PDA

View Full Version : On alcohol and carrying - a civil discussion



DocGKR
06-21-2011, 12:22 PM
I like a glass of good wine or beer as much as anyone, however, alcohol and firearms do not mix. Ever. In addition, many LE agencies and civilian CCW regulations have strict prohibitions against carrying a weapon while drinking alcohol. Thus if an individual governed under those conditions wants to drink, they must not be carrying a weapon. I know a lot of folks in just that situation who don't carry their firearm when out partying and drinking...that is a prudent choice. What is utterly STUPID is to go out into a public place like a bar with a bunch of other people whose judgement and inhibitions may be altered and expect to not have trouble--especially if you are LE and may be recognized by miscreants who you have had previous interactions. If you want to imbibe alcohol, I'd recommend doing it at home; if for some reason you must go out in public to drink, then it would be quite wise to have a designated non-drinker to drive and serve as an armed escort. In the last 20+years I've seen far too many situations spin out of control when this rational approach is ignored...

LittleLebowski
06-21-2011, 12:44 PM
I like a glass of good wine or beer as much as anyone, however, alcohol and firearms do not mix. Ever. In addition, many LE agencies and civilian CCW regulations have strict prohibitions against carrying a weapon while drinking alcohol. Thus if an individual governed under those conditions wants to drink, they must not be carrying a weapon. I know a lot of folks in just that situation who don't carry their firearm when out partying and drinking...that is a prudent choice. What is utterly STUPID is to go out into a public place like a bar with a bunch of other people whose judgement and inhibitions may be altered and expect to not have trouble--especially if you are LE and may be recognized by miscreants who you have had previous interactions. If you want to imbibe alcohol, I'd recommend doing it at home; if for some reason you must go out in public to drink, then it would be quite wise to have a designated non-drinker to drive and serve as an armed escort. In the last 20+years I've seen far too many situations spin out of control when this rational approach is ignored...

Well said, Doc. Case in point (http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-06-05/news/bs-md-police-shooting-sidebar-20100605_1_police-officers-officer-shot-service-weapon)

jslaker
06-21-2011, 01:46 PM
I'm single and relatively young compared to most of you (mid 20s), so the bar scene's still a fairly important part of my social life. I don't carry if I'm imbibing, that's simply out of the question so far as I'm concerned. Given that, I've found that being selective about where you go plays a major factor in how safe you are. Granted, things can go wrong anywhere but it's a matter of stacking the odds in your favor.

In my area, the places you are most likely to run into trouble are:
A. Thug bars
B. Redneck bars
C. Bars full of young GIs that have just graduated basic/returned from overseas

(Not a negative commentary on soldiers, just the reality of young men that have been pent up for months mixed with alcohol).

I basically limit myself to the after-work corner bar a third of a mile from my office and the local downtown bar district. The first because it's in a low-crime area of town, I'm friends with pretty much the entirety of the staff, and somebody in the kitchen or office usually has a firearm anyway. As for the downtown district? I stick to a couple of bars that are off the main beating path, on nights they don't attract a bad crowd. Downtown is also one of the only places I'm okay with relying on the police -- we're talking about a three-block area that usually has at least a dozen metro officers walking around, and lately they've been supplemented by MPs because of some issues with soldiers getting themselves in trouble.

I realize it's not for everyone, but for me I've struck a balance between carrying myself and carrying on with my social life that I'm happy with. I mostly wanted to point out that your options aren't limited to a binary carry or stay in.

Kyle Reese
06-21-2011, 02:06 PM
I like a glass of good wine or beer as much as anyone, however, alcohol and firearms do not mix. Ever. In addition, many LE agencies and civilian CCW regulations have strict prohibitions against carrying a weapon while drinking alcohol. Thus if an individual governed under those conditions wants to drink, they must not be carrying a weapon. I know a lot of folks in just that situation who don't carry their firearm when out partying and drinking...that is a prudent choice. What is utterly STUPID is to go out into a public place like a bar with a bunch of other people whose judgement and inhibitions may be altered and expect to not have trouble--especially if you are LE and may be recognized by miscreants who you have had previous interactions. If you want to imbibe alcohol, I'd recommend doing it at home; if for some reason you must go out in public to drink, then it would be quite wise to have a designated non-drinker to drive and serve as an armed escort. In the last 20+years I've seen far too many situations spin out of control when this rational approach is ignored...

Agree 1000%. Much less drama / trouble having a beer quietly at home as opposed to going to a local watering hole where you cannot control the environment / patrons, etc.

That said, I drink about 5 beers per year (CONUS) so it's a non issue for me.

TGS
06-21-2011, 03:02 PM
Here's a question for you guys;

I'm not sure of your families/lives, but it's just commonplace in mine to have wine with dinner without thinking of it as having a drink. It's just what you do with dinner. It's not boozing, it's just complementing that delicious chicken joseph with a tasty beverage. Totally different to us than mixing drinks or beer.

Have you ever realized you ordered a drink while carrying, but realized it a few minutes too late?

I was at a Macaroni Grill for dinner and ordered a glass of wine while carrying. Totally against the law, and I didn't realize I had done such until I finished that glass and switched to a sweet tea like I always do if I'm driving or going to carry later. Woops.....pucker factor override.......

I imagine there's quite a few people that have done so without realizing. Probably more as a product of carrying a mouse-gun and literally forgetting it's there I would bet. Even when I'm pocket carrying my 642 it's always jabbing me in some small manner resulting in me always being aware of it, thankfully.

jslaker
06-21-2011, 03:56 PM
Here's a question for you guys;

I'm not sure of your families/lives, but it's just commonplace in mine to have wine with dinner without thinking of it as having a drink. It's just what you do with dinner. It's not boozing, it's just complementing that delicious chicken joseph with a tasty beverage. Totally different to us than mixing drinks or beer.

