NYT,pg1: Boredom in the West Fuels Binge Drinking

[DeepModem Mom]

Boredom in the West Fuels Binge Drinking
By TIMOTHY EGAN
Published: September 2, 2006

CODY, Wyo. — Barely five people per square mile live on the high, wind-raked ground of Wyoming; the entire state is a small town with long streets, as they say. The open space means room to roam and a sense of frontier freedom.

It also means that on any given night, an unusually high percentage of young people here are drinking alcohol until they vomit, pass out or do something that lands them in jail or nearly gets them killed.

“Had a kid, drunk, flipped his car going 80 miles an hour, and that killed him; and another kid, drunk, smashed his boat up against the rock just a couple months ago, killing two; and then there was this beating after a kegger — they clubbed this kid to death,” said Scott Steward, the sheriff here in Park County, recounting casualties that followed long nights of hard drinking by high school students.

A federal government survey recently confirmed what residents of Wyoming, Montana and the Dakotas already knew: people there drink to excess, at very early ages, well above the national average.

The survey, conducted over three years by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, said south-central Wyoming led the nation with the highest rate of alcohol abuse by people age 12 and older. In Albany and Carbon counties, more than 30 percent of people under age 20 binge drink — 50 percent above the national average....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/02/us/02binge.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=login

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Draft them and they'll soon get over being bored.

[filer]

2. Gimmie a dozen shots of that red eye, barkeep.

Hey, it could be worse. They could be smoking marijuana.

[tanyev]

3. And then they go out and shoot an old man in the face.

Or maybe that's just one particular Wyoming resident.

[NJCher]

4. un-freaking believable!!

Wyoming still allows passengers in a vehicle to drink , as long as the driver is not holding the container. A bill that would have made that illegal was defeated. A minor in possession of alcohol can be fined, but will typically not lose a driver’s license for a first offense.




Cher

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. Why is that unbelievable?

What's wrong with passengers drinking? You allow passengers on trains and airplanes to drink. I would say that an open (or finished) alcohol container in a car is grounds for taking a breath sample from the driver (and if they refuse, you can infer they were drinking), but I can't see a problem with passengers being drunk, or drinking.

[msongs]

7. any problems with passengers being killed or is that ok too? nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Why is a passenger more likely to die from alcohol poisoning

than someone who drinks while stationary?

[kenny blankenship]

10. On a plane the passengers aren't supposed to ever be at the wheel

They aren't licensed to fly and never "spell" the pilot unless they are hijacking the plane and then usually the pilot is still the one whose hands are on the controls. In a car there's no distinction really between driver and passenger. Anyone whose feet can reach the pedals could be the driver. In old cars, from the period in which most legislation regulating the operation of motor vehicles was written, passenger and driver could swap positions without even opening the car's doors. (pickups still have such bench seats). Even without bench seats drunk drivers and their less blotto passengers sometimes still attempt the old switcheroo during the first moments of a police pullover. The laws banning open alcohol containers inside cars are good ones with very reasonable foundations.
Too many people think that when they are in their cars they are somehow on private property. In your driveway that may be true, but on the public roads it is not, and in public everyone should expected to keep to reasonable legal restrictions on their behavior for the sake of public safety.

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. "for the sake of public safety" - exactly

Passengers have no effect on public safety. You might stop the car, swap drivers, and continue - but then again, when there's a group of people drinking in a bar, you might decide not to use the designated driver, but a drunk one instead. Would you therefore make it illegal to drink in the company of anyone with car keys on them? Of course not. If the police have pulled someone over, it will either be because of bad driving - in which case an open container will not be relevant - or because they saw a driver in the process of drinking - in which case they have already seen the driver, and just have to keep watching them.

That it's not private property is irrelevant - I don't agree with laws banning drinking in public. Drinking isn't the problem - it's drunken behaviour, or being in charge of a dangerous object while under the influence, such as a car.

I was under the impression that the USA had limos with bars in them, but you seem to be saying that would be illegal in most states. Is that correct?

[kenny blankenship]

13. OK you don't agree with the laws. That much was clear already.

If a passenger takes the wheel of a chartered limo he's breaking a law, drunk or sober. More importantly the licensed operator of the limousine would be violating the terms of his license and endangering his business/livelihood. Your limo example kind of proves my point. There is a legal distinction made between aircraft pilot and passenger. Everyone gets that without explanation needed, in part because flying a plane isn't something one can do without formal training. There is a distinction there which hardly needs legal definition and enforcement. But even though driving a car is something anyone can do passably with basic coordination, there is a similar legal distinction made between limousine driver and limousine passenger. A limo driver holds a different class of license to drive from the state than a normal motorist--a chauffeur's license--which if he were to allow a passenger to take the wheel, he may lose. A limousine car has a different registration with the state than a personal car as well. Both the operator's license and the commercial vehicle registration obligate the driver/owner of the hired car maintain the distinction between the driver and the passenger(s) at all times as conditions of issuance. The whole point of such restrictions is to legally separate passenger from driver, in order to clarify civil and criminal liability matters presumably, and this assures that driver and passenger can never switch roles, as they can do so easily in an ordinary personal car. Many jurisdictions make physical reference to this distinction by dividing the interior of a hired car into the "driver area" and the "passenger compartment", two zones in which the laws apply differently even though the law already forbids passengers to drive limousines, and though the law already allows limousine operators neither to allow customer to drive, nor their licensed chauffeurs to drink. (There are often physical modifications of limousines that fall exactly on this line of demarcation in the form of a glass barrier separating front seats from the rear passenger areas, and in some jurisdictions there are different legal classifications for hired cars that do or do not have this modification.) In many states, this rigid driver-passenger distinction which is created through laws which define what a limousine is, consequently allows limousine passengers to be freed from the restriction of not having open containers and actively drinking. In some areas of the United States, however, the distinction of role is given a further reinforcing expression in the "geographical" distinction within the limousine interior: open containers in the hands of "guests" or paying customers of chauffeured limousines which are perfectly legal in the passenger area, suddenly become illegal in the the hands of guests who are in the front seat (the driver's area). One supposes that those legislators wanted to remove temptation altogether from the chauffeur's sight, or to lessen the chances of a drunken passenger deciding to grab the steering wheel. In any case, the liberty of paying customers and their guests to drink in hired cars and busses exists because it is hedged about with legal restrictions imposing penalties on the drivers and owners of limousines for allowing the driver-passenger distinction to be violated, as well as misdemeanor penalties imposed on the passenger. Although it is more practically possible for passengers to take the place of the licensed driver of a limousine than for passengers to take the place of a licensed pilot of an airplane, it is not more legally permissible.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. So you agree there is a big difference between driver and passenger

and that's what I think should be reflected in the laws. Drivers drinking is wrong. Passengers drinking is OK.

[ovidsen]

9. I've got no problem with that

As long as the driver isn't drinking. Or chatting on a cellphone. Or reading, using a PDA, eating a Double McCrusty Burger with cheese, brushing teeth, combing hair, etc., etc., etc....

[kenny blankenship]

5. God's country. Good People. Rock ribbed Republicans, you can rely on it.

Just a little drunk and violent, that's all.

[High Plains]

12. As a resident of the Dakotas, I can tell you...

...that after awhile, watching the corn grow gets a little bit boring.

[WinkyDink]

15. Do they know of that new invention, "books"?

Maybe they should read the DU "bilingual" thread.