41°Mostly Cloudy

Morning Notes

by ARLnow.com — February 27, 2012 at 8:30 am 3,785 174 Comments

DUI Checkpoint on Columbia Pike — As promised, Arlington County Police (and the Sheriff’s Office) conducted a DUI checkpoint on Friday night. The checkpoint was set up near the intersection of Columbia Pike and George Mason Drive. Some 400 vehicles passed through and one DUI arrest was made, according to police.

Arlington’s Bikeshare Strategy — Arlington is currently in the process of creating a six-year strategic plan for the continued growth and utilization of Capital Bikeshare in the county. The plan is expected to be presented to the public in June. An initial draft of the plan includes some data from 2011: the county’s cost per Bikeshare trip ($8.18), average Bikeshare trips per day in Arlington (166 — though Bikeshare didn’t expand into North Arlington until April), and percentage of female Bikeshare members (42 percent). [TBD]

Urban Agriculture in Arlington — County officials plan to establish and appoint members to a new “Arlington Urban Agriculture Task Force” next month. Among other assignments, the task force is expected to focus on a proposal to allow residents to keep egg-laying hens in their backyards. Hen advocates from the Arlington Egg Project recently gave a presentation to the Arlington County Republican Committee and were reportedly well-received by supporters of GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul. [Sun Gazette]

Flickr pool photo by Mark C. White

  • JimPB

    Chickens on the property of a resident should be accompanied by the pest control power of an outdoor cat.

    • Arlington Cat

      The Animal Welfare League of Arlington does not allow outdoor cats.

      • Tabs

        AWLA will deny adoptions to people who say they’ll let the cat outside, but AWLA is private.

        The county’s leash laws apply ONLY to dogs, as it should be.

        • Arlington Cat

          The AWLA has a contract with Arlington County, and gets lots of money from that contract.

          The AWLA also encourages people to approach any cat they see outside, trap it, and take it to the AWLA.

          • Tabs

            “The AWLA also encourages people to approach any cat they see outside, trap it, and take it to the AWLA.”

            Wrong. There are a limited number of animal control officers who do not have time to waste trapping people’s pets. I had a bipolar neighbor, Crazy Linda, off Brookside who would call Animal Control to harass those of us who were renters. I spoke to the ACO and he said “oh, God, her…never mind. She hauls me out to check on ‘sick looking’ pets who look A-OK to me. Sorry you have to deal with her.”

          • arlgal

            we must have been neighbors! i know of whom you speak :) anyway, that’s really interesting about rodents eating bird eggs. nature is smart. humans throw the balance off. sigh.
            AWLA has always been great on strays and wildlife issues. never heard them encourage anyone to trap a cat.

          • Crazy Linda

            You look sick, Tabs!!!!

          • Tabs

            *whimper*

    • MC 703

      Outdoor cats (invasive species) kill millions of native birds and small animals every year. Outdoor cats are responsible for declines in native species on every continent on which they have been introduced, feral or indoor/outdoor pet.

      • Tabs

        Research, rather than frothing-at-the-mouth hatred, reveals that where cats are NOT outside free to kill rodents, sea bird populations plummet, because the rats multiply and eat bird eggs.

        Habitat destruction by human beings is what’s to blame for declining animal populations and extinctions. Dogs are far more destructive, but will well behind human impact.

        When the plague first hit, cats were blamed, and most killed. Death rates skyrocketed. Someone figured out that it was rats that were spreading the disease, and the few cats left were allowed to multiply. that ended the plague.

        • MC 703

          Whoa where’s the froth? I’m not anti-cat whatsoever. I am anti-outdoor cat. I have 2 cats and zero dogs. Cats belong indoors where they are safe from cars, foxes and coyotes. The life span of an indoor cat is longer. So I do not sound anti-cat at all.

          Here is some research. I don’t know where you got your info. You’re much frothier.

          http://www.humanesociety.org/animals/cats/tips/bringing_outside_cat_indoors.html

          http://web4.audubon.org/bird/cat/

          http://web4.audubon.org/bird/at_home/safecats.html

          • bringmetheyuppies

            Cats belong inside like trees belong inside. It can be done, but it ain’t natural.

          • Tabs

            Well said.

            Life inside for a cat is like prison–plus diabetes.

        • awh hells bells

          Hahaha, thanks for the laugh! In my studies of epidimeology I never realized that it was in fact cats that ended the plague. Rats were one of many carriers of the carrier of the bubonic plague (the flea) which had the Yersina Pestis bacterium in it’s gut. Kittehyz dhydnt zhtop da playghue.