Have you ever realized you ordered a drink while carrying, but realized it a few minutes too late?

I was at a Macaroni Grill for dinner and ordered a glass of wine while carrying. Totally against the law, and I didn't realize I had done such until I finished that glass and switched to a sweet tea like I always do if I'm driving or going to carry later. Woops.....pucker factor override.......

I imagine there's quite a few people that have done so without realizing. Probably more as a product of carrying a mouse-gun and literally forgetting it's there I would bet. Even when I'm pocket carrying my 642 it's always jabbing me in some small manner resulting in me always being aware of it, thankfully.

Personally, I distinguish between a single drink with a meal and drinking for serious social purposes.

In all seriousness, at my size, a single beer over the course of an hour with a meal is barely going to blip my BAC. The guns go away if I intend to drink any more than that, though.

JeffJ
06-21-2011, 05:21 PM
Yeah, I'm with you guys on that - in Texas the law is pretty vague, you can't carry while intoxicated and intoxicated is up to the discretion of the officer. So the safe thing to do is not to drink at all while carrying, however, I'll admit that one beer with a meal is not something that I get concerned about I'm not intoxicated after that. Although for me, as I've just entered my 30s I've discovered that my waist line is trying to expand and I need to pay more attention to my diet and exercise regime. Going from a couple of beers after work to no beers after work is a quick cut of 300-500 calories (never was a big light beer drinker) which has enabled me to pretty much eat how I want and not gain weight, I might still have a few drinks on the weekend but I'd rather carry.

To answer the OP question though - Johnny Walker Black it's blended so it's not as trendy and cool as a single malt but it's smooth with good flavor and not overpowering. The price is reasonable and most decent establishments stock it. Here in Texas in the summertime you've got to add an ice cube or two, what is room temperature in Scotland would be refrigerated here.

TGS
06-21-2011, 05:49 PM
Yeah, I'm with you guys on that - in Texas the law is pretty vague, you can't carry while intoxicated and intoxicated is up to the discretion of the officer.


In Virginia, the consumption of alcohol while carrying is illegal. I could have gotten one wine tasting and been in some serious trouble.

I carry in Florida about 20-30 days out of the year. Florida is similar to Texas in that regards, you can't be intoxicated while carrying and there is no written law about consuming alcohol while carrying. I imagine if you're in 90% of Florida and a WASP with a southern accent you could be completely blitzed and the local deputies wouldn't care too much as long as you weren't disturbing anyone. At least that's been my experience......they certainly don't think any problem of the ol'boys shooting at our bubbles as we're just a few feet below the waterline....or driving 25mph, swerving, on any of the state/county roads and chucking empty PBR cans out the window......

jslaker
06-21-2011, 06:10 PM
So far as I know, we don't really have any laws addressing carry while intoxicated here in GA. Closest to it that I'm aware of is a prohibition on carry in bars without the permission of the owner (and I've noticed a few bouncers suddenly wearing fanny packs since that law went into effect. :cool:)

VolGrad
06-21-2011, 06:14 PM
Sort of sad a guy asks about people's drink preference and it turns into a lecture of sorts. We're all adults here and free to make our own choices, right? Just because someone chooses to have a drink every now and then doesn't automatically mean he has lost all of his good judgement. The press and anti-gun crowd tends to jump to the same conclusion all the time and we all get up in arms about it. Why here any different?

I don't believe in drinking and carrying, same as I don't believe in drinking & driving, but never understand why any time alcohol is mentioned on a gun forum people start to assume the worst.

THIS POST IS NOT DIRECTED AT ANY ONE IN PARTICULAR SO PLEASE DON'T GET OFFENDED. It's just a casual observation over several years of forum reading.

ToddG
06-22-2011, 08:40 AM
(VolGrad -- The issue comes up exactly because there is such a strong perception among some segments of the shooting community that a little alcohol is ok.)

There is so much data showing that even a single drink can have an effect on judgment and motor skills that I'm always amazed at people who think having just one drink (or two, or...) is ok. By definition, if your judgment is impaired you are in no condition to assess your own condition. "I'm fine" has been uttered by a number of people right before they slid their car into a minivan full of innocent people.

Furthermore, regardless of whether you feel fine or even are fine, regardless of whether it's legal, if you do get involved in an altercation where violence ensues do you really want to have a prosecutor, plaintiff's attorney, judge, and jury thinking about the fact you've been drinking? "I just had one" isn't acceptable for pilots, doctors, cops... Do you want there to be even a hint of a question that you weren't 100%?

I've been in plenty of social and business situations when I was the only one not drinking. I just say, "I don't drink." Seems to solve the problem.

VolGrad
06-22-2011, 08:57 AM
I am not arguing the fact alcohol impairs both judgment and body function .... even as little as one drink. It's a fact ... alcohol does cause impairment.

My observation was simply any time alcohol is mentioned on a gun forum people jump straight into judgmental mode, condemning those that choose to partake of a drink every now and then, ignoring the fact they might not be carrying at all at the time. Many in this very thread have stated they do not carry while drinking but yet the condemnation remains. I liken the "don't drink & carry" posts to the std disclaimers lawyers put on cigarettes, hair dryers, toaster ovens, etc.

I completely respect the choice some make to never drink alcohol. I sincerely do. Please respect my right to have a beer or a couple fingers of Scotch without assuming I haven't already considered the ramifications and taken necessary precautions. That's all I meant by my post.

