Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $390 of $700 target

Bud arrested for Dui


macdaddy

Recommended Posts

I've had a few friends who have had a DUI and refused to be breathalyzed and did not have to take any other test once being in jail.

From what I've read, although the law applies to all of GA and about 20 something other states that have passed it, only certain police districts have decided to apply for the warrants and apply it. The article I read was by a group that is always watching out for the increasing "police state" nationwide and thought it was a disturbing trend. There are lots of Youtube videos showing upset drunks having their blood drawn against their will.

Although I oppose most of the police state trends I see, I do think law enforcement should have the right to determine if legal or illegal substances have impaired one's ability to drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was one glass of wine, he would not have to worry about taking the test. His attorney's press release already sounds like damage control. Rushing to take a blood alcohol test hours later sounds like a ploy by his attorney to create evidence. If it didn't show up good, they would have never had to mention it.

Edited by Randy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I do not see how it is likely that Bud was over the legal limit. A test of less than 0.01% is essentially an indication of him not having alcohol in his system. If I went to get my blood tested right now, my BAC would show up as <0.01%. There is no 0.00% option in testing procedures as far as I know.

As far as I can tell, there is no evidence that Bud did have a BAC over 0.08%. Now if Bud showed up to the hospital and had a BAC of 0.01% then that would be a different story. Still, this could all have been reconciled if the police allowed Buds request. Is there some legal or procedural reason for the police to deny a request that they previously requested?

(1) OK - I misread the earlier post. You are right that <.01% doesn't indicate anything. If it was numerous hours as the timeline suggests, it seems like there isn't much scientific proof either way. If you are talking 4 hours from his last drink, as much as .10 might have dissipated from his system over that time. It isn't clear.

(2) Now why did they refuse to allow him to test? Probably because they viewed him as already guilty and there was nothing more to do. Since he refused to consent, he was already nailed for that crime (violating the implied consent). I don't think they would have done him any favors if he had taken the BAC test. If he was clean, they still charge him for refusing consent. If he blows a positive, now they charge him for DUI and for refusing the testing. The only way he walks away clean is if he consents to the testing and then either blows below the legal limit or gets the test results tossed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nearly everything we do puts us at risk. If you want to go to the root of the problem: CARS and how they're used. Cars have killed more people during the last half century than all the combined wars during that same period. Motor vehicles still kill over 10 million people a year, plus the pollution and cutural and social reorganization that basically has imposed the car as the only viable means of transport. One of the effects of alcohol is to impair judgement i.e. the decision of whether or not to drive. Drinking and driving laws are part of the war on drugs (people) where puritan intolerance is imposed on people as law. I agree, don't drink and drive. I chose to stop driving, like to drink too much. What about all the hypocritical smoking laws, including second hand smoke. What about second hand arsenic, co2, mercury etc associated with auto emission that non divers are forced to breathe everysecond ? Before entering micro arguments (arguments where you only look at a little part of the reality) and being so ready to condemn people, look at the whole reality. It could improve the perception people will have of you.Bud may really only have had one glass. I'll let the justice system do what it does before even pretending to pass judgement with out info.And I totally disagree that drinking and driving is compared to a violent crime. Without a the effect of an accident, there's no victim.

If he had 1 glass, then why not just take the damn breathalyzer like everyone else does, and move on? Probably because he knows he was buzzed out of his azz. lol. Btw, I agree with you on the violent crime nonsense. That's going overboard. Edited by terrell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now we know. We have a new, drinking coach. He has no more

respect for any of us since he chose to drive on the highway where

any of us or our children could be harmed or killed by a drunk driver.

It happens all the time, and he can be no exemption.

Being the new coach of the Hawks is so horrible that he felt he must

get drunk? Then, get on the road and drive.

It's enough to make any reasonable fan sick. This is the leadership

of our beloved Hawks. How low can we go?

Edited by Gray Mule
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Each state is different. As an old insurance salesman, I know that

having a Driving While Impaired will cause your insurance premium

to go out thee yengyang.

Refusing to take the test or blood test? In NC that is considered a

plea of guilty. Therefore, take the test or you are guilty of DWI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair to coach light this state is pretty nazish when it comes to DUIs esp the gsp. I'm gonna let the justice system play out if he made a mistake fine I'm sure it won't happen again if the police went too far then he will have his day in court

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Each state is different. As an old insurance salesman, I know that

having a Driving While Impaired will cause your insurance premium

to go out thee yengyang.

Refusing to take the test or blood test? In NC that is considered a

plea of guilty. Therefore, take the test or you are guilty of DWI.

Do people really buy old insurance? Posted Image

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free Mike Budenholzer!

In all seriousness, if it turns out he was blasted, and still decided to take his car on the road, putting not only himself, but others at risk he should be fired. Drunk driving seriously needs to stop. I don't care what he did/does in his home, but when you put others in danger that is a problem. He should have just taken the test, and if he was under the limit we would have never heard about it. He probably refused because he knew he wouldn't pass it. In any event, this is awful PR for a team having an awful offseason as far as I'm concerned. I hope we end up getting the real story, and this is resolved quickly.

By the way, our coach can't afford to fix his taillight? lmao

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

N.C. is a manditory liability insurance state. You must have proof

of insurance to obtain a license plate. Drop the insurance and

your license plate is picked up by SHP and you must reinstate

insurance, pay a $50.00 fine and re-purchase your license plate.

Fine doubles with each lapse and, if you don't turn license plate

in yourself when notified of an insurance lapse, the fine is automatically

doubled and you must do without license plate for 30 days.

N.C. takes this stuff seriously.

Also, having worked in License Plate Agency, I have watched this work,

over and over.

Do people really buy old insurance? Posted Image

See above post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...