Posted on 04/01/2011 2:22:59 PM PDT by chessplayer
http://bloodalcoholcalculator.org/#LinkURL You’re wrong. According to this, 3 beers in an hour puts a 180 lb male at .05. At 197 lbs, 5 beers in two hours, puts me at .079. There are other calculators out there, they all give the same result.
You are nuts. An adult male has been known to blow .08 after two beers. It is zealotry. The same zealotry that denies people the right to enjoy a cigarette on their own patio. It is the same zealotry that tells you what kind of light bulb you must buy. It is the same zealotry that tells you you must fight “global warming”. It is a bunch of people who think they have the right to tell other people how to live every aspect of their lives. And these people vote and elect nanny state politicians like Al Gore who want to control you lives. Don’t resist. It is for your own good.
I’d rather be on the road with a hundred people who have had two drinks than one who is texting.
So if the lush fails to wipe out those folks he should still be hanged?
He should be BUSTED as if he had wiped out a family?
Even if he just drove down the street for some smokes?
He's equal to a killer for that?
Like many, many laws, it only acts as a deterrent if you really care about spending a night in jail. Once you don't care about that, the DUI laws have no effect on stopping someone.
How about we set the limit at a level that truly constitutes being drunk, and then throw people the slammer for 90 days if they are caught driving above that level?
If they cause an accident while driving drunk, then give them a year.
You know....no better drunk driver than an experienced drunk driver. /sarc.
0.08% is a bit on the low side. 0.10% BAC was the standard for DWI (driving while intoxicated) and 0.08% was the DWAI (driving while ability impaired) standard. Seemed fair. Someone posted that most alcohol related accidents are with those who are 0.15% which to me is on the high side if buzzed.
Have a friend who lost control of his car on a slippery November evening after his bowling league. Slid the car off the road onto someone’s front yard and got stuck. When the police showed up they gave him a field sobriety test which he passed, yet the deputy could smell the alcohol on him and gave him a breathalizer. He blew 0.32%. The deputy put in the accident/arrest report that at the initial interview that the suspect did not appear intoxicated and passed the field tests. Only when administered the breathalizer did the level of intoxication become known.
He was wondering what was going to happen to him and I asked to see the police report. (I got busted for 0.11% many years before, and took the standard plea arrangement of reduced charges to DWAI and remedial driver courses etc.) I started laughing at the s”uspect did not appear” comment, and told him he was going to be going to “meetings” for many years.
Needless to say, as part of the adjudication of his case under the standard plea arrangement they made him start going to A.A. He’s been going ever since. That was 15 years ago.
This small business person said, I can survive Obamacare, I can't survive MADD. In their humble opinion they ( MADD ) are a 501(c)(3) and have to continue to deliver the goods to their consituency, ergo lets drop it to .08, and someday it will be .06.
They also said you want a recession? Drop the number again, then people will stop going to resturants and buying even one beer or wine and then they will start having dinner parties @ home ( with drinks ) with not as much scrutiny by police like they do around bars/resturants and accident rates will increase and tons of wait-staff and cooks will be unemployed.. They then noted how many are employed by the food business, it was huge.
It is so un-PC for me to even post this, but this was one Opinion, ( not mine ) none the less, it is an interesting perspective, I had never heard...
Another case of the government fixing something that wasn't broke - and making a pile.
Jaywalking kills! First offense, barbwire around ankles. Second offense, cut feet off. Third offense, decapitation. I'm tough on crime- yeah. Do I get the group think approval by the herd now?
DWI/DUI laws are ALREADY far blown out of proportion with the risk, costs etc associated with this. It's borderline ridiculous: criminal record, loss of job in many cases, huge fines, drivers ed, public humiliation, increase in insurance......... for a first offense?!?! I don't even drink, at ALL, but this is so over blown that it's laughable but of course I have to be serious about this matter because after all it's “for the children,” and we all know when you say “for the children” like being called a “racist” you're not allowed to think anymore.
A full grown man that has 5 drinks over two hours with dinner...and get's his levels up to .15 is no more a danger on the road than the average driver.
It's the .25 - .35 crowd that gives "drunk driving" a bad name.
I'd rather share the road with 100 grown men at .15 than 5 young adults with a cell phone.
>.08 is a RIDICULOUS standard.
mark
Worse, it is a government industry that destroys the lives and careers of valuable, productive people. A doctor, nurse, or military officer who gets a DUI because some machine determined that they were "drunk" driving home after dinner with a few glasses of wine, is greatly harmed financially and in their professional reputations.
On balance, more is lost than gained by these kinds of stupid, irrational laws.
Yeah, who cares if someone texting or dialing wipes out a carload of people or kills some kids.
It`s just some good teen or socker mom having some good `ol fun.
DUI/DWI laws are to tough in most states and all because of the MADD freaks. Another group who wants to intervene on every one else’s life. 0.1 and under should be law not the .08 and pretty soon they’ll try to lower that. MADD is also trying to get breathalyzers in all cars they want it mandatory. They’re as bad as the PETA freaks.
Drinking and driving, texting and driving, talking on a phone and driving, eating and driving.. what’s difference if someone get’s killed?
Can’t they just make the laws about killing people, or causing accidents, or driving badly?
Not worry about what made them kill people, what made them cause the accident, what made them drive badly?
You refer to the small independent businesswoman losing her business when the cops park out front.
Note it's the small independent business.
Places like Appleby's or TGIF are corporate entities.
Drive the little guy out using the power of the state to favor corporate entities. And the ULEOs are right there enforcing the law. This has been the development of fascism.
If you’re over 50 and there is no accident, DUI should be moot because you’ve obviously proven that you can drive drunk.
You got valid points, Beal.
The simple answer is no.
There are few if any reasonable laws. Most laws are the result of something happening to some one who didn’t like it so they make a “law” and change it.
There’s far to many laws period and that’s why the country is in the mess it’s in. We have 535 professional full time lawmakers destroying this country.
Since 0.08BAC can’t be “enforced” by cops actually patrolling and observing (since drivers at that level do not exhibit evidence of impairment), they must have police-state roadblocks.
All part of the criminal-industrial complex.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.