I DO NOT CONDONE DRINKING & CARRYING. Now, somebody hold my beer and watch this. :p

ToddG
06-22-2011, 08:59 AM
I don't see a condemnation of drinking in general...

VolGrad
06-22-2011, 09:07 AM
I don't see a condemnation of drinking in general...

I guess it's all in the eye of the beerholder. :)

ToddG
06-22-2011, 09:33 AM
http://toppun.com/Public_Health/Free_Poster_Layout_small.gif

TCinVA
06-22-2011, 09:33 AM
It's not the least bit inappropriate, in my opinion, to mention that guns and booze shouldn't go together when someone brings up alcohol on a gun forum.

I say that because while everyone acknowledges that guns and booze don't go together, I've seen them mixed on a number of occasions by people who ought to know better. I've seen people who ought to know better mix booze and vehicles, too. I've even seen occasions where people mixed booze, guns, and vehicles together...and only managed to avoid arrest because they flashed tin and received professional courtesy.

I look at it like reminders about firearms safety in general. I can recite the rules by heart but I'm never against hearing sensible arguments for safe handling practices and good judgment. I may not learn anything from it, but you never know who else is watching/listening that might learn something.

TGS
06-22-2011, 10:52 AM
It's not the least bit inappropriate, in my opinion, to mention that guns and booze shouldn't go together when someone brings up alcohol on a gun forum.

I say that because while everyone acknowledges that guns and booze don't go together, I've seen them mixed on a number of occasions by people who ought to know better. I've seen people who ought to know better mix booze and vehicles, too. I've even seen occasions where people mixed booze, guns, and vehicles together...and only managed to avoid arrest because they flashed tin and received professional courtesy.

I look at it like reminders about firearms safety in general. I can recite the rules by heart but I'm never against hearing sensible arguments for safe handling practices and good judgment. I may not learn anything from it, but you never know who else is watching/listening that might learn something.

Would you be offended or find it out-of-place if we started warning of the dangers of neo-nazism because your picture is of a person shooting a weapon from Nazi Germany?

All it comes down to is people having some issue that they want to project on others. The lectures on why alcohol/not living like a hermit/ect. is evil is best reserved for another conversation......it's related, but still a tangent. I could see starting another thread with, "So guys, the thread on booze got me thinking and I wanted to show you show data that many might not be aware of......" That'd be cool.

Is this a gun forum? Yeah. Is this the Romper Room? Yes. I thought the romper room was for anything, even if completely unrelated to guns.

There's no reason that one dude asks a question about your favorite drink warrants lectures as if he's posting video's of him shooting watermelons between a friends legs in the local sandpit while downing a 30 rack. If someone started a thread about what baby carriage they like to haul their tot in while running, would that warrant lectures out of left field on guns and kids, or dry firing with the kid in the room behind the wall of your target, or the likes? No.

Those are just as off-base as these lectures. It's simply people projecting some issue they have with those who choose to drink and conjuring up stories in their own head. I see a lot of messiah complexes going on in this thread.

But what do I know, I'm an ignorant fool out to destroy the world with my one-n-done mentality.

TGS
06-22-2011, 10:55 AM
My observation was simply any time alcohol is mentioned on a gun forum people jump straight into judgmental mode, condemning those that choose to partake of a drink every now and then, ignoring the fact they might not be carrying at all at the time.

This.

TCinVA
06-22-2011, 11:08 AM
There's no reason that one dude asks a question about your favorite drink warrants lectures as if he's posting video's of him shooting watermelons between a friends legs in the local sandpit while downing a 30 rack.


Nobody reacted even remotely like that in this thread.

Nobody "lectured" anyone, either.

Mitchell, Esq.
06-22-2011, 11:08 AM
The use of force in Self Defense is a deliberate act.

It has to be to take advantage of the way the laws are written - and they are written around "resonable". Reasonable people in reasonable fear for their lives using reasonable force.

What YOUR subjective reasonable is will be determined by your training and experience, and will be shown to those evaluating your decission by the books and other media you posess (i.e. your library of body language books, the video Surviving Edged Weapons in your desk...) and the testamony of the instructors you have trained with.

You do not want your subjective reasonable blown out of the water by your instructor having to say on the stand "Carrying a gun after consuming alcohol is not reasonable, nor is it conducive to making good decissions in stressful situations..." because if you can't show your actions were subjectively reasonable, you don't get to the second prong of the test: if the trier of fact believes your actions were objectively reasonable based on what you knew, how and when you knew it.

Self defense is a deliberate action. It is an act that is illegal, but for the situation you were forced into.

An action done negligently with a fortunate result does not get you to the same place as deliberate action with the same result.

Simply put, while your skills may be unimpaired and your judgement may be sufficient to the task of opening the can of 'Whoop-Ass', it compromises your ability to handle the "everything else" phase of the fight.

So, that's why carrying while drinking is a bad thing...

Shellback
06-22-2011, 12:27 PM
We're all lushbags according to the study just released (http://www.dailydemocrat.com/news/ci_18276826) by UC Davis. Coincidentally, or not, the Joyce Foundation funded study was released just 1 day prior to the Ohio Restaurant Carry legislation came to a final vote.


The highest levels of alcohol abuse were reported by gun owners who engaged in dangerous behavior with their weapons. For example, gun owners who also drove or rode in motor vehicles with loaded guns were more than four times as likely to drink and drive as were people who did not own guns. But gun owners who did not travel with loaded guns were still more than twice as likely to drink and drive as were people who did not own guns.

"It's not surprising that risky behaviors go together," said Garen J. Wintemute, author of the study and director of the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program. "This is of particular concern given that alcohol intoxication also impairs a gun user's accuracy as well as his judgment on whether to shoot."

I'd like to knock the wind out of his sails.

DocGKR
06-22-2011, 01:17 PM
Wintemute is an idiot with an agenda.

This supposed "study" is so flawed on so many levels that a good research institution like UC Davis should be embarrassed to have their name associated with it.

TGS
06-22-2011, 02:32 PM
Mitchell,

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Nobody is arguing that we should be drinking and using guns. There's a difference between having a drink with dinner and leaving some amount of reasonable time later with your gun, and what you're talking about.

TCinVA,

please see VolGrads post, #65.

ToddG
06-22-2011, 03:22 PM
Didn't TC cover this already?

It's a GUN FORUM. When alcohol gets mentioned, you can expect some folks to mention that alcohol and guns don't mix. If this offends your sensibilities, that's unfortunate.

VolGrad
06-22-2011, 04:35 PM
please see VolGrads post, #65.
Leave me out of this. I'm in deep enough already. :p

Mitchell, Esq.
06-23-2011, 12:56 PM
Mitchell,

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Nobody is arguing that we should be drinking and using guns. There's a difference between having a drink with dinner and leaving some amount of reasonable time later with your gun, and what you're talking about.



I'm not following your thoughts here...

What I'm talking about is the presence of alcohol in your system during the use of a firearm in a use of force situation compromising your ability to have the aftermath break as you want it to because of the way the review of action process is set up.

If their isn't any alcohol/alcohol below your state's impairment limit in the blood at the time of the incident, then it is either not an issue, or is an issue that can be dealt with more managably (but by no means easily).

If you have alcohol in a no-drinking w/ carrying state, then you have an issue to deal with should you use it, even if your BAC is 0.02 - because you weren't supposed to have any in you when you were carrying.

I'm not making comments about drinking in general (I've got booze in my desk right now for times when it's a safety issue for everyone in the office for me to get a bit loaded...), just stating why, from an aftermath standpoint, it's something that compromises your ability to win the whole nut, rather than how or if it may effect you in the 1st 1/2.

I don't care if anyone drinks.

Hell, I encourage it because I think booze is a wonderful thing that keeps people from killing themselves, other people, produced marriages, kids, divorce, DUI's & other crime, wrongful death actions...and may be the only way some college kids ever get laid...

So I'm not against booze at all. But it's got its place.

If it's kept in its place, then its a great thing and may cause you to wake up in strange places with strange women who look over at you and say "Holy shit, you aren't my Husband!! You are better looking than he is!"

If not...well...That's bad.

LittleLebowski
06-23-2011, 01:14 PM
Split off to a new discussion from the Alcohol thread.

John Hearne
06-23-2011, 08:07 PM
As I understand it, the safest people on the road are those with a BAC between .02 and .04. They are even safer than sober folks. I don't buy the argument that a low BAC automatically equates with poor judgement. I also don't buy the argument that because I've had a drink or two, I've surrendered my right to self defense.

JodyH
06-23-2011, 10:23 PM
I'll drink the occasional beer with dinner while carrying.
One 16oz. beer along with a slab of prime rib and all the sides enjoyed over 30 minutes to an hour does not equal impaired or irresponsible.

Jay Cunningham
06-23-2011, 10:32 PM
One 16oz. beer along with a slab of prime rib and all the sides

*drool*

YVK
06-23-2011, 11:53 PM
I am going to take this discussion on a slight tangent, but pretty close to a topic, and play a little devil's advocate.

I have been impaired from sleep deprivation that goes hand-in-hand with my line of work numerous times, several magnitudes more than I have been impaired by alcohol. The physiologic effect of sleep deprivation is quite similar to alcohol intoxication, especially reaction time and precision. Does this mean that I should lock up my pistol when I am about to start my 36 hour shift? Would I be less guilty if I screwed up because I was tired (and I had known I was going to be tired) then if I screwed up after a bottle of Guinness?

The usual response to such question is "work is work; alcohol is voluntary". I disagree. Nobody is making me do what I do, I do it because of my own choice. There are plenty 9-5 jobs out there, and none interests me at this point. Discuss.

seabiscuit
06-24-2011, 12:16 AM
I've often wondered the same thing, and I've been more tired than I've been drunk. I usually make a mental note: "You're tired. Only use your pistol at short ranges in an extreme emergency."

Or something like that.

TCinVA
06-24-2011, 07:04 AM
Does this mean that I should lock up my pistol when I am about to start my 36 hour shift? Would I be less guilty if I screwed up because I was tired (and I had known I was going to be tired) then if I screwed up after a bottle of Guinness?

The usual response to such question is "work is work; alcohol is voluntary". I disagree. Nobody is making me do what I do, I do it because of my own choice. There are plenty 9-5 jobs out there, and none interests me at this point. Discuss.

"I was extremely tired because I'd just pulled a double shift at work."

"I had a couple of beers."

Picture yourself in a jury box. Which statement is more sympathetic?

The effects of sleep deprivation may be very similar or perhaps worse in some circumstances than consumption of moderate amounts of alcohol by any objective measure...but the investigation and litigation of a self defense case isn't done in a lab.

orionz06
06-24-2011, 08:10 AM
Is there a safe and accurate way to measure the effects of alcohol on ones shooting abilities? I am not talking about getting loaded and shooting real guns, but some alternate way that can be controlled and kept safe to where certain skills can be measured in scientific way? I am willing to bet I am not the only one who has wondered this.

