[dentstudent (OP)]

Madidus_Scientia was talking about Ernest Hemingway and drunkeness, and it reminded me of a conversation that I've had with my mother-in-law. She said that she'd never been drunk, even though she knocks back a few sherrys (sherries??) of an evening, and I disagreed, saying that, well, trust me, it was obvious to me that she'd been "drunk". On asking, she meant that she'd never been drunk enough to have a chunder, whereas my definition was that she would have drunk too much to drive and was therefore, as far as the law was concerned, drunk.

But that is just the law. When are we actually intoxificated? When do we officially become drunkified? Is it as soon as some alcohol enters the blood stream that creates a measureable impairment?

Anyone know?

Mine's a large one!

[blakestyger]

There must be spectrum - something like: 'technically unfit to drive' through to 'totally ratted - passed out'.
The amount needed will vary from person to person; parameters being body weight, tolerance/history, metabolism...

[Bored chemist]

"When do we officially become drunkified?"
Generally on Friday night.
I think that the simple fact is that any alcohol causes impairment of brain function. However a tiny amount will cause a tiny impairment and not be noticable. How much it takes to have a given level of effect will differ between individuals etc.

[DoctorBeaver]

whereas my definition was that she would have drunk too much to drive and was therefore, as far as the law was concerned, drunk.

Can I correct you on 1 point. There is no law against "drunk" driving. Being over the limit to drive in no way infers, in law, that you are drunk.

"Drunk and disorderly" (or Duncan Disorderly as my friend was known) is an offence. However, there is no statutory limit for the "drunk" part of the offence; it is up to the judgment of the police officer concerned.

Beaver faclets:-
It is an offence to be drunk in charge of a horse in a public place, and also illegal to drive (?) a boat on an inland waterway while drunk. I think the offence also applies to the 3 mile sea limit but I'm not sure.

Urinating into a canal in Scotland constitutes an offence of "Polluting the Queen's waterways". This offence is most often committed when the offender is drunk.  []

[blakestyger]

Can I correct you on 1 point. There is no law against "drunk" driving.

Could you explain a bit further what is meant by this DrBeaver?

[Madidus_Scientia]

lol @ Duncan Disorderly, I like it, that's my name too

[DoctorBeaver]

Can I correct you on 1 point. There is no law against "drunk" driving.

Could you explain a bit further what is meant by this DrBeaver?

Certainly. The offence is "Driving with an excess of alcohol blah blah rhubarb". Nowhere does the law mention "drunk" in driving offences. "Drunk driving" is simply a misnomer used by the public.

[Bikerman]

Can I correct you on 1 point. There is no law against "drunk" driving.

Could you explain a bit further what is meant by this DrBeaver?

Certainly. The offence is "Driving with an excess of alcohol blah blah rhubarb". Nowhere does the law mention "drunk" in driving offences. "Drunk driving" is simply a misnomer used by the public.

Confession - I have been 'done' for driving under the influence. The circumstances were that I got made redundant, rode home, had a complete skin-full (several bottles of wine) until the early hours, got up the next day about lunchtime and went for a ride. Now I was most certainly NOT drunk - you don't ride a powerful bike drunk if you want to live. I was, however, over the legal limit still and paid for it with a 12 month ban and hefty fine....

PS - I have no problem with it - I was done fair and square and I'm not one of these people who say 'I can handle my drink and it was no problem' - I know several people who take that attitude and I think they are foolish.
I'm merely pointing out that you don't have to be 'drunk' to be over the limit. A very painful lesson, but a lesson well learned.

[dentstudent (OP)]

Bikerman - I would tend to disagree with your "I wasn't drunk" premise based on the following definition of drunk.
"Drunkenness is the state of being intoxicated by consumption of alcohol to a degree that mental and physical faculties are noticeably impaired"
There must have been residual alcohol in your system enough to show in a breath test followed by a urine or blood sample. If we are stating that any amount of alcohol impairs ones facets, then this means that although I'm sure you weren't all "staggery", there would have been some diminishment to your motor and / or cerebral functions.

[Madidus_Scientia]

Yeah, when you wake up and you're still drunk its weird, while you are still lying down you think you're sober, but when you go to get up and move you're like "whoaa" and you only then realise you're still drunk. From my experience anyway. Does this happen to anyone else?

[dentstudent (OP)]

hasn't happened for, ooh, days

[blakestyger]

Can I correct you on 1 point. There is no law against "drunk" driving.

Could you explain a bit further what is meant by this DrBeaver?

Certainly. The offence is "Driving with an excess of alcohol blah blah rhubarb". Nowhere does the law mention "drunk" in driving offences. "Drunk driving" is simply a misnomer used by the public.

Thanks - all is clear.