JeepMOM, apparently Ohio isn't a no tolerance state because the police told her and her mother that the legal limit for those under the age of 21 is .02. I did just read in the newspaper that they are working to pass a zero-tolerance law, so maybe it will happen in the future. but Ohio is not "no-tolerance" as of now. so i wasn't incorrect in my information. </p>
<p>and she's already talked to her attorney, it is simply a misdemeanor and there will be no scholarship repercussions. but thanks for the advice anyway.</p>
<p>hotpiece101- Did you not ready JeepMOM's second post? She states why its .02. Still dont count your apples too soon, depending on what she pleads.</p>
<p>i read her second post. and it doesn't matter why the limit is .02 it IS .02. so i wasn't incorrect. and i looked it up, Ohio is not a"zero-tolerance" state...</p>
<p>Drunk or not, drinking under 21 is illegal and then to have the gall to get in a car and drive is simply stupid. I have no sympathy for anyone who loses privileges because they made that mistake. </p>
<p>As far as getting her scholarship taken away, I don't think that will happen.</p>
<p>Regarding blowing a 0.046, the facts given on the companion thread were that all the drinking ended 3-4 hours before the DUI arrest. When a person stops drinking, alcohol continues to work its way through the system until eventually the alcohol levels drop to zero. The rate at which alcohol dissipates in the body varies depending on metabolism, weight, body fat, gender, and other factors.</p>
<p>If you blow a 0.046 when you haven't had any alcohol in 3-4 hours, that means you probably had much higher levels during the preceding hours. An expert can calculate those levels and the rate of dissipation by factoring in the variables mentioned above. I am not an expert but I have worked on cases where this was part of the evidence, and I think it would be fair to estimate that the alcohol levels could have been as high as 0.10 or more depending on the various factors and how soon the police administered the breathalyzer after arrest. I am not saying that your friend was driving with a 0.10 but it is likely she was driving with something higher than a 0.046 since it's unlikely the arresting officer had the ability to administer a breathalyzer on the scene at the time of arrest.</p>
<p>For being smart, your friend sure is retarded. Cops come, you hide the alchohol and either play it cool, because you can't get in trouble unless it's your house. Or you can scatter. But trying to drive away when you KNOW cops are in the area? Priceless.</p>
<p>Right. Her BAC was low, but for an inexperienced drinker, that kind of BAC might be more disorienting than it would seem. She certainly shouldn't lose her scholarship, but she should be punished under the law. Drunk driving should be taken very, very seriously.</p>
<p>They can take away scholarships pretty easily. A friend of mine lost his FULL RIDE to UNC Chapel Hill (yeah, state school, but that's at least 16000) because he shouted at a teacher. The story is that he arrived 10-15 minutes late to his IB Spanish Assessment, and the teacher told him that he could not take the test. That would have meant that he wouldn't get the IB Diploma, etc, other things. So my friend cussed out the teacher, and got really mad. So the teacher went to the school board and administration, blew it way out of proportion, and got his scholarship taken away. What a way to lose a scholarship...</p>