WDW
06-24-2011, 08:23 AM
Bottom line is, it don't matter if you can down a fifth of Jack and shoot a 4.0 FAST. If you shoot somebody and have to go to court over it, and it comes out you been drinkin', it sure ain't gonna help your case any. I drink alot. More than I should. I also carry. However, if I even think there is a slight chance I may drink I don't carry. That is a choice I make and it is a wrong one for a defensive mindset, but it lands me within the parameters of the law and it is the right choice in that regard. TN doesn't allow 1 drop of alcohol in your system if you're carrying. I do carry a knife however when I drink, which is perfectly legal. I am a practicing martial artist and feel confident enough I could defend myself against an unarmed attacker. I am also 6'5" 270lbs, so not too many people start stuff with me to begin with. I also don't think there is anyone here on this forum that thinks guns and booze mix.

YVK
06-24-2011, 08:27 AM
"I was extremely tired because I'd just pulled a double shift at work."

"I had a couple of beers."

Picture yourself in a jury box. Which statement is more sympathetic?

The effects of sleep deprivation may be very similar or perhaps worse in some circumstances than consumption of moderate amounts of alcohol by any objective measure...but the investigation and litigation of a self defense case isn't done in a lab.

TC, I agree 100%, but let's set court/jury issues aside and look at this from the angle of personal responsibility. Lots of people, including some here, don't approve of drinking and carrying not only because it is stupid from litigation standpoint, but also because it is plain wrong if one carries under influence. From this angle of individual responsibility, condemning drinking and carrying while condoning carrying under influence of foreseeable sleep deprivation looks like a double-standard to me.
As I alluded to above, this isn't an abstract discussion for me. I am predictably sleep-deprived about once a week and I carry anyway. While societal attitude to why I am impaired on weekly basis is completely opposite to ETOH-driven impairment, the physiologic endpoint is the same - foreseeable impairment. I have accepted a neutral stance towards those who choose to consume alcohol and carry at the same time simply because I don't want to be a hypocrite.

Ed L
06-24-2011, 04:44 PM
I do not drink, other than an occasional beer at home, and I completely avoid bars and nightclubs. This is a personal choice.

First, it comes under the heading of avoiding stupid people and stupid places. If you are concerned enough about self protection to carry a weapon I feel you should try to avoid *easily avoidable* places where you are more likely to be in a situation that might require that weapon.

Second, if you get attacked in a bar or club and defend yourself, whether it is with or without a weapon, there is a tremendous legal predjudice on the part of the police and legal system that if you were in the bar or club you somehow contributed to the confrontation that turned violent, even if that isn't the case. Fights that take place in bars or clubs is seen as social violence and often presumed to be mutual combat.

Of course since I don't really like bars & clubs, so I am making no sacrifice and not loosing anything by not going to them.

jslaker
06-24-2011, 09:05 PM
Second, if you get attacked in a bar or club and defend yourself, whether it is with or without a weapon, there is a tremendous legal predjudice on the part of the police and legal system that if you were in the bar or club you somehow contributed to the confrontation that turned violent, even if that isn't the case. Fights that take place in bars or clubs is seen as social violence and often presumed to be mutual combat.
I'd add this as a reason I frequent the same places on a regular basis when I choose to go out -- it makes you known to the staff. I make a point of avoiding the belligerent drunks, and the vast majority of the time, it's completely fine. The couple of times there nearly has been an issue despite my attempts to diffuse things, being known to the staff as somebody that doesn't cause problems has been a huge asset. I've had bouncers step in and make it very clear to the other party that if anything happened, it would be them going to jail. Bar staff isn't likely to do that for someone they don't know.

ToddG
06-24-2011, 09:45 PM
I think there is a huge difference between "I chose this job, this job requires me to work long shifts, I know I may be tired" and "I just chugged two bottles of Bud."

I'd also be willing to bet -- though I don't have the scientific data to prove it -- that being in an adrenalized state compensates for tiredness substantially more than it compensates for drunkeness.

seabiscuit
06-24-2011, 10:59 PM
I'd also be willing to bet -- though I don't have the scientific data to prove it -- that being in an adrenalized state compensates for tiredness substantially more than it compensates for drunkeness.

I'd agree. I've done some tiring training, but when it comes down to it, I can make it happen.

jslaker
06-24-2011, 11:02 PM
I'd also be willing to bet -- though I don't have the scientific data to prove it -- that being in an adrenalized state compensates for tiredness substantially more than it compensates for drunkeness.
There is also definitely a point in inebriation that no reasonable amount of sleep deprivation will really be equivalent to. I'd actually guess that it's not particularly far beyond the legal driving limit for most people.

fuse
06-25-2011, 10:09 AM
Is there a safe and accurate way to measure the effects of alcohol on ones shooting abilities? I am not talking about getting loaded and shooting real guns, but some alternate way that can be controlled and kept safe to where certain skills can be measured in scientific way? I am willing to bet I am not the only one who has wondered this.

Huge party tonight. I will bring my SIRT.


IT'S FOR SCIENCE

Mitchell, Esq.
06-26-2011, 07:56 AM
Being tired v. intoxicated is an interesting question.

From a criminal point of view, I can tell you that most judges would look at someone who got into a fatal car crash due to working a 36 hours shift for whatever reason wouldn't likely get the full ire of the court.

2 beers...no. Your ass is grass.

Working is something everyone has to do, and maybe you got to tired and shouldn't have been driving home...but we understand...Was your judgement impaired, maybe...but it's something that a situation mandated and wasn't in your complete control.

If your job says "We need the coverage, stay..." that's an external factor influencing your life. Can you say no...maybe. If you are a cop/doctor and they need coverage or factory-worker who's boss said "You go home, stay their and don't come back"...maybe you can't.

