Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Protagoras
Who the heck said they weren't?

So why are you quibbling with 0.08? Or are you contending there is some huge difference between 0.08 and 0.1?

I am just using the 0.1 figure, because that is the only number I have direct empirical experience with. I would imagine my condition would be fairly similar at four fifths of that blood alcohol content.

65 posted on 09/07/2006 6:50:56 AM PDT by gridlock (The 'Pubbies will pick up at least TWO seats in the Senate and FOUR seats in the House in 2006)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: gridlock
It is not a quibbling amount, but that is beside the point. The point is, the problem should be addressed correctly. Get at those who are causing the biggest part of the problem, watch the problem largely dissipate, and then if you must, work on the margins.

Most of these laws were about pandering to people who actually want to have another prohibition, in exchange for power. And they are about,,,you got it,,,MONEY.

They were not about a logical approach to the problem.

10% of the people cause 90% of the problems. (I made those numbers up) Remove them and you have made the biggest impact on the problem.

That is my point, and I know I made it clear if you actually read my posts.

66 posted on 09/07/2006 7:01:37 AM PDT by Protagoras (Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: gridlock

When you hit 0.05 most people will show noticeable impairment in operating a vehicle. Your reaction time is slowed and that can mean life or death when you are behind the wheel.


67 posted on 09/07/2006 7:02:00 AM PDT by xp38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson