I know I'm coming to this party late, but I'd like to weigh in--and I'll preface this statement by saying that just last year, my grandmother was killed by an impaired driver.
The reason why .08 is a stupid law is because it's not concerned with removing impaired drivers from the road; rather, it's about raising revenue.
The problem is that an aribtrary BAC--whatever it is--isn't an adequate tool to determine whether or not a person is impaired. One person may be perfectly capable of operating a motor vehicle without significant impairment at .10. Another person may be far too impaired to drive at, say, .07. The problem is that the person who is far too impaired to drive can get back behind the wheel and go about his merry way after having blown a .07 while the person who was not impaired spends the night in jail.
I don't think anyone is in favor of eliminating drunk driving laws--I think what they are saying is that .08 is a dumb law--because it is.
And incidentally, I oppose current levels of airport security, too. You don't need an alternative. You want to make airplanes safer? Let people carry guns on the airplane. Do you think those three planes would have crashed into buildings if there were a few armed citizens on those airplanes? I don't think so either, and it's a lot more honest.
"BAC--whatever it is--isn't an adequate tool to determine whether or not a person is impaired."
Then what is?
What do you poseas far as law, that would apply to all people equally?
I'd love to hear it. You say it is 'dumb' but I do not see you offer an alternative.
"You want to make airplanes safer? Let people carry guns on the airplane"
Is that what EL AL does? When was the last time one of their airplanes was hijacked?
I notice you offer an alternative for airplanes (though I disagree with it) where is the alternative for BAC?