Deciding to drink, that's on you.

The danger may be the same, but the leadup isn't and that matters a lot.

peterb
06-26-2011, 09:04 AM
Is there a safe and accurate way to measure the effects of alcohol on ones shooting abilities? I am not talking about getting loaded and shooting real guns, but some alternate way that can be controlled and kept safe to where certain skills can be measured in scientific way? I am willing to bet I am not the only one who has wondered this.

Years ago one of the motorcycle magazines tried to run a controlled test of the effects of alcohol on riding skill. They had a volunteer ride a parking-lot maneuvering course against the clock at steadily increasing levels of intoxication. As I recall, performance improved slightly with the first drink -- attributed to decreased inhibition -- and deteriorated after that.

What was most interesting were the journal kept by the rider and the observers. The rider perceived his intoxication and impairment level to be much lower than it appeared to the sober folks watching.

jthhapkido
11-16-2011, 03:19 PM
Wintemute is an idiot with an agenda.

This supposed "study" is so flawed on so many levels that a good research institution like UC Davis should be embarrassed to have their name associated with it.

Very, very true. I took a look at it, and had my Scientific Logic students (I teach high school science, among other things) go through it--and they were able to find logical flaws that invalidated the entire study within about 15 minutes.

I'm not surprised at all that Wintemute published it.

It is complete crap.

jthhapkido
11-16-2011, 03:20 PM
Huge party tonight. I will bring my SIRT.

IT'S FOR SCIENCE


You know, I have a bunch of friends who would LOVE to try this. I'll get data, you get data, we find many other people to host Drunken SIRT parties, and we'll put it all together and publish it.

It'll be more valid than Wintemute's study, that's for certain.

ford.304
11-16-2011, 04:55 PM
I'm not sure I understand how the line of logic here allows drinking at all, when combined with standard self defense logic. Unless maybe you have a "designated shooter" when you go out.

The idea expressed consistently in self defense teaching is that you don't know when something bad will happen, and when it does, it is better to be on the winning end of it. So how is someone in a better situation having been shot/mugged/raped than having to tell the judge that he had one beer with dinner before the shooting? The natural result of this logic seems to be "never carry" or "never drink." If you come home unarmed and with one beer in you and have a situation come up, are you going to pull your punches/avoid using whatever means are at hand, because the jury will not have sympathy with you for having a beer beforehand? No, you're going to try to save yourself and worry about that later.

Yes, one's ability to judge incapacitation gets worse with incapacitation. However, it is entirely possible to have pre-determined limits at which your motor and decision making skills will in no way be compromised. As in, for most adult men, a single beer with dinner. Therefore, I don't consider it irresponsible to drink at that level and carry, if one does not consider it irresponsible to drink at that level at all. I also don't consider it irresponsible to drink at that level and drive, and the state actually agrees with me on this one.

I do think that there is a tendency among people who are in the self-defense and firearms community, to choose to not drink, and they would choose that whether they were carrying or not, because they don't want even the smallest risk of being incapacitated. You hear a lot of people saying "I'm usually the only one in the group who says they don't drink" or "I never go to bars or clubs." So you don't feel that you're missing out by just cutting out alcohol entirely. I also think that among the less serious gun owners, alcohol and guns are abused together, resulting in a whole lot of stupid. This tends to result in very hard bright lines around the topic. The same bright lines that made it so Ohio only just passed a law allowing concealed carry in bars at all.

Now, all that said, I don't drink and carry, because it's illegal in my state to even breathe alcohol while carrying. But I do think that's an overreaction.

JDM
11-16-2011, 05:23 PM
I'm not sure I understand how the line of logic here allows drinking at all, when combined with standard self defense logic. Unless maybe you have a "designated shooter" when you go out.

The idea expressed consistently in self defense teaching is that you don't know when something bad will happen, and when it does, it is better to be on the winning end of it. So how is someone in a better situation having been shot/mugged/raped than having to tell the judge that he had one beer with dinner before the shooting? The natural result of this logic seems to be "never carry" or "never drink." If you come home unarmed and with one beer in you and have a situation come up, are you going to pull your punches/avoid using whatever means are at hand, because the jury will not have sympathy with you for having a beer beforehand? No, you're going to try to save yourself and worry about that later.

Yes, one's ability to judge incapacitation gets worse with incapacitation. However, it is entirely possible to have pre-determined limits at which your motor and decision making skills will in no way be compromised. As in, for most adult men, a single beer with dinner. Therefore, I don't consider it irresponsible to drink at that level and carry, if one does not consider it irresponsible to drink at that level at all. I also don't consider it irresponsible to drink at that level and drive, and the state actually agrees with me on this one.

I do think that there is a tendency among people who are in the self-defense and firearms community, to choose to not drink, and they would choose that whether they were carrying or not, because they don't want even the smallest risk of being incapacitated. You hear a lot of people saying "I'm usually the only one in the group who says they don't drink" or "I never go to bars or clubs." So you don't feel that you're missing out by just cutting out alcohol entirely. I also think that among the less serious gun owners, alcohol and guns are abused together, resulting in a whole lot of stupid. This tends to result in very hard bright lines around the topic. The same bright lines that made it so Ohio only just passed a law allowing concealed carry in bars at all.

Now, all that said, I don't drink and carry, because it's illegal in my state to even breathe alcohol while carrying. But I do think that's an overreaction.

Good points, and I pretty much agree with the idea that one beer isn't a problem.

However in practice I refuse to drink and posses and this is why: "Police say the shooter was consuming alcohol at the time of the shooting" " Sheriff Houston said Mr. Morris was under the influence of alcohol when he shot and killed a 17 year old that allegedly pulled a knife on him."

