Feds Want to Lower Legal Driving Limit to One Drink

[Hookeye]

I bet Ted Kennedy is spinning like a top.

 

[KittySlayer]

Car sex...

Soooooo... hands free is now bad too?

Now I am confused. Which kind of car sex is good and which kind is bad? I just want to make sure I am doing it right.

 

[PistolBob]

There is no excuse for driving while impaired. Drunk, high, or otherwise. Throw the book at drunk and impaired drivers. Get them off the road.

 

[IndyDave1776]

We could start with the complete absence of any constitutional authority for the federal government to be involved. Then we could address the issue of pre-crime. Then we could address the inherent flaws of arbitrary standards. My experience has been that if you need an arbitrary standard, you are probably fiddling with something that either does not need addressed, or needs addressed in a different way, like holding people accountable for their actions for example rather than imposing arbitrary standards.

 

[steveh_131]

We could start with the complete absence of any constitutional authority for the federal government to be involved. Then we could address the issue of pre-crime. Then we could address the inherent flaws of arbitrary standards. My experience has been that if you need an arbitrary standard, you are probably fiddling with something that either does not need addressed, or needs addressed in a different way, like holding people accountable for their actions for example rather than imposing arbitrary standards.

Bingo.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Here's how I see it... if I'm going to be driving home, I drink less but I don't want to be anywhere near the limit. My career is not worth an extra drink or two.

That being said I do own a nice breathalyzer and I am shocked at how affected I am by 0.06. Previously I thought 0.08 was too low based on what I have seen in the ER (functional alcoholics) but since buying a breathalyzer and seeing what a 0.04, 0.06 and 0.08 actually FEEL like, I support lowering the level.

 

[femurphy77]

The National Transportation Safety Board also is seeking a ban on hands-free technology in cars.“Hands-free cell phone use causes cognitive distraction,” said Christopher Hart, acting chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, during a press conference announcing the recommendations.
“We have recommended prohibiting all cell phone use, including hands-free, because a driver’s mind must be on the driving, just as their hands must be on the wheel,” he said.

Soooooo... hands free is now bad too?

The same people were pushing for hands free in the first place, now they want to stop all use....

The same people are for "reasonable" gun laws too.

Let's not forget radios in cars; distraction!, controls for wipers, etc; distraction!, Passengers; distraction!, windows; distraction!


My God, until I read the above statement from Mr Hart I never realized what a distraction driving was. Perhaps they should just outlaw driving also!

 

[femurphy77]

Here's how I see it... if I'm going to be driving home, I drink less but I don't want to be anywhere near the limit. My career is not worth an extra drink or two.

That being said I do own a nice breathalyzer and I am shocked at how affected I am by 0.06. Previously I thought 0.08 was too low based on what I have seen in the ER (functional alcoholics) but since buying a breathalyzer and seeing what a 0.04, 0.06 and 0.08 actually FEEL like, I support lowering the level.

You brought up a very valid point! I won't say I have any functional alcoholics in my circle but having witnessed it for myself and then later found out what their BAC was I have to say I'm rather impressed that they were still standing upright (relatively speaking).

 

[hoosierdoc]

Also, the only three times I have crashed my drone have been while drinking. Two beers one time (two crashes) and one beer the other time. It doesn't take much to affect coordination and judgement.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Here's how I see it... if I'm going to be driving home, I drink less but I don't want to be anywhere near the limit. My career is not worth an extra drink or two.

That being said I do own a nice breathalyzer and I am shocked at how affected I am by 0.06. Previously I thought 0.08 was too low based on what I have seen in the ER (functional alcoholics) but since buying a breathalyzer and seeing what a 0.04, 0.06 and 0.08 actually FEEL like, I support lowering the level.

OK, this can easily work into an 'I can't walk and chew gum at the same time, therefore no one should be allowed to walk and chew gum at the same time' type of argument. As a non-drinker, I would imagine that enough alcohol to register would affect me more than an amount approaching the proposed limit would affect you.

My conclusion: Eliminate the concept of drunk driving completely. If someone chooses to do this and kills someone, make it a minimum voluntary manslaughter charge. Treat less than death incidents similarly with significant charges that are going to make the offender stay in the big house long enough to unpack and stay a while. It cleans up the handling of law and eliminates the revolving door on the courthouse and jailhouse. It also cleans up the stupid cat and mouse games on the road.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

like holding people accountable for their actions for example rather than imposing arbitrary standards.

For one thing, it's far easier, productive, and profitable to impose and enforce arbitrary standards than it is to hold people accountable for their actions. If you or I got a DUI tonight, we'd get a lawyer, pay the fine, and do whatever else they made us do. But, if a person that's already gotten 12 DUI's gets another one tonight, chances are that person will sit in jail, unable to pay any fine, and generally be more of a drag for them to deal with. And, aside from that, it's far more important for a government entity to look like they're doing their job than it is for them to actually do their job. The public would rather they took action that accomplishes nothing than for them to not take action.

The authorities WANT to collect money from responsible people. They DON'T WANT to have to work harder to deal with dangerous repeat drunk drivers.

 

[IndyDave1776]

For one thing, it's far easier, productive, and profitable to impose and enforce arbitrary standards than it is to hold people accountable for their actions. If you or I got a DUI tonight, we'd get a lawyer, pay the fine, and do whatever else they made us do. But, if a person that's already gotten 12 DUI's gets another one tonight, chances are that person will sit in jail, unable to pay any fine, and generally be more of a drag for them to deal with. And, aside from that, it's far more important for a government entity to look like they're doing their job than it is for them to actually do their job. The public would rather they took action that accomplishes nothing than for them to not take action.

The authorities WANT to collect money from responsible people. They DON'T WANT to have to work harder to deal with dangerous repeat drunk drivers.

All true, which is exactly why these people need kicked to the curb and their money-fleecing laws that don't do anything productive with them.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Like many other laws, DUI laws do have an effect on the law abiding while having less effect on criminals and/or those that can't control themselves.

 

[SSGSAD]

I did NOT, read the article, or the whole thread, but one drink, is going to be different, for each person .....

Will they, or us, EVER learn ?????

 

[Shootin'IN]

The drivers eating & texting is more a danger than the guy coming out of the bar after a few drinks. At least the guy coming out of the bar after only a few knows that he needs to be cautious. The drivers that are eating or texting don't have a clue what is going on around them.

 

[Shootin'IN]

All true, which is exactly why these people need kicked to the curb and their money-fleecing laws that don't do anything productive with them.

Right, someone with nothing to lose it is hard to take anything away from to punish them.
The only thing you can do is lock them up, & they look at that as relief from having to provide themselves with a roof over their heads & food in their belly.

 

[drillsgt]

Also, the only three times I have crashed my drone have been while drinking. Two beers one time (two crashes) and one beer the other time. It doesn't take much to affect coordination and judgement.

Flying drones while drinking will be next on the list i'm sure.

 

[edporch]

Because there's always more nannying to be done...

Feds Want to Lower Legal Driving Limit to One Drink

Anything to bring in more money to the government.
.08 is low enough already.

 

[Leo]

The drivers eating & texting is more a danger than the guy coming out of the bar after a few drinks. At least the guy coming out of the bar after only a few knows that he needs to be cautious. The drivers that are eating or texting don't have a clue what is going on around them.

+1

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Anything to bring in more money to the government.
.08 is low enough already.

Just make it 0 and let's stop playing games. If you've even stepped in some beer that got spilled on the floor or get a whiff of alcohol in the car, lock 'em up! (They're probably suffering from second hand intoxication any way).