Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
^_^

Abolish Drunk Driving Laws

36 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

People ... react to alcohol differently. For many people one drink may well be too many. Experienced drinkers, by contrast, can function relatively normally with a BAC at or above the legal threshold. A person’s impairment may also depend on variables such as the medications he is taking and the amount of sleep he got the night before.

...

Consider the 2000 federal law that pressured states to lower their BAC standards to 0.08 from 0.10 ... Once the 0.08 standard took effect nationwide in 2000, alcohol-related traffic fatalities increased, following a 20-year decline.

Critics of the 0.08 standard predicted this would happen. The problem is that most people with a BAC between 0.08 and 0.10 don’t drive erratically enough to be noticed by police officers in patrol cars. So police began setting up roadblocks to catch them. But every cop manning a sobriety checkpoint aimed at catching motorists violating the new law is a cop not on the highways looking for more seriously impaired motorists. By 2004 alcohol-related fatalities went down again, but only because the decrease in states that don’t use roadblocks compensated for a slight but continuing increase in the states that use them.

...

The threat posed by drunk driving comes not from drinking per se but from the impairment drinking can cause. That fact has been lost in the rush to demonize people who have even a single drink before getting behind the wheel (exemplified by the shift in the government’s message from “Don’t Drive Drunk” to “Don’t Drink and Drive”). Several studies, such as a 2005 paper in the British Medical Journal, have found that talking on a cell phone, even with a hands-free device, causes more driver impairment than a 0.08 BAC. A 2001 American Automobile Association study found several other in-car distractions that also caused more impairment, including eating, adjusting a radio or CD player, and having kids in the backseat.

If our ultimate goals are to reduce driver impairment and maximize highway safety, we should be punishing reckless driving more consistently. It shouldn’t matter if it’s caused by alcohol, sleep deprivation, prescription medication, text messaging, or road rage. If lawmakers want to stick it to dangerous drivers who threaten everyone else on the road, they can dial up the civil and criminal liability for reckless driving, especially in cases that result in injury or property damage.

Doing away with the specific charge of drunk driving sounds radical at first blush, but it would put the focus back on behavior, where it belongs. The punishable act should be violating road rules or causing an accident, not the factors that led to those offenses. Singling out alcohol impairment for extra punishment isn’t about making the roads safer. It’s about a lingering hostility toward demon rum.

http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/31/abolish-drunk-driving-laws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the article is pretty honest.

Drunk driving laws are reactionary/emotional based laws. MADD got an inch, now they've pushed for 30 miles. Just as they are making a push for EVERY car and EVERY driver to have to use an in-car breathalyzer before getting behind the wheel ever. First thing in the morning, lunch break at work, on you way home, etc. Any time behind the wheel they want this.

Even here in Texas they are moving to add roadblocks/checkpoints again in which cops and get an on-the-spot court order to draw blood from you. I mean #######??? You can't even refuse and be arrested anymore. They'll have a search warrant place immediately to get blood from you... They've been pushing this by doing it on holiday weekends for the past couple of years.. It's horse #######.

The article says we should focus on overall behaviour behind the wheel and I agree. I see so many people daily driving like jack arses who aren't drunk. Who go in-and-out of traffic, almost hitting other cars, riding right up on people's tails... women driving with their knees putting on makeup.. It never ends on the multitude of things done that is wreckless.


nfrsig.jpg

The Great Canadian to Texas Transfer Timeline:

2/22/2010 - I-129F Packet Mailed

2/24/2010 - Packet Delivered to VSC

2/26/2010 - VSC Cashed Filing Fee

3/04/2010 - NOA1 Received!

8/14/2010 - Touched!

10/04/2010 - NOA2 Received!

10/25/2010 - Packet 3 Received!

02/07/2011 - Medical!

03/15/2011 - Interview in Montreal! - Approved!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the good old days. Back in the 1960s.

You could be driving down the road wasted drinking a beer with a cop behind you......When you finish slamming the beer you roll down the window and toss the can onto the side of the road.

