B.C. by Mastroianni and Hart


Comments (16) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Flashold

    Flashold said, over 3 years ago

    And it was probably tiger’s fault

  2. Bruno Zeigerts

    Bruno Zeigerts said, over 3 years ago

    ‘Just because I had a little trouble with the water trap.’
    ‘That was the fountain in the town square!’
    (You just know someone’s going to ask about golf carts in prehistoric times)

  3. edclectic

    edclectic said, over 3 years ago


  4. bluskies

    bluskies said, over 3 years ago

    @Bruno Zeigerts

    Not me. I got my license in one.

  5. Cooncat

    Cooncat said, over 3 years ago

    You can get a personal BAC (blood alcohol content) device for <$30 online at places like Amazon. I imagine that people would use these responsibly to discover if they are over the limit, rather than seeing how high a number they can blow.

  6. AshburnStadium

    AshburnStadium said, over 3 years ago

    What does a Breathalyzer tell you? It tells you exactly ♫♪…How dry I am…♪♫

  7. J. Short

    J. Short GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    I went to one that got carried away. (Drinking , food and naked women.) I looked over at one point;and I swear I saw Caligula.

  8. jgordy24

    jgordy24 said, over 3 years ago

    As they see the T-Rex in the mirror, the phrase “must go faster” comes to mind……

  9. Vegas Viper

    Vegas Viper said, over 3 years ago

    Now they want to lower the BA to .05 . That means if a lady drinks 1 beer, she’s legally impaired…

  10. sundogusa

    sundogusa said, over 3 years ago

    I wonder if those golf cart wheels are stone or the new fangled rubber?

  11. Nabuquduriuzhur

    Nabuquduriuzhur said, over 3 years ago

    Part of the fun of the strip are the anachronisms. Cavemen with a golf cart…

  12. Nabuquduriuzhur

    Nabuquduriuzhur said, over 3 years ago

    re: vegas viper

    Unfortunately true. Since there is no measurable intoxication at 0.08% (unless other drugs are present), it makes little sense. The last legal limit that made sense from a biological perspective was 0.1% because impairment that could be objectively measured to begin then. Here in Oregon, the typical drunk driver has between 12 and 13 DUIIs before they finally kill someone. The BAC is normally .2 or .3 (sometimes even .4 with some habitual drunks). A major problem since the 1970s has been stoned drivers. Particularly when it was legal from ‘73-’97.
    I don’t drink, never having had any interest in it after seeing what it did to the kids I went to school with, but 0.05 has no rational basis. The science of the matter has been ignored in favor of “feel good” stuff that helps no one for at least 20 years. Since 0.05% will do nothing to save lives, what is the real reason?
    Given some of the loonies out there since the 1970s, is it so couples can’t have a drink at dinner before going to bed, because they would be legally unable to consent despite being cold sober? Given the reprehensible stuff taught by feminists when I was in school, it wouldn’t shock me a bit if that was it.
    Whenever dealing with formerly-good groups like MADD that have forgotten their reason to exist (to save lives) when their main goals were achieved, when something sounds good, it pays to ask “where is the deception? What is the real reason?”

  13. dzw3030

    dzw3030 said, over 3 years ago


    Sir, you are an optimist! There was this crowd I used to crawl with… :-D

  14. The Life I Draw Upon

    The Life I Draw Upon said, over 3 years ago

    Personal wheels are stone, but the golf carts all have a fancy body with rubber wheels. We know where the money goes.

  15. QuietStorm27

    QuietStorm27 said, over 3 years ago


    why would it be tiger’s fault?

  16. Load the rest of the comments (1).