Tiger arrested for DUI.

[DougE]

Just saw the news and the mug shot. What surprised me more than the DUI is that all of a sudden, Tiger has a fuller hairline in the mug shot than he has seemed to have lately. Hmmmm. Anyone else notice that? He certainly looks like he was having a rough night, but then, who among us has not? He probably should not have been driving based on the picture, but it wouldn't be the first time he did something he should not have done.

[bkuehn1952]

The sound we just heard was a famous golfer hitting rock bottom.

I was thinking about Tiger recently. I wondered whether he is even relevant to today's golf. His last major was in 2008. There is almost a whole generation of kids who never knew Tiger when he was winning majors.

[GBOGEY]

I thought he didn't drink?

[legitimatebeef]

I just believe in me.

Ringo and me.

[legitimatebeef]

I thought he didn't drink?

[Duke of Hazards]

I thought he didn't drink?

No, 'tip'. He doesn't tip.

[jasonfish11]

I thought he didn't drink?

No, 'tip'. He doesn't tip.

As someone who was a server for 5+ years, I'm changing my tune and really feel tipping should be done away with.

[jattruia]

The dumpster fire continues.

[bryan k]

I thought he didn't drink?

No, 'tip'. He doesn't tip.

As someone who was a server for 5+ years, I'm changing my tune and really feel tipping should be done away with.

I agree.

Especially on the golf course. It's the only reason I carry cash anymore.

[jattruia]

Welp...apparently he wasn't drunk. Word is he blew a 0.00 and this was all due to reactions to prescription meds. I can only imagine what he's hopped up on after his 4th back surgery. If this is true, although he clearly shouldn't have been driving, it's better than being shitfaced behind the wheel.

[GBOGEY]

I wasn't trying to defend the guy, I just knew that for all of his vices he supposedly doesn't drink alcohol. Given some of the stuff he was doing when he was fooling around, quite shocking actually. However, if he's hooked on Vicotin or something similar, his problems are far worse than drinking too much.

[bryan k]

In most states, being convicted of driving while under the influence of prescription medication carries the same penalty as driving while drunk.

That's why you never agree to the field sobriety test (check the laws in your state). If you haven't been drinking, ask the officer if you can just take a breathalyzer.. The only valid reason for taking the field sobriety test is if you *have* been drinking and are uncertain on whether or not you would be above the legal limit.

I have a bona fide medical condition that makes a field sobriety test inadmissible in court anyway.

[j f jones]

For one who has had two spinal fusions (one in 19977 and one last year)I have reserved my hopes that he could come back with a swing that would reduce the stress that the modern golfers put on the back. Their is no way that I can compare what he is going through but my rehab is on going after 16 months. I have pushed my date to start playing every month since the operation but after hitting 2 or 3 balls I walk off the range. I offer this not as an excuse for Tiger saying that he was close and he was looking forward playing again. This latest episode may be him finally reacting the fact that his career is over and he went on a binge. I don't understand why he didn't have someone that would give him a ride or call uber to take him any place he wanted to go.

[GBOGEY]

It is shocking to me today in a world where UBER exists that anyone with even a modest amount of money DUI's. Crazier for someone like Tiger.

[bryan k]

Alcohol impairs judgment.

I'm very torn on the issue because I seriously don't think that DUI should be a crime, per se. I do think that all other driving laws need to be *seriously* enforced, though. Passing on the right? $1,000 ticket. Five miles per hour over the speed limit? $1,000 ticket. Failure to maintain lane position? $1,000 ticket.

I pretty much don't drink. We're talking maybe two beers a year for me. Driving drunk isn't an issue if you're never drunk. I do, however, have a huge problem with cell phone laws. If they are going to enact cell phone laws, they should have to subpoena your cell phone records to prove that you were texting or talking while driving. I use my cell phone for GPS navigation and as an MP3 player. I'm terrified that one day, I'm going to get a ticket because I quickly glance at my phone at a stoplight to see when my turn is coming up. In my eyes, this is safer than almost missing the turn and having to slam on one's brakes.

A good friend got a $300 ticket a couple of weeks ago because she picked up her phone to see if it was charging while stopped at a light. That's the point where the law is officially ridiculous.