          • Too Easy

            Cat are great for Witches which poop on lawns and have fleas.

      • thatguy

        I’m confused, didn’t cats live outside before humans domesticated them? What about the eco-system back then? Are outdoor cats the reason why dinosaurs are extinct?

  • novasteve

    As I figured about the DWI checkpoint, 399 people were treated like criminals for no reason, only 1 was arrested.

    Any other cases where you’d like to treat a whole bunch of innocents like they are criminals?

    • Max

      399 people were *checked for being drunk for the purpose of increasing safety along an important corridor* and 1 idiot was arrested and should be placed in prison for the rest of his life.

      • SomeGuy

        Life imprisonment for blowing a 0.08?! Wow. How many lashes for jaywalking in your version of utopia?

        • Max

          When it comes down to it, driving drunk isn’t much different than a random shooting spree in a semi-crowded mall. You could miss everyone, hurt a few people, or kill a lot of people. I was being slightly hyperbolic when I meant life imprisonment, but it’s still a foolish action that puts plenty of peoples’ lives in danger.

          • SomeGuy

            Hyperbolic (or just plain non-sensical) in your analogies as well, I see. I’ll assume that your comment below, “Hopefully that 1 person will never drive again,” was also an attempt at hyperbole.

          • Max

            It’s not. Driving drunk is a conscious decision to do something that can kill people. If you’re not prepared to drive responsibly, then you shouldn’t drive.

          • SomeGuy

            Max, plenty of otherwise benign conscious decisions could kill people too. I won’t try to convince you that driving with a 0.08 BAC is benign, but if you believe that driving after 3 beers (sorry, Good Grief, consumption of one beer will put almost no average adult over the limit no matter how hard you cling to those “facts”) is nearly identical to shooting up a shopping mall, then I’m afraid my brand of logic won’t help you understand why a lifelong driving ban goes a little too far.

            But by all means, continue to preach M.A.D.D. pamphlets as your gospel.

          • SouthArlJD

            I’ve represented hundreds of drunk drivers and can’t say more than a handful ever set out to become drunk drivers. The vast majority had no idea when they became “legal” (i.e., hit .08 BAC). They are usually decent people who went out with friends or attended a wedding or engaged in some other social event during which they imbibed too much and many times were utterly oblivious to the fact that they had done so. BTW, most of my drunk driving clients have been pulled over not because their driving behavior was bad, but because they were missing a tail-light or had expired tags, or some other non-drinking related offense. In the case of the checkpoint, the fact is this person got caught up in a net cast for so many hardly reassures me. This is a typical result of the checkpoint method, a diversion of resources to one spot while all around the County there were other more pressing issues to attend. It’s a ridiculously expensive, intrusive, and unproductive way to go about enforcing the laws against drunk driving.

          • Good Grief

            x 100. SomeGuy one of these days were gonna agree on something!

          • drax

            Because Max has NEVER done something he regretted after drinking too much.

          • Max

            @SouthArlJD – how did that notion hold up in court? I’m sure they are good people and fine drivers most of the time. But since when is driving an excuse to bend the rules?

            @drax – of course I have, but I don’t drive or do things that put others in danger.

            I’m a pretty open person. I’m a fan of drinking and a fan of being fun. No problem with alcohol or drugs, really. I’m not a narc. That being said, I’ve had enough happen to me and friends that has made me believe that if you’re going to drive, don’t do anything stupid like drink, be high, talk/text on the phone, or act aggressively. If you’re incapable of doing that then get used to taking the bus.

          • SomeGuy

            Exactly, drax. But of course, if Max HAD ever done something he regretted that also had the potential to hurt someone else, I’m sure he’d agree that it’s almost the same as if he’d gone on a “random shooting spree in a semi-crowded mall.”

            Hardly a difference there.

          • Joe

            Actually, drinking alcohol impairs your decision making ability, and most people who drive drunk don’t think they are impaired, due to the alcohol in their system. So to call it a “conscious decision to do something that can kill someone” is a little bit excessive.

            And every car accident is the cause of someone consciously deciding to do something that can kill someone, since “innocent” car accidents kill people too. I don’t drive drunk, but I’m willing to bet that I can drive better with a .08 than some people when stone sober.

            Why is it that stupid driving by sober people is less of a crime than impaired driving by drunk people? The effects are the same. The intent is the same. What’s the difference? How is an accident caused by a drunk driver any different than an accident caused by a tired driver, or someone driving while texting, or driving while doing makeup, or just being a really bad driver? Because you can certainly choose to not drive tired, choose not to text while driving, choose to not do make, and choose not to drive at all because you realize you are unsafe.