Notice "under the influence" and "consuming" are immediately negative. Even If I wasn't drunk, or impaired, I may as well have been. Sure it would probably come out in the wash, but I'm really not interested in stacking the deck against myself in any way. To me those headlines read "indict me grand jury, oh please, please indict me" I'll pass.

ford.304
11-17-2011, 07:38 AM
Oh, I completely agree that the cops, justice system, and media do *not* share my opinion.

The issue is, in this hypothetical, you're going to get attacked with the knife whether you carry or not. So your likely outcomes are either a) getting stabbed or b) getting lucky in unarmed self defense and breaking the guy's arm or stabbing him with his own knife. In case a, you're dead or severely injured. In case b, you're still going before the jury as a guy who was "under the influence" when you beat the shit out of a guy.

It's slightly better than "under the influence when you shot a guy", but it's also much more likely to end in "under the influence when stabbed by a guy." My point is that not carrying isn't necessarily going to relieve the media perception problem, but it *is* more likely to get you stabbed.

fixer
12-03-2011, 11:49 AM
What is everyone's take on home defense if alcohol is in the system of the home defender ?

I see possesing a firearm for personal security in two different modes.

Carrying in public and home defense.

In public, you can often times remove yourself from a situation. You are taught non-violent conflict resolution techniques in the chl class. you avoid escalation and indeed must as it is often illegal to escalate a conflict and use deadly force to your advantage. In short, you have options of getting out of trouble in public.

Not to mention your target acquisition has to be perfect as you are responsible for every bullet fired no matter the intent...and there will be a lawyer and court case behind every round fired. Period.

So your tolerance for error is practically zero if you have to use a firearm to defend yourself in public.

This is why I am in support of a strict no alcohol while carrying policy.

However at home, in a home defense situaiton, things appear different to me.

You have decidedly less options for avoiding conflict--if the conflict comes to your door. You could argue you have only one option and that is to arm yourself.

Unless a person was fall down, black-out, drunk, legal assumptions about fault should be given to the perpetrator, not the home defender.

If you are watching the game, minding your own business, and trouble comes to your doorstep, your options for defense are severely limited whether you are drinking or not.

Does it make your case a slam dunk if you aren't under the influence? sure. Does alcohol complicate things legally (with home defense)? sure.

If someone was going to automatically have a presumption of guilt or fault concerning the outcome of a deadly encounter because of the presence of alcohol in the system, then we shouldn't be drinking at all, ever.


What is everyone's take on this?

ToddG
12-03-2011, 12:13 PM
What is everyone's take on this?

taste of alcohol < being clear headed and never having to worry about this issue

Jac
12-03-2011, 01:28 PM
taste of alcohol < being clear headed and never having to worry about this issue

Maybe the 'ideal' way of handling it, but man that's rough...

JodyH
12-03-2011, 05:57 PM
Never trust a teetotaler or a zealot.

Never...

LittleLebowski
12-03-2011, 06:21 PM
Never trust a teetotaler or a zealot.

Never...

Preach it, brother.

Mitchell, Esq.
12-03-2011, 07:01 PM
What is everyone's take on home defense if alcohol is in the system of the home defender ?

I see possesing a firearm for personal security in two different modes.

Carrying in public and home defense.

In public, you can often times remove yourself from a situation. You are taught non-violent conflict resolution techniques in the chl class. you avoid escalation and indeed must as it is often illegal to escalate a conflict and use deadly force to your advantage. In short, you have options of getting out of trouble in public.

Not to mention your target acquisition has to be perfect as you are responsible for every bullet fired no matter the intent...and there will be a lawyer and court case behind every round fired. Period.

So your tolerance for error is practically zero if you have to use a firearm to defend yourself in public.

This is why I am in support of a strict no alcohol while carrying policy.

However at home, in a home defense situaiton, things appear different to me.

You have decidedly less options for avoiding conflict--if the conflict comes to your door. You could argue you have only one option and that is to arm yourself.

Unless a person was fall down, black-out, drunk, legal assumptions about fault should be given to the perpetrator, not the home defender.

If you are watching the game, minding your own business, and trouble comes to your doorstep, your options for defense are severely limited whether you are drinking or not.

Does it make your case a slam dunk if you aren't under the influence? sure. Does alcohol complicate things legally (with home defense)? sure.

If someone was going to automatically have a presumption of guilt or fault concerning the outcome of a deadly encounter because of the presence of alcohol in the system, then we shouldn't be drinking at all, ever.


What is everyone's take on this?

Alcohol impacts decision making (If it didn't, the human race would have died out.) and your decisions still have to be subjectively & objectively reasonable.

That said, in this case, in your own home, the situation likely came to you, so your "Authority to release Nuclear Weapons" (Thank you Commander Adama...OK...OK...buckshot or 5.56mm) is on a far lower provocation level, and it's more reasonable to have a shorter, much more abrupt situational analysis than self defense in public would tolerate.

Yes, the consumption of alcohol will come into the after action review, but when a situation comes to you at home, it takes you as you are.

Reasonable is situational.

It's reasonable for someone to have a drink or three at home.

It's reasonable for someone to react when an intruder attempts to break in with buckshot, JHP & boiling tar (Tar. It's cool to be old school...) even after consuming bourbony goodness.

Wheeler
12-03-2011, 10:14 PM
I've been told for years that driving while sleep deprived in Georgia carries the same penalties as driving while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, even perscription drugs. Perhaps JLWeems can clarify that point.