[jasonfish11]

I'm the opposite of you Bryan (not a shocker I know).

I feel use of cell phones while driving is way more pervasive and dangerous of an issue than drunk drivers. There was a commercial that aired on the radio when I lived in Florida. It said something like "Texting while driving has the same result to your driving abilities as drinking 4 beers and driving." My response to that was "That is total crap, I drive much better after 4 beers than if I were texting."

Personally I feel that texting while driving should constitute gross negligence and subject the driver to punitive damages in a civil suite. IE you hit me and I can prove you are texting I want you (or your insurance company) to pay the $5,000 in damages plus $100,000 in punitive damages.


As for this comment...

I'm terrified that one day, I'm going to get a ticket because I quickly glance at my phone at a stoplight to see when my turn is coming up. In my eyes, this is safer than almost missing the turn and having to slam on one's brakes.

What about doing the proper thing and missing the turn and finding a place where it is safe to turn around? Why do people feel this is never an option? I see people do dumb crap all the time because they are worried about missing their turn. Just keep going find a place to do a U turn and turn around. Slamming on your brakes, cutting over 2-3 lanes, looking down at your phone when heading into an intersection are all reckless and terrible options.

[jasonfish11]

Actually I believe that a Texas court found someone guilty of gross negligence and ruled for punitive damages against someone who was texting and driving.

So it is considered gross negligence in some states.

[bryan k]

The last time I decided to go past my destination to try to make a u-turn and come back, I ended up having to pay a $10 toll to come back. That's actually happened to me twice: Once in Boston and once in San Francisco, though I think the toll in San Francisco was $20. It's not always an option. I should note that the San Francisco one actually ended up costing us more than an hour as well.

Keep in mind that I"m not talking about texting and driving here. In my eyes, the concept is absurd. How the fuck to people expect to read shit while they are driving. And typing while driving? How is that even possible?

Additionally, cell phones have been proven to be equally dangerous whether one is using a hands free device or not. It's not the act of holding the phone that makes driving dangerous. It's the task of engaging in an audio-only conversation. I do not talk on the phone while I'm driving unless I'm in the middle of bumfuck nowhere...the type of place where the only danger is a possible deer.

However, being someone who helps to manage and administer a fleet of about 700 vehicles, we condone and encourage the use of GPS devices because they have been proven to be safer. Plus, 700 vehicles each missing 2-3 turns a day costs the company 1.5 employees per day in terms of man-hours.

[legitimatebeef]

The last time I decided to go past my destination to try to make a u-turn and come back, I ended up having to pay a $10 toll to come back. That's actually happened to me twice: Once in Boston and once in San Francisco, though I think the toll in San Francisco was $20. It's not always an option. I should note that the San Francisco one actually ended up costing us more than an hour as well.

Reminds me of this



Right after you take the Randall's Island exit in Manhattan, you are faced with a crucial fork in the road. It's dark and dodgy looking, and if you make the wrong choice, you literally end up in the Bronx. Fortunately I never have but if I did, I'd have to just say fuck it, and go back home.

[jasonfish11]

The last time I decided to go past my destination to try to make a u-turn and come back, I ended up having to pay a $10 toll to come back. That's actually happened to me twice: Once in Boston and once in San Francisco, though I think the toll in San Francisco was $20. It's not always an option. I should note that the San Francisco one actually ended up costing us more than an hour as well.

So because you poorly planned your route and it's going to cost you time/money to fix your mistake you are entitled to be able to drive like a moron and slam on your brakes where other drivers wouldn't expect it?

I don't think so.

Just 1 year ago I got a car that will connect to my phone via Bluetooth. So I use my phone navigation system in my car but I listen to the audio and don't check the map. Prior to that I would plan my route and know where my turns were and even the preceding roads. Did I always remember, of course not. But I'd either go past and do a uey or I'd pull over somewhere off the road and figure out where the heck I'm at.

The drivers around you are entitled to you not doing something erratic for no reason.

[jasonfish11]

Additionally, cell phones have been proven to be equally dangerous whether one is using a hands free device or not. It's not the act of holding the phone that makes driving dangerous. It's the task of engaging in an audio-only conversation.