          • Cluelessasianwomandrivertalkingonacellphone

            Rucky for me I don’t need to read, write or speak a word of Engrish to get license here. And novasteve, I drive an automatic.

        • heavy drinker

          I like to tell the police my blood is “99.02 percent alcohol-free” just to put a better light on it. Hasn’t worked yet.

      • Too Easy

        Funny that’s the same punishment for over due library books.

    • R. Griffon

      Anytime you fly (not that I LIKE it; just pointing out that you receive equal treatment there).

    • Charlie

      So Columbia Pike has NOT arrived if it can’t even muster up a few drunks…

  • Chris

    Wow, one arrest in 400 cars. Totally worth the overtime.

    • novasteve

      Yeah, Great results to treat 399 other people like criminals.

    • truth be told

      They certainly could have picked a location better suited to catching those at the bars. But that would hurt business, and we can’t have that can we?

      • SmartArse

        Why do they announce these in advance? Defeats the purpose, seems to me.

        • drax

          Deterrence? That’s why they don’t announce the location in advance.

          • SmartArse

            You misread; I mean why DO they announce it at all? So that Joe Drunk can decide this will be the one Friday night he takes a cab on the Metro? Why not just pick a spot near the bars at 2AM and do it then?

          • Crab

            They advertise it because it is enforcement theater. i.e. “PR”.

          • drax

            Yes, so this one Friday night he can do that. And maybe think about it next time.

            Yes, I agree that they should hit the bars, so to speak. That would probably be more effective.

        • ArLater

          Because they arent doing this with the goal of arresting people. They do this to act as a deterrant to people who might consider drinking and driving. If someone knows about this checkpoint being set up they may be less inclined to get on the road to begin with. Thus keeping the drunks off the road and possibly saving lives.

        • T.G.E.0.A….

          It is illegal to hold a checkpoint without advertising the date ahead of time.

    • JimPB

      I hope that NO overtime was involved.

      A way to increase the hits DUI drivers: track those leaving bars late in the evening as they drive off. Stop and check for DUI those movement is unsteady.

      • CW

        How about “having police out policing; pull over anyone who exhibits erratic behavior”? Aka, be a police department.

      • JamesE

        Just set a checkpoint at the exits of Clarendon and Ballston parking garages at 2 am.

        • Grandstander

          They don’t want to catch those people, too important to the tax base. Much better to set up shop on the Pike.

      • Rick

        Someone hasn’t heard the designated decoy story. Although with the haughtiness of the region I doubt anyone from DC could pull it off without arguing about who got to be who.

      • T.G.E.0.A….

        Tracking bars is entrapment. INAL, but that’s what lawyers have told me (in bars of course)

        • Autoexec.bat

          Not unless the police somehow coerced people into driving who would have otherwise NOT driven after drinking.

    • JamesE

      Any statistics on other tickets issued? (property tax anyone??)

    • drax

      In the grand scheme of things, checkpoints may deter some people from driving DUI in the first place.

    • http://www.arlnow.com ARLnow.com

      It’s our understanding that these checkpoints are paid for with grant funds, not with local tax dollars. For what that’s worth.

  • Quoth the Raven

    For all we know, though, the announcement of the checkpoint successfully deterred some potential DUI drivers and got them to plan for a taxi. So one arrested might have been 20 others saved from arrest. There is no way of measuring this, obviously, but you can’t determine the worth of a checkpoint based solely on numbers of arrests.

    • CW

      So if the implicit, known penalty for getting caught, absent the explicit knowledge that the police will be out enforcing on a given night, isn’t sufficient deterrence, then doesn’t it indicate that 1) that penalty isn’t harsh enough, or 2) more enforcement, aside from just occasional spot checks, needs to be done?

      • drax

        Maybe on 1, yes on 2.

      • Joe

        Nobody thinks they are gonna get a DUI until they get one. Because of this, there isn’t a penalty steep enough to stop all drunk drivers.

        If you want to eradicate DUI/DWI install breathalzers in every car. Problem solved. People don’t get treated like criminals. Every driver’s sobriety is verified before driving.

        Of course, then when there are still accidents, caused by people driving under the legal limit, they will decrease the legal limit.

        • Zoning Victim

          Which is how it got down to .08 in the first place.

    • Charlie

      Or people bailed on side streets.

      It is silly, IMHO, that the announcements deter anyone. A drunk is a drunk.

