> it would not be until 1904 that driving licences and vehicle registration numbers were introduced
A fun fact is that for many years, to get a driving license you just had to apply at the Post Office. There was no test at all. My grandmother obtained her license this way in the 1930s, and drove on the same license right through til she became too unwell to drive in the 1990s, and never took a test.
> In 1928, a serious accident involving considerable property damage occurred on the main road [...] At the subsequent trial in Klippan, it was said that the Örkelljunga resident, who had caused the accident, received a more lenient sentence because he had been drinking spirits and therefore had difficulty steering.
It may sounds crazy to us europeans but it is not much different than current situation in North and South America and probably many other parts of the world.
My spouse and her friends passed the test on a simulator. She got it at first attempt while forgetting to put her seatbelt on + a few other minor violations. A friend of her told me she got it although she ran over a pedestrian on the simulator in the exam! She later got her licence in the Netherlands after several failed theorical and driving tests.
This is also how one would obtain a firearm or shotgun certificate - apply at the post office for a few (shillings?). I believe when introduced these certificates weren't even mandatory to purchase or own a firearm, and merely served to evidence your good character if a firearm dealer didn't like the look of you.
My grandfather got his driving licence in 1940s Australia without doing a test, because the police sergeant who was supposed to conduct the test couldn't be bothered and was more interested in a ten-shilling note.
That sounded too extreme to be true, but it seems to be true, there is no "practical driving exam" as most other countries I know of have. There still seem to be a written theory exam at least, but if you're over 18, you go in and do those things and get the license.
Seems kind of crazy they don't do anything about that... But then again, lots of things to do something about, some even crazier so what's a couple of more vehicle accidents gonna do.
I watched this clip several times and don't think it's California, based on a) the southern accents of both interviewees and b) the guy's hat which I /think/ says "Fort Worth". My guess is this is in Texas and is a reaction to the implementation of 0.08% BAC and/or other changes urged by MADD in the 80s/90s.
Oh yeah, definitely Texas. I remember my parents raving during the 2000 election that Bush's DUI was a non-issue because "he didn't kill anyone". I remember when seat belt requirements went into effect, my family members getting several tickets each, so proud to refuse to use safety devices. I remember my parents arguing with cops about their unspecified "medical condition" that prevented them from wearing seat belts, or us their kids as well. Texans are cavemen. So far behind culturally.
That's the most positive thing you could say about them. Cultural fashions are like any fashion: just based on "latest", and thus adhered to by even the smoothest of brains. Having said that, although I like their commitment to noncompliance in theory, seatbelt laws are not the place to do it in practice.
I watched some old driver safety films on DVD a while back. The attitudes were way different, the message on drunk driving was "you probably wouldn't be legally drunk for two, maybe three beers, but your reaction time will be terrible and you will live with regret if you hurt or killed someone, so don't do it."
At least my attitude is the legal limits are low enough that 'just one drink' is going to be over the legal limit (this is almost certainly not accurate, but it's my attitude; additionally when I drink, it's usually a mixed drink which are often more than '1 drink' for BAC estimation purposes). If you get a DUI ticket, even without a collision, it's a huge impact on your life: much higher insurance costs, loss of driving privileges, potentially an ignition interlock device which are expensive and inconvenient, maybe some jail time, difficulty at international borders, etc.
I have less than a handful of alcoholic drinks per decade, so it doesn't impact me, but when I would drink slightly more often, I would always be sure to have a transportation plan. Either public transit, a designated driver or a significant cooling off period between drinking and driving.
That if your drink a single drink within 8 hours of driving you are a filthy criminal that will have blood drawn and thrown in the drunk tank until monday unless you post bail and will have to go to court and prove your innocence with a lawyer.
Defensive alcoholics are a great accompaniment to yesterday's reflexive hatred of self-driving cars. Human drivers are really showing their whole selves this week.
Obviously you haven't pointlessly sat in a jail cell for 12 hours because you had an empty folded box in your back seat after sleeping 8 hours from one of the two times you drink in a year. How dare I have a 0.005 bac! Thats the equivalent of using alcohol based mouthwash before driving!