As a stat guy I'm sure you can appreciate this question. Can you site the source, that also explains their experimentation method? I find this extremely hard to believe.

[jasonfish11]

Also I'm not saying that hands free is just as safe as doing nothing. I'm just saying show me a study that proves talking on your phone hands free is just as bad as looking at your phone screen and using your hands.

Obviously doing nothing is ideal, including removing the radio from all cars, but i am confident there is an extremely big difference between talking to someone through a Bluetooth connected phone and typing out a reply to a text on a 5.5" screen. I'd question the validity of a study that showed otherwise, and require their testing methods.

[DougE]

I'm with you Fish. I have a hard time believing it too. I have built-in bluetooth which automatically connects to my phone as soon as I start the car. My phone can stay in my back pocket. When calls come in, I answer with a button on my steering wheel, which is easier than turning on the wipers or changing the station on my radio. When calling someone, I just hit the button and say "Call Joe" or "Call 321-234-5432". When I hang up, I hit the button on the wheel with my thumb. At no time do I have to ever remove my hands from the wheel to press the button. When talking, it's no different than talking to a passenger in the car with me. Are we also to believe that it's dangerous to have a conversation with your passenger? If so, then they should stop promoting HOV lanes so we all drive solo and pay attention to the road and only the road. Give me a break. I want to see the "proof" of hands-free being equally dangerous. That's ridiculous. Next, singing along with the radio will be proven to cause deadly accidents. C'mon, who is doing these "studies?"

[bryan k]

Here is some literature that was published by the National Safety Council. Appendix A contains a list of several studies conducted by the National Safety Council on the topic of comparing hands-free cell phone use and handheld cell phone use. I got to participate in one of these studies way back when hands-free blue-tooth devices were brand new, and I failed the driving course miserably. Keep in mind that this is a driving course that I had already taken, and had passed with flying colors, while not otherwise engaged.

http://www.nsc.org/DistractedDrivingDoc ... -Paper.pdf

I could find you more, but I recently learned that my alma mater has moved their library of peer reviewed studies to a new host, and I can't access it. My understanding on reading through these studies is that there is a scientific consensus that using a hands free device has no safety benefits whatsoever over using a handheld device.

There is also literature in that publication that explains why hands-free cell phone use is dangerous, and it is for these exact reasons why using a GPS device is safer. If your mind is engaged in trying to find an address, you are going to miss important driving cues that could warn you of a dangerous situation. If you are using a device that tells you when to turn (or do as I do and have the device mounted on the dash so a glance at it, similar to glancing at my speedometer, gives me all of the information I need), you are not engaging your brain in such a way.

Unfortunately, outside of literature distributed within my company (which I'm not allowed to disseminate outside the company), I do not have access to any studies (nor am I aware of any studies) that compare the relative safety of using GPS devices. However, I would like to add that one thing I never do in traffic is slam on my brakes unless I'm trying to avoid hitting something. I drive a manual, and I'm very aware of my braking habits. However, keep in mind that the reason why people don't need to do this is *because* they are using GPS devices.

Finally, text messaging is a different beast altogether, and it really isn't related to this topic. From a logical standpoint, I simply cannot understand why someone would think that texting while driving (or even texting while walking) is an okay thing to do.

[jasonfish11]

Thanks Bryan.

I find that really interesting and pretty hard to comprehend (although I could potentially be wrong).

The main issue I see (I only spent 3 min looking at it so far) is that all studies seem to be done between 1995 and 2010. Handsfree devices are much more integrated now than they were 7-20 years ago. As Doug describes I use my phone connected via bluetooth to my car and my phone can be in the trunk of the car* and I can do everything I need via voice commands or buttons on my steering wheel. Old "handsfree" devices sometimes required you to push a button on the headset and that would require removing at least 1 hand from the wheel.

So I'll look more into it later to see HOW they actually did their research. I'm extremely interested in looking at it more later as that seems counter intuitive to what I've noticed, but that is why research is done so...

*Fake news I have a truck and therefore don't have a "trunk".