The Drink Drive Limt: Why?

Well working in the bar business there would need to be mass amounts of public transportation if there was a limit like this. I see too many people who shouldnt be driving. I know two people in the last 6mths who got DUIs and all because they were too lazy or cheap to pay for a cab..Now they have major court fees and one guy lost his business. I myself do NOT drive if I have had ANY alcohol. I get teased relentlessly over it but I think I am doing the right thing. I never drive to work. I always take a cab or get a ride. To me it's safer that way for everyone. You never know what could happen. I have taken keys away from numerous co-workers and forced them to sober up and even then I have tossed them in a cab on my dime so they get home safe and other people on the road are safe. I just dont get why people think they can drive when they are drunk. Heck two shots of patron and it's like 10jager bombs for me.
I know one girl who has an automatic breathalizer attached to her car! If it blows over her limit her car wont start. It's messed up if you ask me. WTH would they even let her drive?~ She has had three DUIs in two years?! I personally think the laws should be harsher on drunk drivers. I know too many people who have gotten away with multiple DUIs EVEN with video evidence. Its sad when money is the only factor in these cases, the more you have the more likely you will get out of it...Most of these people brag about it and it really upsets me. Its not funny. I am all for stricter rules when it comes to drinking and driving.

S&F

reply to post by Death_Kron


Easy really.

Example;

You go out for a few beers or whatever you fav tipple is on a Friday night.

Saturday morning, you get pulled over and breath tested..guess what, there's alcohol found and off you go for a blood test, which will confirm small amounts of alcohol.

Without a limit, we'd all be done for DD, for having a few beers, as it takes a fair while to exit your body.

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by Death_Kron

 

Easy really.

Example;

You go out for a few beers or whatever you fav tipple is on a Friday night.

Saturday morning, you get pulled over and breath tested..guess what, there's alcohol found and off you go for a blood test, which will confirm small amounts of alcohol.

Without a limit, we'd all be done for DD, for having a few beers, as it takes a fair while to exit your body.

I understand where your coming from but in reality no one who drinks "a few beers" will be over the limit in the morning.

I'd probably be 4 times over the limit on a Saturday morning after a Friday night and as such I don't drive at the weekend, however I will say that I only have a work vehicle that I can only use during work hours.

reply to post by Death_Kron


Well, you know what it's like "a few beers", is a euphemism for X amount of beers, or glasses of wine, or whatever.

Someone could have a bottle of wine, say, and still have alcohol in their blood the next day, but not enough to put you over the limit.

So it makes sense to have a limit, just for these times.

Not saying that people have 15 pints and chasers, cos they would still be WELL over the limit the next day, and the day after that. Just people who have a moderate night out.

This isn't a theory of mine, btw, it really is the reason for the limit.

I tend to agree...why drink and drive at all? I think it should be outlawed completely and avoid the risk of killing someone...

When I was in college and a stupid young man...I got a DWI, ...had to go out and get something to eat...had the munchies. Got busted too. Thank God I didn't hit anybody.

It really didn't bother me until I matured enough to realize that I might hurt someone besides me...and now that my own daughter is driving, it really hits home how selfish and stupid I was.

I still like a cold beer while I grill some chickens on Sat afternoon... but now, I have everything planned and don't even leave the yard.

If you like to drink and aren't foolish after a few, enjoy...BUT don't drive, that's dangerous, selfish, and stupid.

reply to post by AlreadyGone


There is no good reason to have a limit of 0%. There are so many things that could put you above 0%. For Christians, they would have to take a taxi home after church on Sunday because they had a sip of wine. Maybe someone has a cold and took some cold medicine. Even "non-alcoholic" beer has a small amount of alcohol in it. Do you think all these people should be arrested?

The reason there is a limit is because it's not dangerous to drive when under the limit. Can you find out how many deaths occur each year in your country as a result of someone driving with a BAC level of .01 to .03? I'm curious, and if there is data to support that it is dangerous then I would retract my statement. I just know that if I have half a beer or less I am quite capable of driving 100% as well as when I haven't had any alcohol.

I'm not trying to defend drunk drivers, but I am defending a BAC limit.

I can't help but think that alot of this comes from politicians who drink and drive and know the law to get around it if they are busted. The alcohol limit I do believe needs to be lowered to somewhere like .02 instead of the .09 it is in my state. Personally if you drink you shouldn't be behind the wheel of a vehicle. Many shouldn't be behind the wheel regardless. But as previous posts indicate there has to be some limit as people would be failing it nonstop.

Let's just ban everything that offends anyone.

Yeah, prohibition is cool.

By no means do I think it's okay to drive drunk, but I do think it is interesting how easily people are emotionally influenced and how governments are able to generate so much money from working it.

The word 'drunk driver' is almost equivalent to 'child molester' but in fatal accidents that DON'T involve drinking drivers, you never hear "he was killed by a texter" or a "sleep deprived driver" or "makeup applier".

Lets not forget that even people who try to do the right thing by leaving their car at home have lost their license because they were caught riding their push-bike while over the limit!!

reply to post by spikey


Yeah I knew what you ment about "having a few beers", wasn't being funny with you

But surely if thats the reason for having a limit then its slightly unfair?

As you can probably gather from my first reply I do tend to enjoy a drink and thus would drink more than 4 pints on a Friday night.