I regularly run off of 4-5 hours of sleep in a 24hour period. I also work around and with electricity. Given the type of work I do it's not uncommon to work 24hours straight at times. On several occasions I have made the decision to not attempt to work on something due to mental and physical fatigue.

One bit of anecdotal evidence I have regarding sleep deprivation and performance with a firearm; I beat one of the competitiors that came to the Cherokee Wheelgun Championship that also shot in the Georgia State Championship. I beat him by a fairly narrow margin at the Wheelgun match. He beat me bya huge margin at the state match. I had just come off working nights, transitioned back to days but had to get up at 0500 to drive to the match. I started off fairly well but lost my steam about halfway through the match. No major mistakes but an obvious degredation in performance.

FWIW, I quit drinking when I got my carry permit. When I say quit, I might have a glass of wine per year, and perhaps a beer with a neighbor, less than 6-pack per year. I don't look down on folks who drink and handle firearms. I don't hang out with them either.

Ed L
12-04-2011, 11:33 PM
I've been told for years that driving while sleep deprived in Georgia carries the same penalties as driving while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, even perscription drugs. Perhaps JLWeems can clarify that point.


I'm not sure how they would prove that you were driving while sleep deprived unless you tell them that you fell asleep behind the wheel. If you were not to admit it, I don't see how they would prove it.

JodyH
12-05-2011, 08:04 AM
I'm not sure how they would prove that you were driving while sleep deprived unless you tell them that you fell asleep behind the wheel. If you were not to admit it, I don't see how they would prove it.
If you caused a fatal accident they could subpoena your work schedule, timesheet, billed hours, Onstar records, cell records.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

ford.304
12-05-2011, 10:04 AM
If you caused a fatal accident they could subpoena your work schedule, timesheet, billed hours, Onstar records, cell records.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

It's amazing how much breathalyzers make criminalizing drinking easier. Without them, cops probably wouldn't bother arresting anyone for DUI unless they were visibly weaving or caused a serious crash. I think having a hard number has changed public perception a bit as well. Wonder what'll happen if they ever invent a "sleepalyzer."

Mitchell, Esq.
12-05-2011, 10:25 AM
If you caused a fatal accident they could subpoena your work schedule, timesheet, billed hours, Onstar records, cell records.


Their is a lot more sympathy criminally & civilly for someone who is working themselves to the point of sleep deprivation impacting the ability to drive, than for someone who's deliberately intoxicating themselves then getting behind the wheel.

Both may have the same effect, but are not going to be treated similar, even if both have killed people in traffic accidents.

One is a person who took on too much responsibility, and got in over his head.
The other is a person who is simply not responsible...

ToddG
12-05-2011, 02:18 PM
You can also pass the threshold of sleep deprived (whatever that may be) while driving.

Folks don't become drunk while driving (legally).

Laughingdog
12-30-2011, 04:07 AM
In Virginia, the consumption of alcohol while carrying is illegal. I could have gotten one wine tasting and been in some serious trouble.

I carry in Florida about 20-30 days out of the year. Florida is similar to Texas in that regards, you can't be intoxicated while carrying and there is no written law about consuming alcohol while carrying. I imagine if you're in 90% of Florida and a WASP with a southern accent you could be completely blitzed and the local deputies wouldn't care too much as long as you weren't disturbing anyone. At least that's been my experience......they certainly don't think any problem of the ol'boys shooting at our bubbles as we're just a few feet below the waterline....or driving 25mph, swerving, on any of the state/county roads and chucking empty PBR cans out the window......

In VA, it's only illegal to consume alcohol while carrying concealed, and it is also illegal to be legally intoxicated while carrying concealed. It's perfectly legal to drink if you are open carrying, and it's also legal to be drunk while open carrying. Stupid, but legal. Amusingly enough, if my girlfriend wanted me to try a taste of whatever beer she ordered, all I have to do to be in compliance with the law is unconceal my gun, take a sip, and then conceal it again.

The thing in Florida that is even more ridiculous is that you can drink while carrying, and I haven't found anything in Florida law that prohibits being intoxicated while carrying. However, you cannot sit in the bar area of a restaurant. So if you sit at the bar stool, even just to wait for carry-out, you can go to jail. But it's perfectly legal to sit a few feet away at a table and get sloshed. Again...stupid, but legal.

TGS
12-30-2011, 04:25 PM
In VA, it's only illegal to consume alcohol while carrying concealed, and it is also illegal to be legally intoxicated while carrying concealed. It's perfectly legal to drink if you are open carrying, and it's also legal to be drunk while open carrying. Stupid, but legal. Amusingly enough, if my girlfriend wanted me to try a taste of whatever beer she ordered, all I have to do to be in compliance with the law is unconceal my gun, take a sip, and then conceal it again.

The thing in Florida that is even more ridiculous is that you can drink while carrying, and I haven't found anything in Florida law that prohibits being intoxicated while carrying. However, you cannot sit in the bar area of a restaurant. So if you sit at the bar stool, even just to wait for carry-out, you can go to jail. But it's perfectly legal to sit a few feet away at a table and get sloshed. Again...stupid, but legal.

About Florida...

"790.157 Presumption of impairment; testing methods.--

(1) It is unlawful and punishable as provided in s. 790.151 for any person who is under the influence of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances, when affected to the extent that his or her normal faculties are impaired, to use a firearm in this state. "

It goes on to state that at .05%-.10% alcohol you're in an official gray area.

As an outsider, I'm not the kind of person that wants to argue with a good ole' boy Florida deputy that carrying isn't using a gun. That's pretty open ended, and after spending as much time in North Florida as I do, I haven't any faith in fair and impartial judgement by the deputies with my yankee carpet-bagger self.