Legal Drunk Drivers from the 1960s
Robert ExleyCited 3× on HN, 2023-2025
1.7M views · 4 years ago · news · evergreen
A 1967 current-affairs segment interviews habitual drunk drivers just before the UK introduced the breathalyser. They insist they drive fine after drinking.
Used as a historical analogy for public resistance to new safety rules, and as an amusing vox pop.
0:27People React To DUI Laws(1980s News Report)
Cut The Shorts
1.7M views • 3 years ago
3:25The Real Reason Jaywalking Is A Crime (Adam Ruins Everything)
Dropout
8.7M views • 11 years ago
14:52Modern Times Streetwise - part 1/4 - 1996 BBC Documentary how become a London cabbie.
TaxiWarrior
54K views • 15 years ago
1:25Hazard perception test 2026: official DVSA guide
Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency
2.7M views • 11 years ago
2:47Ernst Dickmanns’ VaMoRs Mercedes Van, 1986-2003
Computer History Museum
38K views • 10 years ago
56:25Taken for a Ride - The U.S. History of the Assault on Public Transport in the Last Century
PEACE REBEL
449K views • 12 years ago
45:23BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters
Flex Your Rights
4.1M views • 19 years ago
59:23Quick Start, Episode 7: Crimes... And Felonies.
Cathode Ray Dude - CRD
235K views • 2 years ago
0:32Julie knew her killer - seatbelt road safety advert
Car Keys UK
1M views • 17 years ago
18:58How The Auto Industry Carjacked The American Dream | Climate Town
Climate Town
922K views • 5 years ago
3:08A Meditation On The Speed Limit
Campus Movie Fest
469K views • 19 years ago
24:57The Man Who Accidentally Killed The Most People In History
Veritasium
43.5M views • 4 years ago
6:284th of July DUI Checkpoint - Drug Dogs, Searched without Consent, while Innocent
Chris Voluntaryist
5.8M views • 13 years ago
5:55Adam Ruins Everything - The Sinister Reason Weed is Illegal
truTV
4.2M views • 9 years ago
0:40James May Explains What Happens If You Drive A Car In Germany Without A Licence | The Grand Tour
The Grand Tour
2.9M views • 9 years ago
2:50Tea and Consent
Thames Valley Police
10.5M views • 10 years ago
9:31Around The Corner - How Differential Steering Works (1937)
US Auto Industry
22.3M views • 17 years ago
1:50"Turbo Encabulator" the Original
Dave Rondot
3.5M views • 16 years ago
12:07Why We Can't Have Small Trucks Anymore - Blame the EPA
All Cars with Jon
2M views • 3 years ago
11:11The Agricultural Revolution: Crash Course World History #1
CrashCourse
17.7M views • 14 years ago
3 comments from Hacker News
>I feel like you haven't really been listening to the arguments against these types of age-verification-for-websites laws. Or maybe I just have a different conclusion to you? Because I do care, I do try to listen to the arguments. I'm no stranger to advocacy for civil liberties, they are important to me. I think all else being equal, freedom should be valued more over harm prevention. So if I'm for these laws, consider that a sign of how bad these sites have become, not how uninformed I am. > I mean, there's some similarities, of course. But I think there are some very stark differences. Yep of course it's not a 1:1, I agree. I don't mean to imply that people saying the same arguments today are wrong simply because people in the past were, but it does make me think more about it when I spot the same rhetoric. Often both sides have very reasonable concerns, as an example, the question isn't "should we have all or no freedom" Either extreme creates issues, yet both sides have valid arguments worth our time considering. We settle somewhere in the middle. Here's one vox pop with the introduction of breathalizers in UK (1967): ▶ this video
The rise of the automobile did cause a whole lot of legal and social ramifications that ought to be a good warning. Drunk driving was legal for years, I think it's a good thing to be wary of how things can change and to be ready, as a society, to deal with unintended consequences of this new technology, even if we assume it to be a worthwhile net good. As an amusing tidbit: a reporter asking people about making drunk driving illegal, a little before that came to be a reality: ▶ this video
> The point is your opinion is concordant with every other poster in this thread, aka hivemind By this logic isn't everyone who is pro-touchscreens also a hivemind? > Nobody is asking whether some people are fine with touchscreens in cars and why that might be the case. Many people are demonstrably bad drivers who are over-confident in their ability and down-play the risk of distractions. When drunk driving was made illegal, people were furious and insisted they were fine to drive drunk and that it was perfectly safe: ▶ this video Touchscreens, while convenient and extensible, are demonstrably inferior to static physical controls for saftey-critical contexts.