Should I pursue a flight career with a DUI

[JeffDG]

I am not "rationalizing" anything, I probably eat healthier and am in better shape and have more self discipline than your fat ass! I go to the gym and lift 5 days a week and run 3 miles, 3 days a week...eat chicken, broccoli, sweet potatoes, oatmeal, tuna, etc. religiously on a daily basis with only one cheat day a week where I can eat or drink anything. I am 39, 195 lbs, and 12.5% body fat! My wife and I stopped drinking before our wedding a few years ago for three months, hitting the gym 5-6 days a week for a couple of hours a day! I wouldn't be in that good of shape or have that much discipline if I had a drinking problem! What about you!? How big is your fat belly from eating McDonalds 7 days a week? LOL!

I love cowards who insult other people hiding behind the "Unregistered" line.

 

[Unregistered]

Don't let Ron discourage you, he is a professional CFi and nothing more lol. He is the biggest nancy naysayer on this site. We have a pilot flying with us (united) who has gotten a DUI 8 yrs ago prior to being hired.

To the O.P. good for you for pursuing your passion! I respect that! That is great! People shouldn't be counted out because of one mistake.

I can say as a member of the flying public, I am completely comfortable and fine with United hiring that guy as a pilot! Just so long as he doesn't show up hung over or inebriated in any way shape or form...but that goes for every pilot!

 

[Unregistered]

I love cowards who insult other people hiding behind the "Unregistered" line.

Oh, I guess it would be better to defend my position under some made up screen name like "steingar" or "JeffDG"? LOL!

 

[flyingron]

The weight is already factored into the BAC. It takes more drinks to get a 200 lb guy to .08 than a 120lb girl. Not "feeling buzzed" does not equate to sober. In fact, the insidious problem with regular heavy drinkers is they get alcohol tolerant which means they have to drink more to get the same self effect. The FAA has more severe procedures for people they suspect have developed alcohol tolerance. It's a BIGGER risk not a smaller one.

The prima facie limit makes prosecution easier, but to ascribe that as solely a revenue stream is specious.

 

[Unregistered]

The weight is already factored into the BAC. It takes more drinks to get a 200 lb guy to .08 than a 120lb girl. Not "feeling buzzed" does not equate to sober. In fact, the insidious problem with regular heavy drinkers is they get alcohol tolerant which means they have to drink more to get the same self effect. The FAA has more severe procedures for people they suspect have developed alcohol tolerance. It's a BIGGER risk not a smaller one.

The prima facie limit makes prosecution easier, but to ascribe that as solely a revenue stream is specious.

Well you are correct .08 BAC does not at all imply "sober", but .01 BAC does not equate to "sober" either. Same with driving while on Benadryl or on pain killer medications, etc. In fact, since we are talking about mental impairment while driving, maybe we should all have to pass an IQ test before we get behind the wheel and implement a driving while under the legal IQ limit law!

I'm not saying stopping drunk drivers and other citations are solely as a revenue stream, but to assume the government always has, us, the citizen's, best interest in mind at all times is also specious. In my opinion, the government is self serving and only wants to grow bigger, accumulate more money and more control over its citizens. Why does a Senator get 170k/year, or more,for life after leaving office, but our soldiers who put their lives on the line fighting for our freedom don't get anything close to that!

Also the police have lowered their standards so much that they are employing some drug addicts and psycho's that are trigger happy...but I'm sure the nice officer is always of sound judgement, out to protect and serve and he is in no way corrupt, immoral or have other motives for his actions as a person in uniform.

 

[flyingron]

I'm not saying stopping drunk drivers and other citations are solely as a revenue stream, but to assume the government always has, us, the citizen's, best interest in mind at all times is also specious.

You certainly implied it by your statement. And I never made any assumptions, I was just refuting the rediculous statement made by someone without even the balls to post such drivel under their real name. Why do I feel I KNOW who I'm talking to?

 

[JeffDG]

Oh, I guess it would be better to defend my position under some made up screen name like "steingar" or "JeffDG"? LOL!

Actually, it would be better if you were to "defend [your] position" without resorting to ad hominem attacks at all. But as is, your decision to do it as "Unregistered" is a clear and distinct sign of cowardice.

 

[Unregistered]

Actually, it would be better if you were to "defend [your] position" without resorting to ad hominem attacks at all. But as is, your decision to do it as "Unregistered" is a clear and distinct sign of cowardice.

