May 14, 201313 yr Author Somerset finally goes wet, now this!!! I guess it's good thing I no longer drink...
May 14, 201313 yr Author I and most of you remember when it was .10, now that would be double the new proposed limit. Just think, back in the day you could blow a .09 and walk er' drive away.
May 14, 201313 yr I and most of you remember when it was .10, now that would be double the new proposed limit. Just think, back in the day you could blow a .09 and walk er' drive away. In my opinion anyone that doesn't have a fair amount of drinking experience that blows a .09 is beyond "drunk."
May 14, 201313 yr If they are going to do this, they might as well go to 0.00%. That would be difficult because of some defenses, you would have to go .02.
May 15, 201313 yr Even teenage drivers can blow .02 so that Communion is protected, so it's never dipping below that. It is funny that the legal maximum BAC is now closer to the "zero tolerance" minimum for those who cannot legally drink than to the previous maximum of .10. Personally, I think they should just lower it to whatever minimum they can hold up in court and take the decision on how many is too many out of drinkers' hands. There should be a bright line.
May 15, 201313 yr I don't hate it but I'm not sure I think it's a great idea. You can still go to jail at .05 as it is now. What's the need for changing it?
May 15, 201313 yr Heard yesterday on the radio that .05 would mean, on average, 2 beers, 1 shot or 1 glass of wine in one hour, and probably less than that for some people I'm sure. And evidently some people are complaining about that. Here's a very simple rule that EVERYONE should follow. IF YOU HAVE BEEN DRINKING AT ALL, DO NOT DRIVE, PERIOD! Why is that so hard for some people to understand and follow? Our tolerance in this country for drunk driving is way too lax in my opinion.
May 15, 201313 yr Heard yesterday on the radio that .05 would mean, on average, 2 beers, 1 shot or 1 glass of wine in one hour, and probably less than that for some people I'm sure. Whoever stated that on the radio needs to take a math class. In other words, it is bad information and a scare tactic.
May 15, 201313 yr Author I'm not a fan of this at all. I think .08 is a good level.Why? What harm would it do to lower the legal threshold of drinking and driving? I'm not arguing I'm honestly asking why would it be bad to lower it?
May 15, 201313 yr Why? What harm would it do to lower the legal threshold of drinking and driving? I'm not arguing I'm honestly asking why would it be bad to lower it? I guess it comes down to whether you're trying to stop ALL drinking and driving...or whether you're trying to stop all driving under the influence. And that basically comes down to science. On the report on Channel 9 last night, they had a doctor that said it had been "proven" (don't know when, don't know where) that you could fly/land a plane on instruments with a BAC of .04. Does that extra .01 mean you can't operate a car? (I'm not trying to be smart here, just asking a question.)
May 15, 201313 yr Listen lets call a spade a spade. DUI laws today have little to do with public saftey and more to do with generating revenue. DUI fines, lawyers costs etc.., are big business. Lowering the limit is about generating more revenue. We have the technology right now to end DUI's if we wanted. We could force all car makers to put the breathalyzer in every car. But again this is a government money maker, it's the biggest cash crop for local governments. The whole DUI process is corrupt and how the laws are written are hysterical. To answer your question should they lower the limit further? No. A DUI arresst can already be subjective, a breathalyzer in the field can not be used in court anyway. We have bigger fish to fry in this country than this issue.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.