Posted on 08/12/2005 11:36:01 AM PDT by Rodney King
Show me the victim that was harmed from someone with a BAC of 0.8, and we throw the book at him.
If nobody was harmed, then the actual victim was the person being arrested for a BAC of 0.8 and the people responsible should be held accountable.
I guarantee, that data will not be available!
But most people understand what I was talking about.
cf. the "Double Nickel" 55 mph speed limit. Before it, speeds were set by engineering standards, and most people felt governed by it. Afterwards, however, people lost their respect for the law, which is why most folks now drive 5-10 mph above the limit, no matter what the limit is. The danger is that, unless you're an engineer, one cannot tell the difference between a genuine engineering limit and one which is "politically motivated"...
and you are required
OH you are wrong again.
REQUIRED, but do not have, you can decline. This is still a country where the govt must prove their case.
Wiseass????
NO just experienced and have intelligence.
The DUI jihad has not exactly paid off.
ALCOHOL-RELATED DEATHS, 1994-2003
AS A PERCENT OF ALL CRASH DEATHS
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This is a bogus graph and fictious benchmark. This includes anyone, including a passinger in any of the vehicles. I could be stone cold sober in an accident taking home a freind who was blitzed and it would be an alcohol related crash.
HOW STUPID>
To: CHICAGOFARMER
I'm sure a decent fraction of them are, yes
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You have just made my point. Innocent people with families are labeled as criminals.
Most alcohol related are no caused by drivers with under .10 BAC. Seventy five percent of all fatal accidents are caused by drivers with BAC over .014 This is good news. No one should drive drunk, period. The question is what is drunk? When you are drunk, I am cold stone sober?? Just because you can handle your beer, why should you limit others.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
HERE IS SOME MORE YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN>>>>>>>
Why do these "innocent people" get pulled over & charged with DUI in the first place? I'm an innocent person, yet in many tens of thousands of driven miles, I have never been pulled over, much less falsely charged with DUI. Why is that?
What if you are going 65 in a 55. You do this every day. The one day you get pulled over, you just had two beers. The officer smells them on your breath, and you get the DUI.
This REALLy violates any concept of presumption of innocense.
After having a single beer after work, 2 hours before driving, I had a very low BAC. I then came within 1ft of a (probably drunk pedestrain) crossing a dark wet road in dark cloths. I figure I was 1 ft away from an alcohol related vehicular manslaughter charge, and probably 10+ years in jail. Alcohol had nothing to do with my inability to see and react to the idiot.
In the state of Washingtion, you can get nailed with a DUI on over the coutner meds..with a O BAC.
Why do these "innocent people" get pulled over & charged with DUI in the first place? I'm an innocent person, yet in many tens of thousands of driven miles, I have never been pulled over, much less falsely charged with DUI. Why is that?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Remember my first post to you. Remember you are perfect.
I been pulled over many times. It is just a game of deer and deer hunter.
Who says the SAFE speed limit on a particular stretch of road I driven hundreds if not thousands of time is 35 MPH. Who set that limit, some politican who needed votes or power.
Remember this. Q What is the difference between a politican and a prisoner? One sleep in jail every night.
That thing says I can have six U.S. beers in one hour and only be at 0.075.
I know myself and at that point I'd be asleep.
LOL. Yep - It told me I would have a safe BAC after drinking 4 shots of vodka in a hour. I would be a drooling beast at that point - there is no way I'd get behind the wheel.
Except for that little problem involving shifting the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense.
Refraining from drinking alcoholic beverages before or while driving does very little statistically to prevent one from receiving a DWI.
While it is a fairly recent development that it is illegal to drink AND drive, it is still legal (for now) to drink THEN drive.
I never thought of it that way. Something to think about.
I am aware of one case here in NM where "open container" means transporting other than the way alcohol is sold.
In this case, driver had 9 bottles of unopened beer in a cooler in the bed of the pickup (along with steaks, brats, salad and other picnic supplies.
Because that particular brand of beer (and most others) are sold in increments of 6, that was deemed "open container"
DUI is also a fast track to promotion.
DUI arrests are also a good way to have a prosecutor have re-relection points.
Actually, a judge who, in popular parlance, is known as a strict constructionist.
the observer administers any on of a number of objective tests to confirm.
I presume you are referring to the Field Sobriety Tests (FST's). FST's are not designed to provide objective evidence that a driver is not "impaired". Their purpose is to provide "evidence" which can be used to convict a driver who is subsequently found to have a blood alcohol content below the legal limit (even 0.00).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.