Okay "JeffDG"....

"Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact."

 

[JeffDG]

Okay "JeffDG"....

"Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact."

Yes, your statement of " have more self discipline than your fat ass!" to steingar certainly outweighed his experience as a professor dealing with pharmacology quite decisively.

I stand by my claim of cowardice.

 

[Unregistered]

You certainly implied it by your statement. And I never made any assumptions, I was just refuting the rediculous statement made by someone without even the balls to post such drivel under their real name. Why do I feel I KNOW who I'm talking to?

I am saying that I think DWI's, red light cams and other citations are cash cows for the local governments, feeding the governments insatiable appetite for more money...which they can then overspend and use for their own personal benefit. Politicians are more interested in how to bring in more money and what to say or do to satisfy enough "groups" to win the next election, than to actually care about your freedoms or safety.

Who cares what my name is...the point is what matters.

 

[mcmanigle]

Same with driving while on Benadryl or on pain killer medications, etc.

Driving while impaired by other drugs (legal or not) is also against the law; we just don't happen to have easy field tests for them. But if you're driving hopped up on pain meds and fail a field sobriety test, the fact that you blew a 0.01 won't save you.

In fact, since we are talking about mental impairment while driving, maybe we should all have to pass an IQ test before we get behind the wheel and implement a driving while under the legal IQ limit law!

We kind of do. It's the written and practical driving exam.

 

[Unregistered]

By the way I was defending myself from the bozo saying that I have an alcohol problem, when all I was trying to point out is don't judge me...you don't know me or my lifestyle. I probably live a healthier lifestyle than 90% of Americans! How many of you got up and ran 3 miles this morning at 6:30am?

 

[Jimmy cooper]

The unregistered guest seems very troubled. I would say the outbursts indicate that a commercial cockpit, or for that matter any cockpit would be a bad career choice for both himself and the passengers, especially the passengers. Scary.

 

[JeffDG]

By the way I was defending myself from the bozo saying that I have an alcohol problem, when all I was trying to point out is don't judge me...you don't know me or my lifestyle. I probably live a healthier lifestyle than 90% of Americans! How many of you got up and ran 3 miles this morning at 6:30am?

If the only way you can defend yourself from such a charge is calling someone else a "fat ass", then you may want to seriously reconsider your proposal for IQ tests for driving.

 

[Unregistered]

If the only way you can defend yourself from such a charge is calling someone else a "fat ass", then you may want to seriously reconsider your proposal for IQ tests for driving.

I have driven for 24 years, never had one accident. I have no doubts about my driving abilities, I have a long clean record to prove that.

Also if the other person wants to pass judgement upon me...I will do the same in kind to him. Not many people I know have the discipline that I have and you can't do what I do with an alcohol problem...not happening.

 

[Unregistered]

The unregistered guest seems very troubled. I would say the outbursts indicate that a commercial cockpit, or for that matter any cockpit would be a bad career choice for both himself and the passengers, especially the passengers. Scary.

I already have a career, telling you pilots what to do and when to do it....

 

[steingar]

This is absolute crap, of course .08 BAC is .08 BAC in any pound person, but the alcohol affects everybody's body and mind differently and it doesn't matter if you drink regularly or not, it has to do with a persons individual physiology... .08 does not affect everybody or impair everybody to the same exact degree with regards to being able to perform a task well. .08 used to be .10 until congress voted to change it, so it is an arbitrary number.

.08 affects absolutely everyone. Some people are more inured to it, though. We have a special scientific name for them though. Alcoholics.

That is true if a person drinks a lot regularly they build a "tolerance" to the effects, however, .08, the legal limit, can be reached very easily by ANYONE with just a couple of drinks and without a person feeling to much of an affect. This can be deceptive and unless a person has a scientific BAC meter at hand, they may think they are under .08 and thus legal to drive.

That's why it is a really bad idea to drink and drive, and why I don't do it period. It is true that someone large and/or with lots of adipose tissue will absorb alcohol more readily than a squirt like me, though.