      • drax

        I disagree. Lots of people can think twice when they’re drunk, or their friends can be more assertive about not letting them drive. “Call a cab, dude, they’re doing checkpoints tonight.”

        • Southeast Jerome

          And the hope is that they realize that the cab was the correct decision and they’ll begin to do that going forward.

          Too many people drive when they shouldn’t around here. With such a densely populated area, theres no need to do it.

          There is no cab fare too high when viewed against drunk driving. I’ve paid $80 to get home in a cab. Yes it sucks, but a DUI not only can kill people but fines/jailtime/lawyer costs/potentially losing your job is not even close to worth it.

    • rob

      20 saved?! how many dui deaths are there in Arlington on a typical Friday night? Even if it is sustantial, wouldn’t a 20 death reduction in a single night be noticeable? My guess is that your estimate is way off, and this checkpoint had little effect on lives saved.

      • drax

        He didn’t say deaths, just DUIs. You never know when a DUI will result in a death.

  • JimPB

    Bars could make available breath analyzers (small personal ones can be bought for $90) so that patrons could monitor and self-manage their drinking so that their alcohol level stayed below the DUI threshold. (Note: impairment in functioning can be evident at lower levels.)

    • Tabs

      Yup.

      • Southeast Jerome

        Imagine the sweet diseases you could score by using community breathalyzers in a bar! great idea!

        • rob

          presumably there would be disposable mouth pieces like what I presume the police use

    • Rick

      First Down has one of these mounted on the wall but they have to put a disclaimer on it saying it isn’t perfect and should not be used as a judgement of car-worthiness

    • zzzSleeper

      I have seen a bar that had a breath analyzer. The drunks at the bar would have contests to see you could get the highest BAL. Brilliant, eh?

  • Garden City

    400 cars checked, one arrest made, and the officers manning the checkpoint were unavailable for patrolling anywhere in Arlington. Really efficient use of resources. Seems like they could have nearly the same result by just announcing they’re going to have a checkpoint, and then letting the officers patrol normally. One of them is bound to find one DUI to issue, so you’ve already replicated the results, and you have your officers on the street instead of clustered at one intersection. And the announcement of a checkpoint somewhere in the county will make some who have had too much decide not to drive.

    • Crab

      Perhaps the police public affairs office could provide the number of DUI arrests made that night elsewhere in the county via regular patrol procedures.

    • CW

      Like.

    • TooEasy

      Because the police actual stop crimes in progress… funny.

  • Max

    Hopefully that 1 person will never drive again.

  • TooEasy

    Be sober, answer yes if they ask a stupid question like “have you had anything to drink?” Only take a breathalyzer . They will eventually run out of those devices.

    • Ren

      Sir, have you consumed any alcoholic beverages this morning?

      • Southeast Jerome

        you cant get a DUI during the day right?

        • Too Easy

          Cameras work too well in the daylight , you wouldn’t want anyone filming the police would you. That would make the work to dangerous and would require the county’s armored vehicle to be present.

      • Too Easy

        Oh my mistake I thought you said colonic , like a activia.

  • Dum Dum Guy at the Gates of Dawn

    Are you people emotionally unable to be satisfied by anything the County does?

    • Josh S

      It seems that way.

    • Michael H.

      A little outrage is good for the soul. Or at least that’s how the thinking goes. As for me, outrage only tends to raise my heart rate, and not in a good way. (Exercise is a much better method.)

      Too much stress for too long a period or too consistently also results in elevated cortisol levels. While this can be useful in short-term bursts (emergency situations or occasional athletic events), ongoing high cortisol levels leads to a weakened immune system, increased abdominal fat and eventually a higher risk of heart disease.

      Some things are worth being stressed about. But every little thing, every day? Not so much.

      • SomeGuy

        I think that’s the right attitude, Michael H. Well said.

      • drax

        This does not bode well for novasteve, especially when you throw in smoking.

        • Bluemontsince1961

          Or loud music, dry cleaning fluid, automatic transmissions, dedicated GBLT housing at a university – Or when he’s upset about the “woman of the year award” – see other thread.

        • Tabs

          And four indoor cats. Imagine the stench in there.

  • ACPD PIO

    In addition to the one arrest made during the checkpoint, there were thirteen other DUI arrests made this weekend on Friday and Saturday.

    • CW

      So there we have it folks, traditional policing was, in this instance, 13 times more successful than checkpoints. Fascinating.

