This one is $85, but I saw one for $30.
Posted on 03/12/2017 6:01:58 AM PDT by C19fan
Utah could soon have the strictest DUI threshold in the nation after state lawmakers on Wednesday night voted to lower the limit for a driver's blood-alcohol content to 0.05 percent, down from 0.08 percent. The measure heads to Utah's governor, who has said he supports the legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
a lot of money to be made for lawyers and the courts.. uber is killing them and self driving cars will be the end to their racket
Years ago, We were traveling to Utah via Idaho. There was a sign, a bill board actually, advertising a restaurant
Eat Drink and Be Merry For Tomorrow You’ll be in Utah
This one is $85, but I saw one for $30.
Well stated CM.
Absolutism is never a good guiding principle. It is the proverbial foolish consistency, the hobgoblin of little minds.
The usual rush to signal virtue means that politicians and far too many others are willing to uncouple scientific definitions of impairment from colloquial ones.
Exactly what ‘pro-life’ ie a term typically used in the context of abortion, has to do with the medical and/or legal definition of impairment, remains a mystery. At best one might say we are anti-death or anti-accident but isn’t every rational person?
The reality is that DUI is a safe political target for states who have turned the ‘crime’ into a huge revenue stream on which they have become dependent. Fines are ratcheted up, limits lowered and 4th Amendment mocking checkpoints erected with federal grants paying for overtime. If your house is burgled while the majority of the cops are standing idle on a roadside somewhere, that’s hard luck.
The other reality is that MUCH stricter licensing requirements, from tests to vision to operation with retesting every 10 years, would increase road safety a thousandfold beyond getting a few so-called impaired drivers arrested and fined. Most of us know at least one senior citizen with bad eyesight, cataracts, loss of peripheral vision, loss of physical ability (arthritis, surgeries, hearing loss, etc.) who keep their license and are even coaxed through vision tests at the DMV.
We have all seen panic defensive moves and near wrecks caused by someone putting along 10 mph below the posted limit especially on freeways. They don’t check mirrors, they don’t signal, they don’t know or care
Why? License fees, tags, vehicle/property taxes, and fuel taxes are an even bigger earner for states. Keeping seniors on the road, even if they don’t belong there, keeps the dollars flowing. The state is never as interested in safety as it is cold hard cash.
.
No one ever went into politics thinking, I’m going to leave things as they are. There is a permanent bias toward trying to fix what isn’t broken, because its easier than fixing what is.
In France and in Russia, of all places, the limit is 0.0 for drivers. Same in Norway and Sweden. Sorry, but it makes a great deal of sense and stresses that paying full attention to driving is an extremely serious requirement in those countries. I don’t view it as anti-alcohol (yes, I am a wine drinker); only that if you want to go to a restaurant and drink to your heart’s content, someone else has to drive. This could have averted a lot of totally unnecessary tragedies, both for the drivers and those whose lives they have destroyed, for no good reason, not for any reason.
It’s a stupid law. It doesn’t achieve its stated goals and cannot.
Emotional blackmail is a tool of the left.
Looks like they’re now targeting responsible drinkers instead of drunks.
One drink is about .05 for most people.t I
0.05% limit for everybody 55.0% for the Kennedys.
Intrusion on individual liberty, not commensurate with the tiny additional safety it provides. I support .10, actually.
I wonder if this could be successfully attacked on a scientific basis. Would any expert (outside of the Mormon/SDA cults) be able to testify that someone with .05 is impaired?
Life is full of tragedies, any cluster of which could be use to justify increasing intrusions on freedom. Let’s not be like Finland or whatever other socialist paradise you can name.
ML/NJ
Exactly. A Mormon mother in a minivan distracted by her 7 children in the back is far more dangerous than someone that has had one or two drinks.
And to punish those who fail to live up to their moral standards.
Liberals are the puritans of our age.
Don’t be surprised if stocks reappear in our town squares.
Public shaming is already appearing in Liberal protest marches. It won’t be long if some version of the Scarlet Letter in handed down from some court for someone who offended some Liberal standard of morality. (it probably already has)
And how exactly would I get to work in the morning? My BAC doesn’t drop below .05 until at least noon the day after tying on one.
Refresh your memory cells.
I have in my family. It’s still a stupid law!!! The only thing it serves to do is generate revenue. This will amount to an increase in DUI convictions for the state, increased revenue for the government not through tourism, through penalizing their citizens essentially for not being Mormon.
The solution to the DUI problem is found in the higher BAC drinkers being educated, bartenders being held liable for those they overserve and education. I’m not advocating drinking and driving when a persons drinking is at a responsible level.
FWIW my cousin was ejected from her vehicle, in Utah, by a drunk driver who crossed the road and hit the car she was in head don. She was 16 years old.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.