http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... AHeadlines

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Eric Musselman, in his first season as coach of the Sacramento Kings, was arrested on drunken driving charges early Saturday.

He was released from Sacramento County Main Jail not long after his arrest, the Sheriff's Department said. He did not have to post bail.

The arrest came four preseason games into Musselman's stay with the Kings. He was hired by the Kings in June and spent the past two seasons as an assistant with the Memphis Grizzlies. He was fired by Golden State after the 2003-04 season.

Calls to the Kings were not immediately returned.

The Kings defeated the Utah Jazz 112-96 on Friday night at Arco Arena. Musselman recently told The Associated Press he can usually drive from home to the arena in two minutes. It was unclear where he was arrested following the game.

Musselman has been through a divorce since his firing from the Warriors, and his two sons live in the Bay Area. He was fired by the Warriors after they missed the playoffs in his second season as their coach.

The Kings open the season Nov. 1 at Minnesota.

Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press

I love being right.

I totally said this guy was a loose cannon. In your face, Sac-Town!!!

HAAAAAA.LOLOUDDDDDD I'd like to give a shout out to uptempo

Good to see a coach that is like the common man

Am I the only one that finds midly amusing the fact that everybody was defending Nellie when he did the drunk interview and now Muss is a loose cannon for doing the same thing?

No, it's completely different.

Nelly's interview was from his home (where he probably just finished having a glass of wine with dinner). It was in a safe, private environment where he could enjoy himself while having a drink (like most of us enjoy doing). Besides, Nelly being drunk was purely speculation. It was never proven; just a feeling some people had after watching him.

Eric Musselman drove a car drunk. That's one of the stupidest things anyone can do. He put himself at risk and he put others at risk.

This issue isn't if one person or the other was drinking; the issue is that Musselman broke the law... whereas Nelly was just enjoying himself at home.

I could care less that Musselman had a few too many beers (we've all been there)... but the fact that his judgement flew out the window when he did is why I'm happy. It shows what a true moron this guy is. Don Nelson has never been arrested for driving drunk. Hell, Don Nelson's never been charged with "Drunk in Public". Nelly's just an ordinary guy who likes his beer. Nothing wrong with that. But putting others at risk (like Muss did)? There's a huge problem with that.

Who said he put others at risk?. From what we know of it, he could have been driving back to home at 10 mph hoping to avoid the police, even tho he knew he was drunk... There's no info about the arrest, not the place or the circunstances, other than it was by night... His alcohol level would have been legal in half of Europe (just 0.11, and, tho most countries allow only 0.08, there are others, several, that allow even a 0.3)

Doesn't seem like a big deal to me...

America allows 0.8

The point is, he broke the law. He was on a road that was crowded enough to warrant a police officer's patrol. The reason drunk driving is against the law is because it's a danger to the perputrator and everyone around him. He, unnecessarily, put others at risk (no matter how big or how little).

Drunk driving is a big deal to me (and most other Americans).

#32 wrote:America allows 0.8

The point is, he broke the law. He was on a road that was crowded enough to warrant a police officer's patrol. The reason drunk driving is against the law is because it's a danger to the perputrator and everyone around him. He, unnecessarily, put others at risk (no matter how big or how little).

Drunk driving is a big deal to me (and most other Americans).

I beg to differ. I just moved to the US a year and a half ago and was shocked to find that drunk-driving is largely tolerated (as long as you don't get caught). I think it's a much bigger deal a lot of other places. Certainly it is in Norway.

Regardless, I do agree with you. It's a stupid thing to do that puts others at risk.

Well, it may be a bigger deal in Norway, but that doesn't make it okay in the US. Every 30 seconds of TV has at least ONE commercial (on some channell) trying to prevent drunk driving. It's been pounding into my head since I was 7-years old.

Just because someone is over the alcohol limit, using a breathiliser, does not mean they are drunk.

I don't advocate drinking to excess and then driving but the effect of alcohol varies from person to person. That does not mean that there shouldn't be a limit created, as that is what has to happen to try to keep things under relative control, but here in Australia, the limit is ).05 and that is equivalent to 1 beer in one hour! That is stupid! Personally, I have drank quite a bit of alcohol (when I was 18) and was always able to drive well. I had faster reflexes, as I focus more on things in front of me better with some alcohol but I didn't have as good peripheral vision. It is different than being sober though and so the difference from the normal is somewhat a concern as things can happen outside the normal.

Touchy subject but that's how it is nowadays and you just have to get smashed somewhere and pretty much stay there the night, hopefully with some nice bich ah, the days of being single


The good old days have gone

migya wrote:Just because someone is over the alcohol limit, using a breathiliser, does not mean they are drunk.

TMC wrote:

migya wrote:Just because someone is over the alcohol limit, using a breathiliser, does not mean they are drunk.

If one beer an hour makes you drunk then you certainly shouldn't be behind the wheel of any car, pretty much ever

migya wrote:If one beer an hour makes you drunk then you certainly shouldn't be behind the wheel of any car, pretty much ever

Yeah, cladden talked about Norway. The limit there is 0.02. That's half a beer and you're legally drunk... crazy.

#32 wrote:America allows 0.8

This isn't exactly accurate.

You can still get a DUI with <.08. If you your blood / breath is .08 or < then your driving privelage is revoked.

A DUI is a violation of section 23152 (a) - which says you are driving with even traces of alcohol in you blood / breath.

Section 23152 (b) - says you have .08 or more alcohol in your blood / breath. This is when the DMV steps in and says you can't drive anymore.

So, if your blood / breath alcohol level reads .08 or more, then you have violated 2 counts of DUI and you loose your driving privelage for at least 1 year, along with a number of fines and community service and jail time.