    • Garden City

      This pretty much matches studies on the subject. A 2007 study from PA found that police arrested less than 1 percent of the more than 180,000 drivers that were stopped by police at DUI checkpoints. A California study from 2008 found that of the more than 1 million drivers stopped by CA police at sobriety checkpoints, less than one third of one percent were arrested for DUI. From these results, one has to conclude that they’re PR shows.

  • R. Griffon

    If they are going to do these checkpoints, I think they need to find a better location as well as NOT broadcast it to the public. What’s the point of that?

    But I think they’re a horrible idea. Aside from the obvious constitutional implications, they appear to be grossly inefficient. Instead, why not post plain-clothed cops outside of bars to watch for impaired people on the way to their cars? Radio a patrol car a block away, and BAM! Reasonable suspicion and a much more efficient use of resources.

    Also increase unmarked patrols on 66 and major roads to and from major nightlife destinations. This isn’t rocket science.

  • http://www.bluevirginia.us Blue Virginia

    And, of course, we’ve now got a toe-tapping new song, “Virginia Doesn’t Own My Vagina”

    http://bluevirginia.us/diary/6093/toetapping-new-song-virginia-doesnt-own-my-vagina

    • dk

      Awesome.

    • Too Easy

      They still could compel you to show id for the privilege of operating one.

  • Bluemontsince1961

    “DUI Checkpoint on Columbia Pike”

    Oh no, its a “liberal conspiracy” to take away our freedoms! Where will it end? Those “liberals” are out to get us! AUUUUUUGGGGGHHHHH!

    /s off

    DUI checkpoints happen all the time. The 399 that passed through were not treated any differently than the 9999 flyers out of 10000 that have to pass security checkpoints before boarding a plane. Yes, it is inconvenient. But one DUI driver caught is worth it so the one DUI driver would not end up killing/injuring his/her self or others. I got stopped years ago at a checkpoint when the police were tracking down a criminal and were asking if people had seen the perp. No, I wasn’t thrilled to have to be stopped for a minute, but I’m glad they were out trying to find a criminal. I did not feel like I was treated like a criminal. I would bet that most of the 399 innocents did not feel like they were treated as criminals but understood that the police were trying to do their job at catching drunk drivers and getting them off the road before they hurt themselves or others. But I suppose some people feel that is “wrong”. Would such individuals prefer to allow drunk drivers on the road and the police do nothing about it? If they or their loved ones got hurt by a drunk driver, they’d be the first to howl about it.

    • Too Easy

      So they should set up check points on a daily basis, that would be good in your ” show me your papers!!” mindset. Take the trolly from Bluemont and nothing but the crazies are left.

      • Max

        This was one night. Relax.

        • Too Easy

          Spoken like a true rapist.

      • Bluemontsince1961

        Oh honey, puleeeeeeeze!

        • Too Easy

          Is that how you consent to unwarranted searches?

    • Zoning Victim

      This is exactly why people still make slippery slope arguments during debates, because there is always someone who will try to convince you that it’s okay to have your rights violated over here because you already are having them violated over there.

  • bobco85

    I think they’re always going to have DUI checkpoints as they are a visible presence of the police in the community at night (I’m thinking of this in a PR kind of way).

    The problem with driving under the influence of alcohol is in our culture, though. The BAC limit for driving in Virginia may be .08 percent, but how many people drive even when they’re at something like .04 or .05, which is impaired yet legal? Combine that with driving at night when it is already more dangerous and you’d need exponentially more police to cover everyone.

    We as a culture need to get to a point where we can say, “I’m going to have a couple of drinks, and I’ve got a plan in place to get home without driving,” instead of, “I’ve only had a few. I should be good to drive home.”

    • Bluemontsince1961

      “We as a culture need to get to a point where we can say, “I’m going to have a couple of drinks, and I’ve got a plan in place to get home without driving,” instead of, “I’ve only had a few. I should be good to drive home.”

      Exactly right, Bobco.

      • drax

        Yes, and that’s another way Arlington’s emphasis on moving away from car dependence helps us.

    • good grief

      Palease! You people act like having one or two beers and you’re driving directly into a wall or another vehicle. I’ve seen worse driving from people yapping on a cell phone or fooling with a GPS device! Yet what’s the penalty there, a $50 fine and a slap on the wrist yet having two beers, hurting no one and you’re arrested! Man I would love to have every person I see leaving a lane because of distracted driving arrested! But there probably would not be enough police personnel available for the processing.

      • Good Grief

        Woah, chill with the name stealing. ESP of you’re going to say something moronic! Sheesh.. Tipsy driving is drunk driving. Everything else is driving while distracted, also illegal.