You "think a LEO will pull them over" HA! I just watched a minivan run a red light yesterday with two motorcycle cops stopped at the light heading the opposite direction...all they did was look and then look at each other and proceeded to do NOTHING! LOL! Yes, a person like I described COULD put the distraction down, but good luck with that! A jackass taking his/her eyes off the road completely for several seconds to check their text messages is way more dangerous, in my opinion, than the driver that had 2-3 drinks but is paying full attention to the road!

I will not disagree, but the fact that the one is perilous doesn't make the other all right. Infantile reasoning at its finest.

I wouldn't ride any motorcycle on the road the way most people drive! People don't see me in my 2,000 lb vehicle!

With the way you describe yourself that sounds like an exceedingly good idea. Leave the bikes to those of us wise enough to stay sober.

I am not "rationalizing" anything, I probably eat healthier and am in better shape and have more self discipline than your fat ass! I go to the gym and lift 5 days a week and run 3 miles, 3 days a week...eat chicken, broccoli, sweet potatoes, oatmeal, tuna, etc. religiously on a daily basis with only one cheat day a week where I can eat or drink anything. I am 39, 195 lbs, and 12.5% body fat! My wife and I stopped drinking before our wedding a few years ago for three months, hitting the gym 5-6 days a week for a couple of hours a day! I wouldn't be in that good of shape or have that much discipline if I had a drinking problem! What about you!? How big is your fat belly from eating McDonalds 7 days a week? LOL!

I am a short fat little old bald guy. I wish I were in better shape but gain ten pounds from just eyeballing a Chiclet. But I do have a sufficiently advanced understanding of physiology and lipid mechanics to know that the vast majority of what you spout concerning the effects of alcohol is utter malarky, and am vigorously arguing to make damn good an certain that no one reads this and actually believes you. Pilots take their careers in their hands when they do this stuff.

 

[Unregistered]

I am not arguing people should go out and get drunk and then drive and kill/injury people, I am pointing out that by the law stating that there is a .08 LIMIT, implies there is a LEGAL level of INTOXICATION! Meaning that a person could, potentially, legally, go out and have a couple of beverages and drive home safe and within the confines of the law. However, I believe the paradigm has changed and it is now a zero tolerance atmosphere we live in.

I also don't appreciate you labeling me as some sort of drunk, degenerate, menace to society. I was pointing out to you, by my workout and eating routine, that I am not like that at all...and in fact not many people have the discipline to workout like I do. People with alcoholism don't get up at 5:30am to go running three miles, then go to the gym and lift weights for 1 1/2 hrs after work each day!

Excuse me for taking offense to your offensive remarks to me! Those who live in glass houses...! Don't pretend to be the perfect specimen of a human being, who makes no mistakes.

Infantile...hum...who is resorting to personal attacks now?

 

[Unregistered]

Don't let Ron discourage you, he is a professional CFi and nothing more lol. He is the biggest nancy naysayer on this site. We have a pilot flying with us (united) who has gotten a DUI 8 yrs ago prior to being hired.

Once again to this, I say great! And I, as part of the flying public, am perfectly fine with him being a pilot like I said as long as he performs his job to the same standard as everyone else! Good for him! Let's not ignore the fact that some cops are a-holes and take things way too far...farther than they need to.

And to the OP, if you are still around, good for you for pursuing your passion! I'm sure you will make an excellent pilot!

 

[steingar]

I am not arguing people should go out and get drunk and then drive and kill/injury people, I am pointing out that by the law stating that there is a .08 LIMIT, implies there is a LEGAL level of INTOXICATION! Meaning that a person could, potentially, legally, go out and have a couple of beverages and drive home safe and within the confines of the law. However, I believe the paradigm has changed and it is now a zero tolerance atmosphere we live in.

Wiser people than you have realized that there has to be a quantitative legal standard, otherwise it's just what the LEO thinks and that leaves way too much power in their hands. Thus through our various legal processes it has been set at 0.08. Your contention that people can experience such a level of intoxication with no cognitive or physiological detriment is devoid of factual basis. If you want to say that two people can drink the same amount and be differently affected I'll agree. The level of alcohol in the blood is a factor of consummation, size, ADH levels and many other things. Though I don't relish the thought of driving around with folks at 0.07 one has to set the level somewhere.

I also don't appreciate you labeling me as some sort of drunk, degenerate, menace to society.

