Lowering BAC lmits from .08 to .05....
 

Been out around, but come home and see this on the morning news...made me go hmmmm.
Particularly in light of what I've been posting in the opiate thread. To be clear...I abused alcohol as a youngin'...back when it was "OK" to drive afterwards if impaired :(....if course it never was. Times change....can't remember the last time I even had one beer, so this has no impact on me whatsoever...none.

The local news is having a poll, and the consensus is that there should be zero tolerance...even .05 is too high.

Oh, you don't have to blow even .08 here (legal limit)....if you have a hint of alcohol on your breath, you "can" be charged if you fail the roadside sobriety test...and usually will be, especially if involved in an accident.

But lowering BAC to .05 as an "arbitrary #" pretty much means if you have a glass of wine or a single beer while in a restaurant, then you "might" be legally impaired....depending upon body weight imo.

Am I missing something? Why the double standards....it seems we have collectively lost our common sense these daze.

Let's bring cell phones into the equation....

Yes, we have....lost common sense that is :(

Discuss....

I'm not much of a drinker, and have family members who have been injured, one severely by drunk drivers. I believe that making the penalties more draconian as intoxication increases would do more to make society safer than lowering the punishment threshold. I'm not saying that 0.05 does not equate to some level of impairment, but the serious accidents around here often involve elderly drivers, I know what I was capable of 25 years ago, and what I can do today, and the next 25 years will likely do more to impair my abilities than a 0.05 BAC today.

But hey I'll bet the attorneys and law enforcement support it, and the money needs to come from somewhere.

Those pushing for .05 cannot support their cause. They cannot show many (if any) serious accidents cause by those between .05 and .08%. As KC sez, distracted driver had proven more dangerous than someone as high as a .25, yet we see that all day long. Put your efforts there.

I hope the bar and restaurant lobby fights an lower than .08. I'm not in favor of impaired driving, but like to a 2 beers with dinner sometimes........

The party poopers who are pushing for .05 versus .08 are trying to eliminate casual drinking when out with friends. .05 would be about 1 drink in many thinner people, and not quite 2 drinks in heavier patrons. God forbid, the resturaunt or wedding reception serves alcohol.

This does sound like something the lawyers would be in favor of greatly.

The drunk driving incidents that make the headlines are the ones where the driver is far beyond the .08 limit. Usually they are 2 to 3 times that limit. Lowering the limit Will make absolutely no difference except how much money changes hands. Around here, a first time DUI will cost you about $7000. 2/3 of that goes to the lawyer.

Like most laws, these laws seldom do anything at all to change the problem. You should spend a day in a misdemeanor court room sometime and see firsthand just how much a waste of time most law-enforcement is.

Totally agree much bigger problem with distracted drivers these days.


I have the same policy, 2 beers or drinks with dinner. I happen to own a pocket breathalyzer and took it to dinner one night, after two IPA's I blew over 0.08. I did not feel impaired at all and if I had not blown, I would have never hesitated to drive home, actually I didn't hesitate, I drove home..... while texting, emailing, and posting to FUbook that I was out to dinner.

funny how I can’t have 2 glasses of wine at a restaurant but it’s ok to hop in an uber whose driver may have just popped a couple of Ativans and a 80mg cheeba chew

I have seen the direct result of alcohol on different folks with racing sims, or private karting events.

I don't drink, but my take away is that it very much varies from person to person.

Guys that are too tense by nature, will actually improve a little with 3-4 beers.

Guys at the top of the game will fall off a little around 4 beers, but still be better than most.

I think if its seen you aren't in control of your vehicle, that should be the threshold. That includes cell phone, etc.

...while talking on their cell phone.

I may be out of touch with the hip crowd, as I don't even know what a cheeba chew is...

I don't drink at all anymore, but i believe they should be more concerned with the stoned mush-heads than the people who have one or two drinks.

Being able to control the car is not the the big issue. Loss of concentration and nodding off are the big problems with drunk driving.

I find it funny (and sad) that people who know the least about something, know it the loudest. I'm not talking about folks here but about folks who think the problem is with drunk drivers at 0.08 BAC.

Jeff Sessions comes to mind on another front.

It’s a little tootsie-roll thing with enough thc in it to knock out an elephant. Creates those mush-heads Sammy is talking about.

Big article about this in our local newspaper yesterday. I'd like to know who is feeding the media this story. My bet is the ABA.

Why is there not some kind of a progressive scale? I.E., a speeding ticket for 100 in a 60 is a good deal more than 70 in a 60. I just can't see hammering someone as hard for .05%, or even .08%, as we should for .25%.

Of course, like many other things, I guess we should just follow the money. An entire industry has been built around DUI laws, and a quite profitable one at that.

They are just trying to make the roads safer for all the newly legal stoners driving around at 10mph.

Appear to do something vs actually doing something.

Same applies to a lot of regulation of "Things" over "Harm"

Been .05 in Australia for years. Learners and probationary drivers (must display P plates for the first two years of driving) are zero. No one here really cares.

We are .05 in New Zealand too.

But it's the rotten drunk drivers who cause the damage. And it's not just drunken young men. More than often it's a middle age or elderly woman who has downed half a bottle of gin who mows down a group of cyclists. Or the smart business woman who has downed a bottle of pinot gris with lunch.