That's how it is here in Japan by law - zero tolerance, even one drink is too many.
One solution is "daikou" taxis - they drive you home in your own car, with a chase car to bring the driver back. Where I live they're subsidized (volunteers I think) and can actually be cheaper than a taxi https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/運転代行 (use your browsers translate tool)
"the limits are bullshit unless you're borderline unsafe when sober but don't risk it because it's a revenue thing for the state and they'll try hard to get you."
That said, my friends work on boats, cut grass, weld, service generators, etc. for a living so probably the polar opposite of HN let alone the significantly less diverse weekend crowd.
Horses are very easy to trip if you can get close enough, at least close enough to be able to throw something if nothing else. Lassos help also and is a bit less violent.
Mounting, wedging, steering uphill, forcing the head into a turn, etc. Tripping and especially firearms were used as a last resort, there's plenty of ways to do that without permanently injuring or killing the horse.
> it would not be until 1904 that driving licences and vehicle registration numbers were introduced
A fun fact is that for many years, to get a driving license you just had to apply at the Post Office. There was no test at all. My grandmother obtained her license this way in the 1930s, and drove on the same license right through til she became too unwell to drive in the 1990s, and never took a test.
Back in the day in my country, you could apparently get milder punishment if you were driving while drunk, because it's harder to steer properly then. From https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ABilkrock_i_%C3%A5s...:
> In 1928, a serious accident involving considerable property damage occurred on the main road [...] At the subsequent trial in Klippan, it was said that the Örkelljunga resident, who had caused the accident, received a more lenient sentence because he had been drinking spirits and therefore had difficulty steering.
Different times :)
It is a form of temporary insanity, I suppose (though self-induced).
> There was no test at all.
It may sounds crazy to us europeans but it is not much different than current situation in North and South America and probably many other parts of the world.
My spouse and her friends passed the test on a simulator. She got it at first attempt while forgetting to put her seatbelt on + a few other minor violations. A friend of her told me she got it although she ran over a pedestrian on the simulator in the exam! She later got her licence in the Netherlands after several failed theorical and driving tests.
This is also how one would obtain a firearm or shotgun certificate - apply at the post office for a few (shillings?). I believe when introduced these certificates weren't even mandatory to purchase or own a firearm, and merely served to evidence your good character if a firearm dealer didn't like the look of you.
My grandfather got his driving licence in 1940s Australia without doing a test, because the police sergeant who was supposed to conduct the test couldn't be bothered and was more interested in a ten-shilling note.
In Belgium it was until 1977 that you could buy the license.
today, right now, there is no driving test in Mississippi. Its a paper test and eye test and BOOM you get a license.
That sounded too extreme to be true, but it seems to be true, there is no "practical driving exam" as most other countries I know of have. There still seem to be a written theory exam at least, but if you're over 18, you go in and do those things and get the license.
Unsurprisingly, Mississippi seems to have the highest fatality rate by rate compared to any other US state: https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/fatality-statistics/deta...
Seems kind of crazy they don't do anything about that... But then again, lots of things to do something about, some even crazier so what's a couple of more vehicle accidents gonna do.
Reminds me of the old 1980's news clip of people reacting to California's DUI laws - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xcQIoh3FQQ
I watched this clip several times and don't think it's California, based on a) the southern accents of both interviewees and b) the guy's hat which I /think/ says "Fort Worth". My guess is this is in Texas and is a reaction to the implementation of 0.08% BAC and/or other changes urged by MADD in the 80s/90s.
Oh yeah, definitely Texas. I remember my parents raving during the 2000 election that Bush's DUI was a non-issue because "he didn't kill anyone". I remember when seat belt requirements went into effect, my family members getting several tickets each, so proud to refuse to use safety devices. I remember my parents arguing with cops about their unspecified "medical condition" that prevented them from wearing seat belts, or us their kids as well. Texans are cavemen. So far behind culturally.
> So far behind culturally.