I do feel badly about doing so, but when you tell me that you can experience such levels of intoxication I believe you and don't think you're talking out of your six. Since I think you're being truthful that must mean that you imbibe frequently and dramatically, to the point where you experience inebriation as normality. Either that or you are 1) lying or 2) talking out of your six about something you know absolutely nothing about.

I was pointing out to you, by my workout and eating routine, that I am not like that at all...and in fact not many people have the discipline to workout like I do. People with alcoholism don't get up at 5:30am to go running three miles, then go to the gym and lift weights for 1 1/2 hrs after work each day!

Actually, I've known some alcoholics that have tremendous discipline with everything except alcohol. Known them quite closely, now that I think about it.

Excuse me for taking offense to your offensive remarks to me! Those who live in glass houses...! Don't pretend to be the perfect specimen of a human being, who makes no mistakes.

Infantile...hum...who is resorting to personal attacks now?

I make mistake all the time, just ask Mrs. Steingar. Just make certain you have a few hours (if not a few days) of free time. What I don't do is drink and drive.

 

[Unregistered]

Wiser people than you have realized that there has to be a quantitative legal standard, otherwise it's just what the LEO thinks and that leaves way too much power in their hands. Thus through our various legal processes it has been set at 0.08. Your contention that people can experience such a level of intoxication with no cognitive or physiological detriment is devoid of factual basis. If you want to say that two people can drink the same amount and be differently affected I'll agree. The level of alcohol in the blood is a factor of consummation, size, ADH levels and many other things. Though I don't relish the thought of driving around with folks at 0.07 one has to set the level somewhere.

If you consider Congress to be wise, well enough said then! Wow! I suppose you voted for Obama also!

Congress had the limit set at .10 years ago, then later, they lowered it to .08 This is an arbitrary based off the lowest common denominator and does not reflect how each individual person can perform at that level.

I never said NO COGNITIVE DETRIMENT! I was saying that the detriment is different for everyone who has the same level of BAC.

Everybody has different aptitudes and abilities, some people may not be able to safely operate a motor vehicle at .04 or even .02, or even SOBER as I have repeatedly pointed out, so there should be some discretion and leeway for the LEO. There should be a legal limit, but LEO discretion should come into play also, since he is on the scene and can determine if you are really that bad or not. In my opinion the limit should be raised back up to .10. It isn't a black and white scenario by any means.

I do feel badly about doing so, but when you tell me that you can experience such levels of intoxication I believe you and don't think you're talking out of your six. Since I think you're being truthful that must mean that you imbibe frequently and dramatically, to the point where you experience inebriation as normality. Either that or you are 1) lying or 2) talking out of your six about something you know absolutely nothing about.

If you believe .08 is a high level of intoxication, maybe you are Mormon or something. LOL! Most Americans like to go out and have a few drinks after a hard work week to celebrate their weekend, and that is all it takes to hit that level. Look it up, doesn't take that much and you don't have to be "alcoholic" to not feel that messed up...of course if you are Mormon or something and don't really drink I guess most people must look like degenerate alcoholics to you! Just look at any Total Wine store or local restaurant bar, like TGIF's or Applebee's on a given Friday afternoon! By your estimation, 95% of Americans are alcoholics!

I "imbibe" as you say, once a week, like I said, on my cheat day. Nothing wrong with that.

Actually, I've known some alcoholics that have tremendous discipline with everything except alcohol. Known them quite closely, now that I think about it.

Oh yeah, and do those alcoholics run three miles three days a week and lift weights at the gym for 1 1/2 hrs five days a week like I do? I would be very impressed if they could pull that off!

People I look up to are athletic types, first my Dad, 73 and still runs 4 miles every other day! BTW he was an Air Force trainer pilot for T-38's and T-37's, and oh yeah, he would have two drinks every night after his stressful job as an air traffic controller....nothing wrong with unwinding with a couple of drinks and relaxing!

I have several friends who compete in fitness competitions and natural bodybuilding competitions...these, along with others like Sal from Khan Academy, theoretical physicist Michio Kaku are some of the people who inspire me to work harder and keep learning!

Just to give your judgmental self a little more insight about who you are talking to.

I make mistake all the time, just ask Mrs. Steingar. Just make certain you have a few hours (if not a few days) of free time. What I don't do is drink and drive.

You go ahead and keep not questioning anyone in the position of authority. Keep listening to the propaganda

 

[steingar]

If you consider Congress to be wise, well enough said then! Wow! I suppose you voted for Obama also!

