Have DUI Laws Gone Too Far?

Jeff Higgins · 04-04-2005, 10:46 AM

O.k. folks, time to attack a modern sacred cow. Who else here thinks that today's DUI laws are a bit over the top? Let me explain where I am coming from.

First and foremost, these laws are used to punish people for their potential to do harm, rather than any real harm done. Way too "Minority Report" for me. If a driver makes it home safely from the bar or wherever and gets busted literally in their driveway they are just as guilty in the eyes of the law, even though no harm has been done to anyone. That's my major beef with the laws. I feel they should be used to layer on more punishment if some one does cause a wreck, but not as a stand alone offense.

My second area of concern is the basic premise on which they are written. "Impairment" is the issue; too much to drink and you are too impaired to drive. I'm here to tell you, there are those I would sooner ride with when they are thus "impaired" than others that are as sober as a judge. Their judgement and reactions are still better than many I know who don't drink at all. If impairment of both judgement and reaction time is truly the target of these laws, why are there no baselines established from which to measure? Why are these attributes not tested on any standard driving tests? I'm convinced there are many who would fail even when stone cold sober, and many who could pass when fairly drunk.

Lastly, the level of punishment. Granted, if a drunk nails some one, the fact that they are drunk should weigh heavily into the sentencing. What about the folks that have done no harm? Do they really deserve the level of punishment doled out today? Maybe lowering the punishment for those that have caused no accident, and increase it for those that have.

Tim Walsh · Tim Walsh's Garage

On your first problem. I see it this way.. In the same light as what you're saying driving on the left side of the interstate is ok, as long as you don't have an accident? Or do 150mph in a residential area, near a crowded park?

No comments on the others.

This is coming from someone who's seen both ends, have a buddy who lost his licence to a DUI, and lost classmates to alcohol related accidents.

84porsche · 84porsche's Garage

Well, I will respond to this. I am not a big drinker but their have been times I have been out drinking and I usually wait a few hours after my last drink. The real question is when is a driver truly impaired and that differs on so many circumstances (weight, food, driving skills etc). Its scary to think that these people drive among us. And yes, I agree that some people drive better when they have been drinking and I honestly may trust a drunk over someone on a cell phone putting on makeup but what do you tell the mother who had her kid killed by some dumb*** that was beyond being drunk and got into a car. I think a simple solution would be to offer a breathylizer to people leaving a bar etc. If determined drunk a waiting room or place where they can detox would be a great solution in my opinion and then they can safely get on the road.

lendaddy · 04-04-2005, 11:27 AM

Don't know what it's like where you guys are, but here in Michigan it's .08 which is basically saying "if you've had even 1 drink in the last hour don't drive".

Tim Hancock · 04-04-2005, 11:29 AM

I think the limits are too strict eg .08 in Ohio. Having two drinks over dinner might land you in jail.

stomachmonkey · 11:45 AM

I think you have totally missed the point.

The idea is to PREVENT people from driving drunk.

You go into a bar knowing that the punishment will be harsh and you are more likely to keep it under control.

Once you've reached the point of impairment you are the least qualified person to make a judgement about your ability to drive. In fact the drunker people get the less drunk they tend to think that they are.

THEIR JUDGEMENT IS IMPAIRED!

I'd agree that there are some people that should not be allowed to drive even sober but what are you going to do?

They passed the required test. I think a better use of resources would be to lobby for a more difficult licensing process.

In other countries driving is a privilige, not a birth right as it is perceived to be in the US.

Ever wonder why Europeans drive better than Americans? Because they are taught how to drive, not simply operate a vehicle. Big difference.

I really hope you are not serious.

Scott

lendaddy · 04-04-2005, 11:40 AM

You can drink and drive in Germany, you just can't drive drunk

I wonder what their BAL is? Do they even have one or is it officer discretion?

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

Is there any evidence that the tougher laws have had an effect, other than on the municipal revenue streams?

skipdup · 04-04-2005, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by widebody911
Is there any evidence that the tougher laws have had an effect, other than on the municipal revenue streams?

I THINK remember seeing something about fatalities due to alcohol steadily and sharply decreasing over the last 20 years. Not positive though - and too lazy to search.