That's the most positive thing you could say about them. Cultural fashions are like any fashion: just based on "latest", and thus adhered to by even the smoothest of brains. Having said that, although I like their commitment to noncompliance in theory, seatbelt laws are not the place to do it in practice.
When mandatory seatbelt laws were introduced, rednecks everywhere were decrying the tyranny of the one world government.
I watched some old driver safety films on DVD a while back. The attitudes were way different, the message on drunk driving was "you probably wouldn't be legally drunk for two, maybe three beers, but your reaction time will be terrible and you will live with regret if you hurt or killed someone, so don't do it."
As an old person, what's the modern attitude?
At least my attitude is the legal limits are low enough that 'just one drink' is going to be over the legal limit (this is almost certainly not accurate, but it's my attitude; additionally when I drink, it's usually a mixed drink which are often more than '1 drink' for BAC estimation purposes). If you get a DUI ticket, even without a collision, it's a huge impact on your life: much higher insurance costs, loss of driving privileges, potentially an ignition interlock device which are expensive and inconvenient, maybe some jail time, difficulty at international borders, etc.
I have less than a handful of alcoholic drinks per decade, so it doesn't impact me, but when I would drink slightly more often, I would always be sure to have a transportation plan. Either public transit, a designated driver or a significant cooling off period between drinking and driving.
That if your drink a single drink within 8 hours of driving you are a filthy criminal that will have blood drawn and thrown in the drunk tank until monday unless you post bail and will have to go to court and prove your innocence with a lawyer.
Defensive alcoholics are a great accompaniment to yesterday's reflexive hatred of self-driving cars. Human drivers are really showing their whole selves this week.
Obviously you haven't pointlessly sat in a jail cell for 12 hours because you had an empty folded box in your back seat after sleeping 8 hours from one of the two times you drink in a year. How dare I have a 0.005 bac! Thats the equivalent of using alcohol based mouthwash before driving!
In my country there are people who defend alcohol like some kind of an idol. Damn junkies.
Zero alcohol
They way it should be
With this logic one cannot enjoy a drink with a restaurant meal and then drive back home. Seems excessive to me…
[edit-typo]
That's how it is here in Japan by law - zero tolerance, even one drink is too many.
One solution is "daikou" taxis - they drive you home in your own car, with a chase car to bring the driver back. Where I live they're subsidized (volunteers I think) and can actually be cheaper than a taxi https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/運転代行 (use your browsers translate tool)
Is this sarcasm? I honestly can't tell. Drinking and driving is obviously not OK and deserves at least huge fines, so I don't get your point.
"the limits are bullshit unless you're borderline unsafe when sober but don't risk it because it's a revenue thing for the state and they'll try hard to get you."
That said, my friends work on boats, cut grass, weld, service generators, etc. for a living so probably the polar opposite of HN let alone the significantly less diverse weekend crowd.
"The following day, he appeared at Marlborough Street Police Court, where he admitted that he had consumed “two or three glasses of beer”."
19th Century version of a few small beers.
"I assure you I'm not, officer. Honestly. I've only had a few ales."
> Police, he observed, had developed ways of stopping a runaway horse, but stopping a runaway motor car was another matter entirely.
I'm curious about the ways of stopping a horse
Horses are very easy to trip if you can get close enough, at least close enough to be able to throw something if nothing else. Lassos help also and is a bit less violent.
Gun, possibly?
Mounting, wedging, steering uphill, forcing the head into a turn, etc. Tripping and especially firearms were used as a last resort, there's plenty of ways to do that without permanently injuring or killing the horse.
Sorry yes. I see what was meant now.
Title is confusing, it should be "The first conviction ever recorded may have happened in London"
Is drink driving where you are drinking something while driving? That seems fine. Drinking alcohol while driving is maybe bad though.
"'Am I drunk' what exactly, officer?" has probably been the basis of some good skits.
As once before said: If they didn't want you to drink, John Deere wouldn't have put a cupholder on it. C'mon, that's entrapment!
[dead]