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

To: BlueStateDepression
I advocate for punishment above .08. For all people that make the choice to drive ator above that. You call it witchhunt, I call it the law.

I would suggest that there is no particularly good reason why the threshhold should be 0.08 instead of some other number. I know that the congresscritters in DC have spoken, and thus so mote it be, but Congress does many things that are unreasonable. If Congress hadn't passed the 0.08 legislation, what basis would you have for arguing for that particular figure?

256 posted on 11/11/2005 5:40:38 PM PST by supercat (Don't fix blame--FIX THE PROBLEM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]


To: supercat

"what basis would you have for arguing for that particular figure?"

The links I posted earlier in this thread.

Not to many disagree that impairment is pretty evident at .08. I think that .08 is pretty well established in testing studies and does show a level of impairment where elected officials can use them to deem .08 the accepted level where driving is no longer legal, much less safe.


282 posted on 11/11/2005 7:00:09 PM PST by BlueStateDepression
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | 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