RickM · RickM's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy
You can drink and drive in Germany, you just can't drive drunk

It used to be that way in NJ as late as the 80's.

BlueSkyJaunte · 04-04-2005, 11:59 AM

I think if you drive with BAC > 0.05 you should be dragged into the street and shot.

turbo6bar · 04-04-2005, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BlueSkyJaunte
I think if you drive with BAC > 0.05 you should be dragged into the street and shot.

Go Marxist Go!!!!

skipdup · 04-04-2005, 12:04 PM

One beer or glass of wine and driving will land me in jail - I don't think that's right. I'm sure one drink will impair me to some level, but so will an itch, pretty billboard, another 930 going the other direction, trying to find the lighter for my bong (j/k), etc. I know repeat offenders are the bulk of the problem. I also know I DO NOT want to be on the road with drunks. Past that, I have no idea what we should do with our laws.

- Skip
again, who was joking about the bong

Jeff Higgins · 04-04-2005, 12:29 PM

Just one more quick little tidbit I forgot on the initial post: I understand that here in Washington, you can actually get a DUI on a bicycle. I'm not sure if that is true or not; maybe some one more adept at internet searches than I am can find out. How about other states? How about non-motorized transportation in general, like a horse or something?

BlueSkyJaunte · 04-04-2005, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by turbo6bar
Go Marxist Go!!!!

LOL, where'd that kid go, anyway???

stomachmonkey · 04-04-2005, 12:35 PM

The average person can process 1 alcoholic beverage in 1 hour.

So if you pound 4 drinks in 1 hour and then abstain for the next 3 hours before you drive your BAC should be almost 0.

If you limit yourself to 1 drink an hour or manage the clock you have nothing to worry about.

Not a lot to ask of someone now is it?

This is really about being responsible.

Unfortunately not everyone is responsible so we need laws to protect us from the idiots.

My former sis in law, her father liked to indulge. He had a "drinking car". Old POS Buick that he did not care if he banged up. What responsible adult buys a car so that he can drive drunk and not worry about it?

He is basically saying that he's a selfish SOB and could care less about you or anyone else.

They are out there. Be careful.

Eric 951 · 04-04-2005, 12:56 PM

Too far. Especially when you consider that if you are pulled over and pass the field sobriety tests, AND then are asked to take a breathalizyer and refuse, it is an admission of guilt--WTF was the field test for then?

And checkpoints .....

Overpaid Slacker · 04-04-2005, 01:07 PM

The BAC limits are too low, IMHO... but that's not the real issue to me.

Law Enforcement Officers are under such pressure to punish those caught driving over the (too low) BAC limits that they very rarely exercise their prerogative to cut the guy a break -- whether that's calling him a cab home, giving the guy an opportunity to call a relative to come fetch him or the old favorite, throwing the driver's keys into the woods (this last one is really just a figure of speech in today's world).

I'm not a criminal attorney and what little I know about NY criminal law may not obtain in other jurisdictions, however, under NY law the onlycircumstance in which the LEO is required to take someone into custody is on a domestic disturbance call. Other than that, the LEO can use his/her discretion ... like let you out of a speeder w/ a warning. Or, something short of dragging your a$$ to jail if you blow a .09 in a .08 jurisdiction.

Of course, there are a variety of reasons other than social pressure that LEOs so severely enforce the DUI laws (feather-in-the-cap/promotion, potential liability for letting a DUI "go", etc.). However, it is usually the law enforcer that we rely upon to make the written law (like ridiculously low speed limits) "livable" or "realistic" and in this case, the LEOs aren't likely to be flexible.

JP

BlueSkyJaunte · 04-04-2005, 01:13 PM

Why do people persist in the notion that a license to drive is a RIGHT instead of a PRIVILEGE?

RallyJon · 04-04-2005, 01:40 PM

According to this calculator: http://www.ou.edu/oupd/bac.htm I can drink 5 x 5oz glasses of wine in one hour, and just be at .08. That's a bottle of wine. Likewise, I could drink a 6-pack of imported beer in one hour, and just be at .08.

If I did either of those things, I can't imagine getting behind the wheel.