On Sunday morning you'll wish you hadn't, but by the following Friday you will pass.
when Gary drank the magic potion, he became a wizard.
It's not the TYPE of beverage, it is the AMOUNT of alcohol contained in the beverage that you drank that matters. The average adult human body is capable of processing approximately once ounce of alcohol per hour. Based on what you drank - YOU do the math.
It was made a law to reduce crime. also because Men (usually Fathers) would go out and get drunk and spend all their money on alcohol then come home and beat their wife. so a women thought "oh if we ban alcohol men wouldnt beat their wives spend all their money on alcohol and drunk people wont go and do illegal things. But this horrible back fired because crime rate went up people still drank alcohol and people had to do illegal things to get the alcohol to the U.S. so it costed even more.
Cannibalism is the nonconsensual consumption of another human's body matter. In the United States, there are no laws against cannibalism per se, but the act of cannibalism would probably violate laws against murder and against desecration of corpses.The British formally outlawed cannibalism in the early 1800s.[1] By most accounts, it was the spread of Western religion and law into pre-industrial societies that extinguished many cannibalistic practices.[2] In countries with established legal infrastructure-that is, in which they were economically successful enough to afford courts-cannibalism had already been made rare.One case in which nonconsensual survival cannibalism takes center stage is taught in most every criminal law course: Regina v. Dudley and Stevens. In Dudley, two upstanding naval citizens, Dudley and Stevens, along with their shipmates Brooks and Parker, were marooned on a raft after their vessel, the Mignonette, was destroyed in a storm.[3] They had no fresh water on the raft, and just two cans of turnips. They managed to fight off a shark attack and capture and eat a sea turtle, but they ended up starving and thirsting for many days.[4] The youngest and weakest, Parker, buckled and drank sea water, which made him sick with dehydration.[5] After Parker went comatose, Dudley killed him and the survivors drank his blood and ate his meat for the next week before being rescued.[6] The judges in that case did not accept the necessity defense and sentenced the defendants to death. Judge Posner defends the Dudley convictions, arguing that enforcing criminal penalties for cannibalism forces the perpetrators to kill only if the circumstances are so drastic as to make murder worth the later punishment.[7]In 2001, a German named Armin Miewes placed an online solicitation for "a boy, if I can real kill him and butchering him. I am a cannibal, a real cannibal."[8] The respondent, Bernd Brandes, had sex with Miewes before asking Miewes to cut off his penis.[9] Miewes complied, whereupon he fried the penis and the two ingested it together.[10] Miewes then killed Brandes with Brandes's consent, afterwards dismembering the body and freezing it for later consumption. Miewes was later arrested, by which time he had ingested approximately 20 kg of Brandes' body. Cannibalism was not illegal in Germany in 2001, but Miewes was nonetheless convicted of killing by request and defiling a corpse, for which he received a sentence of 8.5 years.[11][1] Travis-Henikoff 282.[2] Sanday 210.[3] Stephanie Miller, Cannibalism and the Common Law (1984).[4] Id.[5] Id.[6] Id.[7] Richard A. Posner, An Economic Theory of the Criminal Law, 85 Colum. L. Rev. 1193, 1229-30 (1985).[8] Roger Davis, You Are What you Eat: Cannibalism, Autophagy, and the Case of Armin Meiwes, Territories of Evil 151 (2008).[9] Id.[10] Id.[11] Id.
I am afraid this is impossible to answer without knowing all the details. If it was something where responsibilty was fully accepted and remorse fully shown from a good kid, and there was no other damage then I would expect the Law Enforcement Officer to exercise good judgment and allow a good stern, frightening warning. Typically, this should be settled with a no contest plea and a small fine/alcohol program/work. If it was more serious then some sort of house arrest/curfew could be imposed and/or community service work imposed and/or alcohol program enforced.
of course yes
No. None will remain in your system.
Not an ETG test. You might pass one of the older kinds of test.
porridges and breads. also they drank wines and beers (made from scratch)
yes
because someone drank the 100th beer
Drank is the past tense of the verb to drink. For example, a person may say, "I drink two beers every day." The word "drink" in this sentence denotes an action that in the present tense. However, the in sentence "Yesterday I drank two beers" the word "drank indicates that the drinking took place place in the past.
No- unless you want to get arrested for drunk driving.
No.
Yes, drink plenty of water.
You will probably pass, but if you can keep your drinking down to two beers, why not quit altogether until you are no longer being tested? Better yet, just quit. You would not be getting those tests if you had not already had a problem with alcohol.
Probably, but if you drank 15 beers, passing that test is the least of your problems. You are a full-blown alcoholic, and in need of some serious treatment.