FDA's insistence on classifying pot as a Class 1 narcotic (most addictive) along with heroin and other opiates. Pot is less dangerous to the human body than alcohol.

I've never seen a person go through pot withdrawal and I'm unaware of "pot junkies" stealing or robbing to promote their habits.

Meth, cocaine, heroin....all of these have documented histories of addiction. Keep these illegal.

I've also noticed a huge increase in prescription drug abuse since my formative years.

Cyclist's picture

I could agree with the Darwin concept and let drug use run its course all the way to the bitter end. However, I suspect there is too much compassion in our society to let that happen.

As for the comparison of young mother that killed her infant son as she fed him and those obese young girls living in filth; the young mother was charged with murder.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Git Real's picture

Ummmm... Bladder? It tis quite simple dude. If you don't to have to obtain a $10K lawyer, pay fines, court and probation costs, DUI *skool*, jeopardize your job and your future, lose driving privileges, and not be able to drive your wittle ole golf cart then I have a simple solution for you. Don't drink and drive? Personally I don't any more give a rip about what a drunk driver has to do to earn his driving privileges back any more than I give a rip about an East Point deadbeat not being able to get more free housing at my expense. Sorry you had to endure all those penalties you described as a result of poor choices you've made in life. Deal with it dude.

Regarding my rights being infringed...I've been driving for 35 years or so and other than a few speeding tickets and insurance card / license check points, I've never had any issues. Come on dude... what is your problem? I don't hear this being a problem for the rest of us.

So tell me.... Just what all do you want to "LEGALIZE NOW" other than pot, coke, and drunk driving? Is meth on you list?

As far as Afghanistan goes.... I agree. Let's pull out since our government policies in that war match similarly to those of Vietnam. We have a government that has place our boys and girls in that hell hole while not allowing them to win that war. By all means let's pull out. You are right...... Our commander in chief and his ability to lead has caused our troops to become targets which flounder around in that god forsaken place.

Meanwhile.... get your self a designated driver and fix you stinkin' taillight.

<em><strong>Stupid can't be fixed. We can only vote him out</strong></em>

Cyclist's picture

It seems that several other countries have established lower BAC limits for drivers without the help of MADD. BTW, for those in safety sensitive positions within the transportation industry the max is .04 BAC.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Makes sense that those who choose to take on great responsibility (300+ behind & those on ground) and are well compensated and who venture into a rare air atmosphere, might expect to be held to a different standard.
There are 2 recent cases. 1) A Clayton off duty cop goes 100 mph down the interstate & claims acid-reflux. 2) Cobb off duty cop minding his own business successfully navigating his way home is hit by a DUI driver and finds himself also charged. Nothing in this world is going change and I won't sweep against the tide. I do believe some of it has to do w/ money fines & racking up "laudable" numbers; but, If you are driving home successfully w/in the rules of the road, why are you held to an arbitrary BAC #? How much actual crime (a dangerous driver on the road) is missed because the officer is tied up for an hour or more w/ essentially a tag light out.

Cyclist's picture

That fact of the matter is, far too many are killed because of alcohol impaired drivers. A BAC of .08 was determined the legal threshold in which drivers would have diminished motor skills to the point that they are a hazard to all other road users. If they make it home without incident then they are lucky. If they don't, they could become a statistic and end up hurting themselves and possibly someone else.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

The argument isn't that too many are killed. If it was .1 what changed to make it .08? Who made the determination? My guess is a whole lot of politcal pressure from Mom, Pie & MADD. Since so many must make it home it would seem that something more than luck is involved. Like they aren't really impaired, they just have a light out. One of my points is that while the police are looking, stopping, arresting & going off patrol to process essentially a broken light violation, a real crime has just whizzed by them. The Gwinnett Comish can now testify that just leaving a bar becomes, "How much have you had to drink?" What does that have to do w/ your light out? OR, when was the last time you weaved in your own lane (it is all my lane afterall)? OR, gawd forbid, you actually changed a lane & DID NOT signal? But the police will be extra vigilante during this holiday season.

Cyclist's picture

Google NHTSA BAC.08 for an answer.

<strong>But the police will be extra vigilante during this holiday season.</strong>


Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Git Real's picture

If I get stopped for a tail light being out. I'll thank the officer for pointing such out and will drive off and then get the bulb changed. Won't have to worry about the .08 issue. Guess to some people like Bladderboy the .08 is something to really be concerned about.

<em><strong>Stupid can't be fixed. We can only vote him out</strong></em>

Cyclist's picture

will we give a nod to lower BAC limits for safety sensitive transportation workers - including truck and bus drivers - because of the "great responsibility" but yet fail to realize the great responsible that everyone has when they're on the road.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

NUK_1's picture

Ok, MADD is a group of well-intentioned but goofy people who are involved in a lot more than screeching about lowering BAC to .08 from the old standard of .10. They were also howling about raising the drinking age to 21 for a long time until Reagan bought in and demanded that all the states in the union raise it to 21 or no more highway funds. Of course, the vast majority of Repubs LOVED this since they were/are only social conservatives to begin with and love the power of Big Brother if they are in charge and could care less about civil liberties. Ironically, Mad Mother #1 Candy Lightner who headed MADD now works in the liquor biz :)

Anyway, .10 or .08.....there has to be a baseline standard and it's either accept it or fight to change it. I don't really see the point. If you look at the statistics on DUI, the average arrest is for a driver at about .15 or higher and very, very few that are on the "fringe" at .08-.10. Then when you look at the fact that there is about ONE DUI arrest per 20,000 drunk drivers(Freakenomics), I don't really see the purpose in getting bent over whether the BAC is .08 or .10. Considering that BAC is in fact dependent on the person's size and sex to begin with and a 100lb woman reaches .08 much faster than a 200lb dude...what's there to fight?

Other countries that consume far more alcohol per capita than the USA do not have this drunk driving problem because the penalties are very severe. They just don't do it.

grassroots's picture

Why don't you lookout for Public Works blind siding you. DUI's make more money I guess. See for money vs politics and that safety is not an issue with the county as much as money$$$$$
If they were really into safety then Why do bars have parking lots?
Why are there no child molester check points? No revenue for the county.

Ad space area 4 internal