My dad was NZ's second highest alcohol level while driving conviction. So I've seen it all :rolleyes:

I read somewhere that the people pulled over average 0.14% BAC. Lowering the limit to 0.08 didn't do very much. Going to 0.05 will not do anything either.

I wholeheartedly agree. Lowering the limit will not get the dangerous ones off the road. Responsible drivers will be inclined to follow the lower limits, whereas the lower limit won't make a difference to those that don't give a fcuk.

Lowering the limit to .05 is a win-win for The System. More money changes hands, and they can claim they're making the roads safer without having to provide any actual proof.

Cash grab. Both .05 and .08 are not impaired in most any way. Pathetic and ridiculous.

We need to turn more of the population into convicted criminals (yes, DUI is considered “criminal” in many states) so we can keep the prison industry going strong, we can keep more lawyers employed, keep more people buying really expensive insurance policies (helps out the politicians’ biggest reelection campaign donors - banking and insurance) and we can ensure fewer people can legally buy guns.

I’m 100% in favor of being tough on people who are legitimately drunk driving (most people are terrible enough drivers when sober!) but this is just pandering.

This is one more reason we need self-driving cars. This kind of stupidity needs to end (on both sides - those who abuse alcohol and then rationalize getting behind the wheel and those who are sucking up to big money interests).

Hey, I'm a criminal too :(. As posted earlier, I used to drive after drinking in my youth...thousands of times. The one time I realized I shouldn't be, I pulled my car over off and went to sleep. I was busted for .11 (limit was .1 then, sober as could be at 6 am). Nearly cost me my job as an AVP at a megabank....my "super manager" intervened with the powers that be on my behalf :).

My tolerance for alcohol WAS quite high 40 years ago....I could easily down 4-5 beers before even having a slight buzz or being impaired....well, not real beer....Budweisers :).

It's not a joking matter however....I was flat wrong for doing what I did as a youngin...no question.

But this proposal has gotta be a gift to the attys and insurance biz imo. Will have ZERO effect except for the money trail....

IMHO, just another BS proposal to fill the coffers of lawyers and government without regard to the impact on drunk driving. It will, if implemented, create many unintended problems regarding employment and increased premiums to name low hanging fruit. It will also boost rehab and 12 step participation as many courts order both and most health insurance covers the rehab costs.
We have a hands free law here in Madiganistan (Illinois) and I see LOTS of people on their phones while driving. Sold my Kawi after nearly getting forced into a tree filled median by a girl texting. I suspect there are many more drivers on their devices than driving at .05 or above. Let's just enforce current laws and see where the statistics go.

You know, I find it amazing that there is so much outrage over lowering the BAC (I have no vote on that) yet, many are totally silent when there is a push to become increasingly restrictive with GUN CONTROL?!
Remember that the majority of crimes with guns aren't done by law abiding gun owners who have an AR15 but rather criminals. So, as one person wrote, how about we enforce the current laws rather than escalate the war against the Constitutional right to bear arms?

p.s. Want to talk about money grabbing?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/22/california-democrats-want-some-businesses-to-fork-over-half-tax-cut-savings-to-state.html

I'm using that. For those of us South of I-80 (or west of I-39), we resent having these dictates forced on us year after year that forces us to spend money solving problems we largely aren't experiencing.

Lawyers would love this, more charges, more lawsuits = more money for them.

Not here....not something I've ever worried about either. Just as unenforcable as other bs laws...

In fact...the opposite has ocurred here....
Though NC has always been an open carry state (no one does), I don't even need to ask the gov't for permission to carry concealed anymore if I feel the need. Not that I was ever gonna ask their permission in the first place :)

Which is why I think the ABA (American Bar Association) is feeding this story to the media.

Exactly. DUI has become an industry.

...and insurance :(

Way back when...

...three years of extremely jacked up rates...

This, it will generate a ton of revenue though.

Revenue gathering. It's my thoughts are too that, it's the drunk as a skunk drivers who maim and kill.

Just so you aren't contributing to the revenue gathering exercise. AND don't flame me it's advice for people who have had two drinks instead of one... Carry a one liter bottle of water in the car and if you get stopped drink the whole thing. There is no law against drinking water when stopped by police. And you will beat the breathalyzer. Even if they get nasty and take a blood same you will beat that too. If the cop asks why you drank the water just say I really hate you people and the sight of you makes me thirsty. They like that.

The water trick is bad science. Its not drinking the water but if the water is cold enough to lower the body temp that helps. You would have to drink a LOT of very cold water to reduce your body temp to make a difference. Some of the old wives tales actually increase your BAC reading. (Bill: I will retract my claim if you can show me where there is science to back up your claim.)
The only sure fire way to beat the breath test is to NOT DRINK or at the very least, not more than one or two drinks (but there are a lot of variables like your weight, what you ate, if you have a slight fever...).

Some years ago, the state of Washington dropped it from .10 to .08. Guess who donated huge sums to law makers campaigns that year:

The guy with the state wide contract to install and rent you a breathalyzer interlock.....

OK, OK, I'm just trying to save your bacon.

I don't save bacon. Eat bacon!


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1516666164.jpg