Replies

The criteria for “drunk driving” have been constantly morphing since the entire concept was coded into law.

When “drunk driving “ laws were first enacted, there was little doubt that the discretion of the arresting officer was plenty of proof, and there were no hard limits. At this point in time, “over 70% of ALL accidents” were “caused” by drinking drivers.

Then a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.15 ml/lwas encoded as “THE” standard to determine whether one could safely operate a motor vehicle.

Lots of fines and suspensions, but this revenue stream started falling off as citizens adapted to and obeyed these restrictions.

Lo and Behold, the “drunk” bac is lowered to 0.10 ml/l! Suddenly, “drunk driving” is in a CRISIS situation again, and “drinking drivers” (if you had a glass of wine with dinner, you qualify) are at an all-time-high!!

Folks adapt to this newest “adjustment” of the criteria regarding alcohol levels in otherwise normal folks, and once again, the revenue stream from “those EEEEEVIL drinkers” falls off.

The “acceptable level” for BAC is once again dropped to 0.08 ml/l (HALF what it was originally!) and once again, the accident rate blamed on alcohol seems to spike.
However, if you read the fine print, you’ll notice that it is no longer “drunk driving” accidents, they are “alcohol involved” accidents.

If you read further into the information, it turns out that “alcohol involved” means that there was some alcoholic beverage IN one of the involved vehicles. Not open, nobody was drinking, but there was BOOZE NEARBY!!

Meanwhile, sheeple think that boozing is still a major cause of crashes. According to the NHTSA, DRUNK drivers are under 25% as a direct cause.

Save your pontificating, and stop enabling the leftist control freaks, even though you’re obviously a product of the public school system, and believed your teachers.

In case you haven't seen some of this....

Back Door to Prohibition: The New War on Social Drinking: A great piece by Radley Balko who is the editor of Cato.org and a columnist for FoxNews.com. Read his blog "The Agitator", it's great.

Let's have a toast! Now that the smelly smokers are gone from the bar, we can have a few pints without that annoying, stinky smell of tobacco smoke. We're fine. The Government never has and never will go after alcohol....NOT!

Behind the Neo-Prohibition Campaign The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation: The Center For Consumer Freedom will help to explain why non-smokers who like Sam Adams or Jimmy Beam have nothing to worry about. It's not as if RWJF, a key group behind the anti-tobacco crusade, has them in their sights. You can rest easy.

Colleges are reaching their limit on alcohol : You're in the stands watching the USC-UCLA game at the Rose Bowl. How about an ice cold beer? Bwa,ha,ha,ha,ha!!!! Not for you my friend. Don't be surprised when you go to the Ballpark to watch your favorite team in the future and find no beer for sale. Can't say I didn't warn you.

Single Glass of Wine Immerses D.C. Driver in Legal Battle: We all agree that the drunk driver with a .45 BAC who kills a family of 5 by plowing into them while going the wrong way down a highway should be put away for life. However, under the category of "this could be you", read this before you take a sip of wine at your cousin's wedding, especially if it happens to be in the capital of our great nation.

Arresting Drinkers...In Bars: Let me repeat this for maximum effect: Arresting Drinkers...In Bars.

Anheuser-Busch Urged to Abandon "Idiotarod" Beer Promotion :Anheuser-Busch should drop its sponsorship of a Washington, D.C. charity event called the "Idiotarod," organized by a local group that goes by the acronym "SMASHED," according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The March 3 event, in which young people are urged to acquire shopping carts and drink beer in one bar after another, is in clear violation of the Beer Institute's Advertising and Marketing Code, which prohibits marketing which encourages rapid or excessive beer drinking or drinking games, according to the group.

Thanks for the rant. I would also add that it is my belief that the concentration and continual harping on “drunk drivers” is actually causing the roadways to become more hazardous. I don’t have any way to back it up with stats, or links, but I believe that the general population has heard about the “dangerous drunk driving” for so long, while there is no other discussion about dangerous driving habits, that the general perception is that the only dangerous driving is “drunk driving.”

I contend that people are forgetting how dangerous it is to handle tons of moving steel, they figure that since they aren’t drunk they can’t be dangerous. I find it reprehensible that a driver can be rear ended by a sober driver, and then have a BAC of 0.08 and be the one charged at fault for the car wreck.

I’ve had 2 friends killed by sober drivers. One had dumped his motorcycle and was being attended to on the shoulder of a 2 lane highway when an impatient elderly man decided traffic was to slow so he decided to drive on the shoulder, only to run my friend over and kill him at the scene. The other friend was on his way to work one morning and was stopped in traffic on I94. A lady was texting and never noticed that traffic was at a stand still, she rear ended him at 60+ MPH and killed him instantly, leaving his widow with 2 infants and a baby to raise on her own.

In both cases, the murderers received less time than a typical DUI 3rd offense that never caused personal or property damage to anyone. Yes, multiple DUI’s is an indication of a problem, but when no damage is caused then it becomes clear that the concentration is on revenue enhancement.

My opinion is that any driver that causes personal or property damage should be held to the same standard. I also am of the opinion that there is no such thing as a car “accident.” I consider all car wrecks to be caused by someone’s negligence. All wrecks, regardless of level of sobriety, should be aggressively prosecuted. I honestly think that this would make our roads safer.

Don, Eric,
Never operate heavy machinery or military aircraft without taking at least four ounces of alcohol an hour beforehand. It relaxes the nerves and steadies the hand. It also keeps one on track, which is why they put it in compasses.

What the doughty moms of MADD always neglect to mention is that the drunk driver who is going to kill you has a BAC that would also kill you ... or me ... or them. Your hardened alcs out on the road, the ones with 15 DUIs and the breathalyzer ignition switch, the orange license plate, etc, are the ones that have to be caught and stopped.

Instead, they are enhancing municipal revenues off people who have had a glass of wine with dinner. BTW, if you are ever stopped and asked by the Mass. Police of any jurisdiction to take a breathalyzer test, merely say, "Why of course officer. After you!"