[trumandogz]

If I were King of the World the BAC limit would be raised to .12 and punishment would be graduated upwards depending on BAC.

Thus a person with .12 would get a ticket and a person with .20 would do time in the slammer.

But blaming smoking bans for an increase in DWI deaths in nuts.

What next, are we going to blame developers who build houses way out in the suburbs? After all, if I live way out in the suburbs I have to drive 30 miles to get home after a night of drinking. If I live in town, I can just walk a few blocks.

[Just another Joe]

Actually, when suburbs started becoming popular there was an uptick in traffic fatalities.
More driving hours, more fatalities.

The smoking bans are the initial cause of smokers going farther afield to be able to have a smoke with their drink.
This does not excuse anyone for drinking and driving, but the explanation is quite clear.

[norton]

"After all, if I live way out in the suburbs I have to drive 30 miles to get home after a night of drinking. If I live in town, I can just walk a few blocks. "

I guess that mugging is preferable to a fender-bender, but you could still get a ticket.

[CGTRWK]

If I were king of the world drivers would be punished for failing to maintain safe control of their vehicle at all times and there would be no such thing as a breathalyzer.

The entire field of DUI is built around the idea that why you didn’t stop in time is more important than that you didn’t stop in time. As if injuring other people because you were fooling with the radio or watching a woman jogging is somehow OK.

[metesky]

What next, are we going to blame developers who build houses way out in the suburbs?

No, blame the evil scum over at Enemy Central and the zoning ordinances that keep a friendly tavern owner from opening a decent bar in the 'burbs.