        • Zoning Victim

          Yet they’ve decided that the equally dangerous distracted driving is not worthy of jail time and about $8K in expenses. I don’t know anybody who is tipsy after two beers. This sounds funny, but I think you should be able to certify for a certain BAC. Some people can’t drive at .02 and some people aren’t all that affected at .08.

      • Uh, hello

        If two beers puts you over the limit, you’re 12 years old and shouldn’t be driving in the first place.

        • Crab

          What if it’s two Piraats?

        • Good Grief

          Legally one beer does. I understand why ppl are against checkpoints (while I might not agree) but an attitude like that is completely unacceptable and puts everyone on the road a risk. Very not cool.

          • rob

            wait, are you saying 1 beer = BAC of .08, or that there is some lower legal limit that applies?

          • Good Grief

            Yep on average, one beer, one shoot or one glass of wine. Granted everyone has a different tolerance and body type, but assuming your BAC and your driving skills can handle 1 or 2+ alcoholic beverages is putting ppl at risk. Arlington has more than sufficient transportation options for people to leave their cars parked for the night.

          • WHAT?

            That is ridiculous–unless you weigh 90 lbs. and are drinking the beer or wine through a funnel. The typical beer (4-6% ABV) consumed in the typical manner (over a half hour or so) is not going to get most people anywhere close to intoxicated.

            This is why the DC city council passed a law 2-3 years ago to no longer require DCPD to bring to jail anyone pulled over who admits having consumed one drink.

            Next time get your facts straight.

          • WHAT?

            PS: Here’s a blood-alcohol calculator from an actual police department: http://www.ou.edu/oupd/bac.htm

            According to it, a 180-lb man can drink 3 regular beers in an hour and be under the limit.

          • Good Grief

            I do have my facts straight. Disagree with me all you want, doesnt affect me. Sadly I know how that exact attitude will end and have zero compassion when ppl like that are crying ignorance.

          • drax

            Dude, you would have to weigh something like 40 pounds or less to get a BAC of .08 with just one drink.

            No, your facts are completely wrong, and someone even posted a calculator to prove it.

            Are you drunk right now by any chance?

          • drax

            “Disagree with me all you want, doesnt affect me.”

            And yet, you’re wrong, and actual facts prove it. Don’t let reality affect you though.

          • http://Noironjetta25@yahoo.com Good Grief

            Prove it to yourself. Get 5 friends a breathalyzer and test how everyone’s bac is different throughout the night.That calculator assumes al body chemistry is the same. Just do us all a favor and cab it home, thanks.

          • WHAT?

            So by that token, my body chemistry might also mean I’m that weird guy who can put away a sixer in 30 minutes and be stone-cold sober? Like half of Finland?

            The calculator accounts for body weight. Others online also let you put in your sex. They still come up with the same results.

            All this booze talk is making me thirsty! I’m gonna stop on the way home and have a couple of cold ones.

          • Car-Free-Diet

            Typical Arlington now-it-all, even when the facts directly contradict them, they remain certain of their position and how others need to live their lives. Little wonder most Virginians have little use or patience with Arlingtonians.

          • Good Grief

            You thinking I’m from here is comical. I’m just not a jackass that thinks a 250 pound man can drink 3 beers per hour and drive home. Honestly, that BAC caluclator is bull $$$$ and in my job I get to witness that. But no, please go on thinking you can scientifically control killing another person bc you formulated how many drinks of alcohol it takes to avoid a $15 car ride.

          • nom de guerre

            If the beer is 40 ounces with an ABV of 8% and you are a female that weighs 140 pounds or less and drink that one beer in 30 minutes-your BAC could well be .08.

          • JamesE

            What about a 200+ lb frat boy shotgunning 15 natty lights?

          • nom de guerre

            Would that be a Virginia Tech or UVA frat boy?

          • JamesE

            JMU

          • drax

            Some clarifications:

            A 40 ounce beer is three beers.

            ABV of 8% is malt liquor.

            A 140-pound female who drinks 40 ounces of an 8% ABV beverage in 30 minutes is an alcoholic.

          • JamesE

            What kind of malt liquor? Colt 45 or Olde English 800?

          • nom de guerre

            Have you ever heard of a “forty” or a “bumper”? Those are slang terms for forty ounces of malt liquor. If you asked someone who had just consumed a forty how may beers they had, I would bet that they would say just one.

          • drax

            When it comes to calculating how many “drinks” it takes to get someone drunk, 12 ounces of beer is the standard, that’s all I’m saying.

        • dk

          Small women who haven’t been 12 for more 40 years (such as myself) can be very tipsy after 2 beers.

