Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Integrityrocks
I'd like to see those studies.

I'll try to find them. I remember seeing it a year or so ago and being "struck" by it.

7 posted on 08/12/2005 11:43:51 AM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Rodney King

I saw the same articles. If I recall correctly, the point was that lowering the standard to .08 was not going to make much of a difference because almost no fatal accidents were caused by drivers in the .08 to .1 range, and in fact were mostly caused by the really, really bombed, i.e., way above .1

By the way, how does the impairment at .08 compare to that caused by cold medecines and other common prescription and non-prescription drugs, or for that matter, to the average effects of old age.


14 posted on 08/12/2005 11:49:51 AM PDT by Stingray51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Rodney King
I'll try to find them. I remember seeing it a year or so ago and being "struck" by it.

"Car & Driver" magazine had an in-depth article that cited the same information about 15 years ago. As I recall, the average BAC of drunk drivers who are involved in a fatality is 0.20. That's the average! If they are much above 0.3, they can't even get the key into the ignition to start the car, let alone drive it.

40 posted on 08/12/2005 12:19:26 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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