"Dude, I do this every night . . ."

That is what Zachary R. Duis, of northwest Indiana, told an officer after he was stopped on suspicion of drunken driving. Duis maintained that he was "straight up and not drunk."

A breath test disputed his claim allegedly showing that he had a blood-alcohol level almost four times the state's legal limit of .08 percent.

Hat tip to cripjak

| Bob Cronkleton

Comments

[Ein]

I think he just admitted to driving drunk every night. Too bad they can't substantiate it.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

Although he may not have actually been drunk, just because they set a "limit" does not mean you are drunk you are just drunk in their opinion.

[Man in a Mission]

NoMoreMrNiceGuy -

Yes, there is some variance in sensitivity to alcohol, as there is with any drug. But at a certain level, virtually anyone is susceptible to its effects. Had you read the article you would have noticed that he was driving erratically and failed field sobriety tests. The fact that he was also far beyond the legal definition of intoxicated (expressed as blood alcohol content/concentration) is only physical proof of the observable/subjective evidence impairment.

Your reasoning is analogous to saying that citing someone for being over the speed limit since "just because they set a "limit" does not mean your are speeding just you are speeding in their opinion."

[Drummermama]

Did anyone else notice that his name is Duis...D U I s. I thought that was funny.