          • drax

            Tipsy doesn’t equal .08 BAC though.

  • Good grief

    Good point. I’m thinking most people are very happy with Arlington, but this blog serves as a bulliten board for the few that aren’t.

  • JoshInBallston

    Is anyone else dismayed that ArlNow disabled comments on the lightpost suicide article? While many (okay, most) of the comments would have been in poor taste, shouldn’t the most egregious ones be removed while letting the rest of us comment as per usual?

    And if this decision was made to protect the “victim”, he lost his right not to be talked about when he decided to make his suicide attempt such a public spectacle.

    ArlNow, usually love ya, but disappointed in this decision.

    • Tabs

      “And if this decision was made to protect the “victim”, he lost his right not to be talked about when he decided to make his suicide attempt such a public spectacle”

      Ding ding! First comment in poor taste!

    • Good grief

      Why do you feel the need to comment on such a tradegy? Show some respect please. Thank you ArlNow for censoring unnecessary and crude feedback.

    • If you have something to say…

      start you own Comment Board, in Ballston, up a lightpost.

    • Not your bro

      ArlNow disabled the comments on that thread because of people like you, Josh.

      • JoshInBallston

        As if the cynical, smart-alec comments on every other post are in SOOO much better taste than those on the suicide attempt would have been.

        The fact is, he could’ve hung himself in the privacy of his own home (or taken pills, etc.) and it would’ve been a footnote in the obituaries. The fact that he chose to go out like Mussolini on a public street makes it fair game for public comment.

        • Not your bro

          Wow, keep digging that hole. Your attempt to defend your poor taste and judgment is just . . . sickening.

        • dk

          This person is obviously very ill. Your compassion for his plight is heartwarming.

          • DarkHeart

            Is there an update on his status? I didn’t see anything in WaPo Metro the last few days.

        • drax

          And now you know why comments were closed.

    • Autoexec.bat

      My guess is that the fact that it happened after 5pm on Friday and the ArlNow staff didn’t want to spend all weekend moderating comments must’ve played into the decision. Can’t say I blame them. They deserve weekends just like the rest of us…

  • Complaincomplaincomplain

    The purpose of the checkpoints are for occasional high visual prsence in the community. There are guidelines as to where to place the checkpoints. They are usually placed in areas with high levels of traffic accidents and other incidents. The checkpoints are generally done a few times during the year.

  • mr t

    hey i bet for 20 gazillon dollars and one trolley later, that one DUI arrest could have been prevented!

    • Josh S

      I’ll see your trolley and raise you an Artisphere!!

  • Wayne Kubicki

    The COUNTY’S cost for each Bikeshare trip is $8.18???

    • Crab

      Momma Mia!

    • OddNumber

      I can’t come up with the $8.18 figure given the costs and revenue in the article. I come up with $6.16 without factoring in the revenue. There must be a cost that isn’t mentioned. Once I factored in revenue, I came up with $2.90 but I guess that doesn’t mean anything if only some of the costs were included.

    • westover leftover

      Subsidized Bike rides:
      NOT a function government!

      • drax

        Since the government subsidizes car rides by building roads (and yes, alot of the money comes from general taxes, not just the gas tax), it sounds like it’s both appropriate and a good investment for drivers, since it gets people off the roads and out of the parking spaces.

  • OddNumber

    Interesting that there is so much support to quickly expand Capital Bikeshare. Seems like more data might be appropriate before going on a spending spree. Using the revenue and costs quoted in the article, Arlington lost $194k on CaBi last year. That is a $174 subsidy to 1,115 people (total users that live in the county), a subsidy of $2.90 per trip. Even if that $2.90 went to getting a car off the road it seems expensive (some percentage of those trips would have been via Metro, bus, or carpool in the absence of CaBi so it is likely more expensive per car trip off the road).

    • Michael H.

      Every transportation system, including the road network, is heavily subsidized. Gas taxes don’t even come close to covering construction and maintenance costs. So the fact that CaBi is subsidized really shouldn’t be a knock on it. If self-sufficiency is the goal for a transportation system, then we shouldn’t spend a dime on any form of transportation at all. But that would be economically disastrous, as well as detrimental to the quality of life (mental, physical and emotional health).

      • OddNumber

        I completely agree that self sufficiency does not need to be the goal. However, there should be some cost target that makes it worthwhile. Right now the strategy appears to be “if you build it, they will come”. However, there isn’t much data available on long term membership trends – what percentage of people renew, etc. Why not let DC continue to lead the way and learn from them?