I wasn't born until the 80s but that's what someone told me it was like...:whistle:

Edited by Lord Infamous

India, gun buyback and steamroll.

qVVjt.jpg?3qVHRo.jpg?1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wholeheartedly agree. Driving drunk is FUN and should be legal.

We used to drive down to Detroit...Get some weed...Get some 40 ounces....And just drive around blaring music drinking and smoking. Very fun times. But I did end up in 2 hit (and runs) ... Whoops....When you hit someone you should also be able to run...That is fun too... Especially when they try to chase you :whistle:


India, gun buyback and steamroll.

qVVjt.jpg?3qVHRo.jpg?1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We used to drive down to Detroit...Get some weed...Get some 40 ounces....And just drive around blaring music drinking and smoking. Very fun times. But I did end up in 2 hit (and runs) ... Whoops....When you hit someone you should also be able to run...That is fun too... Especially when they try to chase you :whistle:

LOL


biden_pinhead.jpgspace.gifrolling-stones-american-flag-tongue.jpgspace.gifinside-geico.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the good old days. Back in the 1960s.

You could be driving down the road wasted drinking a beer with a cop behind you......When you finish slamming the beer you roll down the window and toss the can onto the side of the road.

I wasn't born until the 80s but that's what someone told me it was like...:whistle:

I started driving in the early 70's. I was caught totally bombed with open beers in the car several times. The reaction? They took my beer and followed me home to make sure I made it OK. A few times the cop would lean me against my front door and ring the bell so my dad could come out and collect me. Never a ticket or arrest. Ah, small town living in the 70's. It did have its good points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very enlightening seeing the responses here! I had no idea that idiot, right wing politics so closely correlates with such idiotic views on drinking and driving!! Now that I think about it, I guess I should have expected it!! (And I know that there are some very decent people out there that are repubs, just like there are a few idiot liberals as well)

My own view is that choosing to drive to a place where you know you will drink without making plans in advance on how you will get home without driving drunk is on par with voluntary man-slaughter at least. And yes, I don't approve of Teddy Kennedy's actions either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had no idea that idiot, right wing politics so closely correlates with such idiotic views on drinking and driving!! Now that I think about it, I guess I should have expected it!! (And I know that there are some very decent people out there that are repubs, just like there are a few idiot liberals as well)

My own view is that choosing to drive to a place where you know you will drink without making plans in advance on how you will get home without driving drunk is on par with voluntary man-slaughter at least. And yes, I don't approve of Teddy Kennedy's actions either.

This one's working but perhaps you should have yours checked.

sarcasm_detector.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very enlightening seeing the responses here! I had no idea that idiot, right wing politics so closely correlates with such idiotic views on drinking and driving!! Now that I think about it, I guess I should have expected it!! (And I know that there are some very decent people out there that are repubs, just like there are a few idiot liberals as well)

My own view is that choosing to drive to a place where you know you will drink without making plans in advance on how you will get home without driving drunk is on par with voluntary man-slaughter at least. And yes, I don't approve of Teddy Kennedy's actions either.

Did you even read the article?


nfrsig.jpg

The Great Canadian to Texas Transfer Timeline:

2/22/2010 - I-129F Packet Mailed

2/24/2010 - Packet Delivered to VSC

2/26/2010 - VSC Cashed Filing Fee

3/04/2010 - NOA1 Received!

8/14/2010 - Touched!

10/04/2010 - NOA2 Received!

10/25/2010 - Packet 3 Received!

02/07/2011 - Medical!

03/15/2011 - Interview in Montreal! - Approved!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This one's working but perhaps you should have yours checked.

sarcasm_detector.jpg

Yeah, I see the sarcasm in a couple of responses. The OP and other responses seem a little too serious! And responding with sarcasm to this kind of outrageous nonsense is emblematic of why many jurisdictions in this country, as well as some others such as France, continue to see such a problem from this. BTW, full disclosure, maybe I am a bit too sensitive on this issue but you might be too if your oldest son, an honor student who never touched drugs or alcohol, was killed by a drunk driver who had multiple prior convictions but had not killed anyone till that day!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...