Congress had the limit set at .10 years ago, then later, they lowered it to .08 This is an arbitrary based off the lowest common denominator and does not reflect how each individual person can perform at that level.

I can't believe you're complaining to this level about a 5% reduction. They adopted a more stringent level based on the politics of the time. Deal with it.

I never said NO COGNITIVE DETRIMENT! I was saying that the detriment is different for everyone who has the same level of BAC.

Prove it.

Everybody has different aptitudes and abilities, some people may not be able to safely operate a motor vehicle at .04 or even .02, or even SOBER as I have repeatedly pointed out, so there should be some discretion and leeway for the LEO. There should be a legal limit, but LEO discretion should come into play also, since he is on the scene and can determine if you are really that bad or not. In my opinion the limit should be raised back up to .10. It isn't a black and white scenario by any means.

Is your opinion based on anything other than the methane that comes out of your six?

If you believe .08 is a high level of intoxication, maybe you are Mormon or something. LOL! Most Americans like to go out and have a few drinks after a hard work week to celebrate their weekend, and that is all it takes to hit that level. Look it up, doesn't take that much and you don't have to be "alcoholic" to not feel that messed up...of course if you are Mormon or something and don't really drink I guess most people must look like degenerate alcoholics to you! Just look at any Total Wine store or local restaurant bar, like TGIF's or Applebee's on a given Friday afternoon! By your estimation, 95% of Americans are alcoholics!

I will say again, no one reaches 0.08 without impairment. Only people who drink a lot think they aren't impaired because they're used to it. And they're still impaired, by the way.

I "imbibe" as you say, once a week, like I said, on my cheat day. Nothing wrong with that.

Unless you hit the road just thereafter, in which case there might be something seriously wrong with it. If you don't believe me just pay a visit to your local LEO as you do. Might be fun to watch.

Oh yeah, and do those alcoholics run three miles three days a week and lift weights at the gym for 1 1/2 hrs five days a week like I do? I would be very impressed if they could pull that off!

Gosh aren't you wonderful.

People I look up to are athletic types, first my Dad, 73 and still runs 4 miles every other day! BTW he was an Air Force trainer pilot for T-38's and T-37's, and oh yeah, he would have two drinks every night after his stressful job as an air traffic controller....nothing wrong with unwinding with a couple of drinks and relaxing!

Depends on the drinks and how much else one drinks. Indeed it can be very, very bad for you even if you are the athletic type. Again, different people reach different levels of blood alcohol at different rates. That, and the stuff has calories. I'd not stay even a modicum of svelte if I imbibed that many calories no matter how much exercise I got.

Oh, and the people I look up to create things like the cure for cancer and world peace. Easy to stay fit. Not so easy to change the world for the better.

I have several friends who compete in fitness competitions and natural bodybuilding competitions...these, along with others like Sal from Khan Academy, theoretical physicist Michio Kaku are some of the people who inspire me to work harder and keep learning!

Just to give your judgmental self a little more insight about who you are talking to.

I have friends who've won the Nobel Prize in Medicine or Physiology, just to give you a bit of insight as far as to whom you are speaking.

You go ahead and keep not questioning anyone in the position of authority. Keep listening to the propaganda

I only listen to data, all of which says you are full of it unless you care to prove otherwise. And I doubt very, very strongly you could do so from anything even approaching a reputable source. And I honestly don't care how buff, fit, or wonderful you think you are. Data doesn't care about who you are or who I am, data simply is. And all the data I've seen suggests that you know absolutely nothing about the physiology, toxicology, or pharmacokinetics of alcohol. Again, I'll be happy to be proven wrong. Perhaps I'll learn something, I like that.

 

[Unregistered]

I can't believe you're complaining to this level about a 5% reduction. They adopted a more stringent level based on the politics of the time. Deal with it.



Prove it.


I will say again, no one reaches 0.08 without impairment. Only people who drink a lot think they aren't impaired because they're used to it. And they're still impaired, by the way.

First .08 to .10 is called an INCREASE, and it is not 5%. .02/.08*100 = 25%, that means it is a 25% INCREASE in the limit from .08.

And again, I never said a person with .08 or any level or alcohol in their system wasn't experiencing physiological affects. Don't put words in my mouth to bolster your flawed argument.