        I am similarly annoyed by the silver line development. Great project in theory, but the operation costs aren’t well publicized. Last I checked there still wasn’t a fare structure finalized. Without that structure, how can you estimate ridership/revenue and determine the long term subsidies needed from the various jurisdictions.

      • truth be told

        Then subsidize my shoes. I walk.

        Subsidize my skateboard. I coast.

        Subsidize my flying carpet…..

        Mass transportation infrastructure should be subsidized. Recreational transportation infrastructure shouldn’t.

        • Max

          Biking is a form of mass transportation. Plenty of people use it to commute.

          • Meh

            Bikes in the road are dumb. If people want to commute on two wheels, there are things called motorcycles. They can actually keep up with traffic and don’t require their own dedicated lane that no one else gets to use.

          • cyclist

            Enjoying those gas prices?

          • Cromentator

            Motorcycles get better mileage than Smurf/Smart Car. And those riding them generally dress better than bicyclists.

          • BIcyclist

            Nobody gets better gas mileage than a bicyclist.

            As for dressing, haven’t you heard? Cyclists are the best-dressed people in DC these days:

            http://dandiesandquaintrelles.blogspot.com/

        • drax

          Your walking is subsidized – see that sidewalk?

          And why do you assume cycling is just for recreation? It’s not.

          • truth be told

            The sidewalk is there for safety. Yes, people walk. But, the sidewalk was not put in place specifically for a commuting purpose.

            The point is that the vast majority of people utilize the roads and rails to commute. Subsidies should only serve the masses and not feed the pet projects serving only a few.

      • Suburban Not Urban

        Every time some one brings up costs on one of these “Edge” projects – someone chimes in with the road network subsidy comment, but there is never any data/attempt to give a comparable number. I’m all for doing it on the math(real math like $/mile not per trip or person) but no one ever quotes the comparable.

        • truth be told
          • Suburban Not Urban

            Thanks – that’s what I figured

          • OddNumber

            I primarily drive and certainly don’t consider myself a transit advocate, BUT I do think you have to do a fair analysis and the linked article skips too many of the details to be considered fair. The link for the car transportation cost data is either not correct or they haven’t fully disclosed the cost assumptions. What is the assumed cost per mile, are maintenance costs (snow removal, etc) included? Does the cost include negative environmental costs or the positive economic impact? Do we really want to pretend that it is better to increase sprawl and decrease density around cities just because building a road is cheaper than heavy rail?

            Also, although it is important, the analysis of cost misses the concept of value entirely. The reason $/person or $/trip is of interest because it defines what segment of the population enjoys the subsidy.

            I appreciate the link though. Please post if you find a link that includes more of the details, this is interesting stuff!

  • dk

    What, no chicken comments?

    • Popeye

      Just bidin’ my time, my friend.

    • OldTimer

      Too busy working on my ‘Peeps Diorama Contest’ entry. Trying to get a good moustache on the Zimmy Peep and smirks on the opposing groups. I keep eating the proponent peeps.

  • Bimmie Zombi

    Fools! Ride the street car and you would not have to worry about DUI check points. Fools!

    • had a few

      Been standing on corner for two hours now. When be the street car coming. Ain’t seen one yet.

  • Car-Free-Diet

    I laud Arlington’s commitment to a future without cars, I don’t agree with it, but appreciate seeing a jurisdiction trying to create positive change as defined by the jurisdiction.

    What I don’t get are car companies like MINI who promote their care for the environment by supporting a campaign not to drive their cars one day each year. If a company thinks the world would be a better place if people did not drive cars, then don’t build cars in the first place!

  • rory

    In high school I was in a car that went through a DUI checkpoint in Fairfax. My 17 year old friend, who was driving my car, was 4 beers deep. (He told me he was sober, which turned out be a lie when I asked him why he was panicking!)

    There was also two Grateful Dead stickers on the car.

    The cop looked at us,asked us one question, gave us a letter, and let us through.

    Still pretty amazed we got through so easily. I’m pretty sure most cops are taught Grateful Dead stickers= automatically search the car.

    I hope Arlington police are smarter. (And I’m glad I’m no longer an idiot)

    • http://www.exactcom.com.au/proofs/KombiPics/Wrecks/bayBushOvergrown.jpg Overgrown Bush

      They have better technology now. That flashlight they are shining in your face is a sniffer for alcohol and provides them a real-time reading. The best thing you can do is not exhale into the flashlight, and to open your window before you reach the checkpoint. Or, just don’t drink and drive.

×

Subscribe to our mailing list