The mere act of driving with a blood alcohol limit above a certain amount should be legal. BUT if one causes an accident or injury BECAUSE of the impairment then that should be a huge penalty and automatic loss of license for at least 5 years.
Sorry, disagree. That can be extended to allowing way too many other irresponsibly stupid things. And a loss of license for 5 years does not bring back loved ones killed by drunk/drugged out drivers.
I work in a field where traffic safety is critical to my work — and I agree with you 100%. If someone ruins my day by running a red light and crashing into me, I don’t care if they’re drunk, sleeping, or just plain retarded. They should all be treated the same under the law.
Add in erratic driving (actual bad driving, not made-up excuses like “touching the white line” once) with DUI as an aggravating factor, and I’m with you.
However, you can’t say it has to be caused by the DUI, because someone who is simply a bad driver could easily dispute the causality, and if the law uses the term, the court would logically be bound to include causality in its interpretation.
Exactly right. You can generally tell the difference between a good law and bad law by looking for an actual victim. If there isn't one, it's probably a bad law.
Many people don’t realize that blood alcohol content is just one way to get a DUI; you can have a very low BAC and still get a DUI if the cop can make the case you were impaired. On top of that, anyone who drives after taking medication that warns not to operate a vehicle risks a DUI as well.