Drunk walking more deadly than drunk ...

Drunk walking more deadly than drunk driving

There are 35 comments on the WHEC-TV Rochester, NY story from Jan 1, 2010, titled Drunk walking more deadly than drunk driving. In it, WHEC-TV Rochester, NY reports that:

Most New Year's party-goers know better than to drive drunk as tipsy celebrations loom.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WHEC-TV Rochester, NY.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Kellie

Rochester, NY

#1 Jan 1, 2010
At least w/ a drunk pedestrian, they're the only (most likely) one that is killed vs. if they were driving drunk. When someone drives drunk, it usually is the innocent (sober) one(s) that are maimed or killed, not the driver who was drunk. Still sad, but not nearly as sad if those killed are innocent of any wrongdoing.
Tim

Ontario, NY

#2 Jan 1, 2010
Okay. Lets really understand what's going on here. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is funded by the insurance companies. It's sole mission is to increase the profitability of those insurance companies. To believe anything else is absolutely ignorant.

Yet you run this as though it's a news article. COULD YOU PLEASE POST THE "ADVERTISEMENT" DISCLAIMER AT THE TOP OF THINGS LIKE THIS? Either that or ask someone to verify the facts and numbers (journalism 101).
BGN68

United States

#3 Jan 1, 2010
I am not sure I have seen a more irresponsible article in quite some time. Especially the last paragraph!!!

"If you're thinking you're doing a good thing by walking instead of driving, think again," said Esposito. "They key is to not drink to the level of being impaired."

Yes, good point, because we want drunks to determine their own impairment????!!!!

Not to mention that this quote is attributed to Esposito, who is not identified anywhere in the article!

“formerly known as "im bored"”

Since: Apr 08

rochester ny

#4 Jan 1, 2010
Kellie wrote:
At least w/ a drunk pedestrian, they're the only (most likely) one that is killed vs. if they were driving drunk. When someone drives drunk, it usually is the innocent (sober) one(s) that are maimed or killed, not the driver who was drunk. Still sad, but not nearly as sad if those killed are innocent of any wrongdoing.
I agree !!!!
In The Doghouse

United States

#5 Jan 1, 2010
I agree with this news article. However, in my case, walking drunk near traffic is much safer than walking in the house where my wife is waiting for me.
reagan

West Henrietta, NY

#6 Jan 1, 2010
In The Doghouse wrote:
I agree with this news article. However, in my case, walking drunk near traffic is much safer than walking in the house where my wife is waiting for me.
I couldn't agree more. Amen.
Lou Falzone

Lakeville, MN

#7 Jan 1, 2010
This article is an example of evil journalism! It is pure, concentrated EVIL. If Satan himself, walked into a newsroom and sat down at a computer terminal, HE couldn't do worse than this. May God have mercy on your soul, channel 10.
Kellie

Rochester, NY

#8 Jan 1, 2010
Lou Falzone wrote:
This article is an example of evil journalism! It is pure, concentrated EVIL. If Satan himself, walked into a newsroom and sat down at a computer terminal, HE couldn't do worse than this. May God have mercy on your soul, channel 10.
Just curious: How do you judge this to be "evil journalism?"
Richard Mahoney

Clockville, NY

#9 Jan 1, 2010
Lou Falzone wrote:
This article is an example of evil journalism! It is pure, concentrated EVIL. If Satan himself, walked into a newsroom and sat down at a computer terminal, HE couldn't do worse than this. May God have mercy on your soul, channel 10.
just made up crap now they will make laws against drunk walking now. another c o m m i e plot
lol

United States

#10 Jan 1, 2010
Richard Mahoney wrote:
<quoted text>
just made up crap now they will make laws against drunk walking now. another c o m m i e plot
I thought that was basically public intoxication. Duh
Jack Dooley

Rochester, NY

#11 Jan 1, 2010
I read this story with such disgust I had to take a sea-sickness pill and a quart of Milk of Magnesia! Exactly WHEN did we surrender to the socialists?
jws

Medina, NY

#12 Jan 1, 2010
let's just bring prohibition back, that'll make the idiots running this state happier, and add even more government control to our lives
agree with others

Bedford, KY

#13 Jan 1, 2010
Who cares if they trip and fall? It's their own choice to drink. They can't kill anyone else, walking.

Get behind the wheel, and you put countless innocent people at risk.

“Bitchin' ain't Easy”

Since: Mar 09

United States of Obama

#14 Jan 1, 2010
Stupid ass article. I didn't even bother opening to read any further. The headline is enough.

Don't recall hearing of many, if any, fatalities against innocent people caused by drunk walkers.

I have heard of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) but not MADW (Mothers Against Drunk Walkers)

“My POV”

Since: Feb 08

Rochester area

#15 Jan 1, 2010
All it means is that you could get "pulled over" and ticketed for drunk walking since you are putting yourself in danger--like reckless endangerment of yourself--and public intoxication. Drive up the issuance of tickets and paying fines, etc, etc. At first I thought it was a joke, but it's NO JOKE.

“Bitchin' ain't Easy”

Since: Mar 09

United States of Obama

#16 Jan 1, 2010
Yeah I have heard of "public intoxication" and understand that one can be ticketed, fined, whatever whatever etc,..etc..but to say that it is more dangerous than operating a motor vehicle is ridiculous.

It's not an epidemic like DUI.

What the worse that can happen? Get ticketed. Go to jail. Be ordered by a judge to attend AA. Wow. Big deal.

Pleeeeeezzzz!!! People don't spend years behind bars for being publicly intoxicated.
Know anyone who lost their "license" for drunk walking?
El 315r

Schnecksville, PA

#17 Jan 1, 2010
Done them both and I think I drive better than I walk. IMHO.
Tazz00344

Detroit, MI

#18 Jan 1, 2010
for God's sake. The Goverment will not be happy until they can find a reason to right a ticket for breathing or having a heart beat!!!!!! Enough is enough. Perhaps we should stop colecting this useless data. It serves no purpose. Publish enough unsupported data and you can make fear breathing or even leaving thier homes. Perhaps if the Goverment an Insurence companies stop spending all this money collecting data we might be able to reduce our cost of insurence.

“Bitchin' ain't Easy”

Since: Mar 09

United States of Obama

#19 Jan 1, 2010
Exactly!! So if walking drunk is dangerous, why is driving drunk LESS dangerous?!
CityRes

Rochester, NY

#20 Jan 1, 2010
I bet a drunk driver is behind this study and conclusion.

I can picture a bunch of drunk form the burbs coming out of a bar and using it for a reason to drive instead of walking home.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Rochester Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why Are Liberal Democrats Getting So Nervous Ab... 1 hr Ha Ha 46
Make America Strong and Safe Again! 2 hr Ha Ha 61
Agitators 2 hr Ha Ha 62
rochester christian church ministries is a cult... (Oct '07) 5 hr just joe 97
Wease picks his fights (Jul '15) 7 hr slammer is an IDIOT 631
Major Assult Weapons Bust in Henrietta 8 hr Bruce TransJenner 19
Hillary: the most corrupt politician ever!!! 8 hr Just Sayin 17
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Rochester Mortgages