Go ahead, read that headline one more time and see if makes sense after a second look. Does it? Of course, it doesn't but one Texas man believes that the state of Texas and its desire to defend innocent drivers from intoxicated drivers goes too far in curtailing his rights to be a deadly threat on the roadways.

Ralph Alfred Friesenhahn was recently arrested for driving while intoxicated. It was his fourth offense so he probably does know a thing or two about Texas DWI rules. Since you probably don't, 0.08 blood alcohol concentration is considered to be intoxicated. It's the same here in Louisiana.

What Mr. Friesenhahn argued to the courts was this. Because he is an alcoholic he has a much higher tolerance for alcohol. There for a 0.08 BAC level affects him much differently than someone who only drinks every now and again. He was basically saying that he and others like him should be judged differently because they are "trained" drinkers. 

The 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin didn't buy the "protected class of alcoholics" defense. They also said that Mr. Friesenhahn attempt to earn protection on the Americans with Disabilities Act was off base as well.

So Mr.Friesenhahn recent arrest after a single car crash in which his BAC level was 0.23 or almost three times the legal limit was upheld. The courts when on to insinuate that Mr. Friesenhahn was well within his rights to be an alcoholic if that's what he chose to be. He just wasn't within his rights to be an alcoholic under the influence behind the wheel of a motor vehicle.

What do you know, score a point for common sense in this one.