Different people have different tastes and different intoxication thresholds therefore wouldn't having a limit be unfair?

reply to post by Bosko


I agree, a .05 limit is well and good, this is for drivers 21 and over with open liciences, it is .00 for younger drivers.

Even with having a no alcohol limit imposed, the message still doesn't get through to some, they will drive no matter what.
It's not only alcohol that is to blame, it is the highly modified cars that the younger people are now in charge of that seems to be a contributing factor especiallly driving after consuming large amounts of alcohol by them.

having a zero limit is only going to give the powers that be more money to fund thier christmas do's and to add to thier quota's for the month.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Hello all,

I was thinking about something yesterday and I can't come up with any clear answer so I was wondering if you guys could share your thoughts?

Why do we have a drink drive limit?

Surely it would be more straight forward to create a law that stated no person is allowed to drive a vehicle if they have consumed any amount of alcohol, no matter how little.

This would help curb peoples temptation to drive after they had consumed an alcoholic beverage. All too often we see cases of people who have drunk and drove because they thought "I'll just have another" or "I'm okay to drive, I don't feel drunk"

Lets face it, if there wasn't a drink drive limit (simply an all out ban on driving after having consumed alcohol) the government would lose thousands of pounds on missing out punishing people with fines?

Thoughts?

Simple, because people go to bars and can have 1 drink (i.e. 1 beer etc) and still be fine. Cops do it all the time. They'll go to a bar have 1 drink and drive back home. People who are normal responsible people are fine to have a drink and then drive as long as it's not too much.

reply to post by rufusdrak


I do understand that however I think your missing my point slightly, surely having a limit means that people try and push it?

If it was illegal outright to drink any amount of alcohol and drive I'm sure less people would do so as opposed to being allowed to have one or two drinks and then not drive.

Didn't you know? Drunk drivers aren't dangerous, people who spin their tires while their car is stationary is far more dangerous hence why they get their cars impounded and drunk drivers can keep driving.

In Australia anyway.

If they ever instituted a 0% BAC then ya might as well close three quarters of the restaurants.

At 0%, you could be fined and possibly lose your licence for having a glass of wine with a meal. Any time you went to dinner, you would have to have a designated driver.

The gov. would also have to invest massively in public transit to do this. You can't make it illegal to have any alcohol in your system and not provide some reasonable alternative transportation.

I think the standard of .08 is just fine.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Hello all,

I was thinking about something yesterday and I can't come up with any clear answer so I was wondering if you guys could share your thoughts?

Why do we have a drink drive limit?

Surely it would be more straight forward to create a law that stated no person is allowed to drive a vehicle if they have consumed any amount of alcohol, no matter how little.

This would help curb peoples temptation to drive after they had consumed an alcoholic beverage. All too often we see cases of people who have drunk and drove because they thought "I'll just have another" or "I'm okay to drive, I don't feel drunk"

Lets face it, if there wasn't a drink drive limit (simply an all out ban on driving after having consumed alcohol) the government would lose thousands of pounds on missing out punishing people with fines?

Thoughts?

Ok, I'll be honest that I did not read the entire thread. But your absolutely friggin right!

There needs to be a new industry. Transporting drunks to safety. Yes, there is an absolute untapped industry of taking people to the bars and back home in one safe piece. Save the innocents.

Reality is..... that we like to let loose, but at what cost? God forbid I ever hurt anyone by my innapropriate actions. Never will I drink and drive. You are soooo absolutely right! Star and Flag!

There should be no tolerance whatsoever about drinking and driving. Flame away.

the limit is fine, you should be able to drink a couple and still be able to drive, people who know how to drive wont have a problem, now the idiots who dont know how to drive, well now, drinking or sober, your going to cause problems anyways.

also, the morons who drink to the point where they cant walk, and go drive, those are the people that shouldn't be driving, I think the DUI laws need to be different for how much you blow in the breathalyzer also.

It is all pretty much a moot point regardless of the "rules and regulations" regarding DUI and DWI. If you get pulled over and the officer smells alcohol on you, regardless of whether you pass field sobriety, chances are you are going to be spending the night in jail. Officers will tend to er on the side of caution, and lose a case in court rather than allow someone who possibly has a higher tolerance for alcohol go from a traffic stop.

reply to post by Death_Kron


Spoken like a true socialist. I work in an elementary school and your views sound like a project in 3rd grade. You would remove people’s rights, their businesses & livelihoods, ALL to avoid personal responsibility being used?

We have more then enough laws on the books to cover drunk driving, just like cellphones & such. Why should someone who is 6’4”/270lbs (myself) be held to the same level as a 105lb person who is noticeably impaired? The technologies exist to take care of these issues on the side of the road. If they were used and people were not allowed to use loopholes to get their cases thrown out, things would be better faster. I actually support simpler drunk driving laws, but that begins by acknowledging everyone has a different point of intoxication.

Why not just make driving in general illegal? That would drastically reduce the problem…

Originally posted by Jake the Dog Man
reply to post by Death_Kron

 

Spoken like a true socialist. I work in an elementary school and your views sound like a project in 3rd grade. You would remove people’s rights, their businesses & livelihoods, ALL to avoid personal responsibility being used?

We have more then enough laws on the books to cover drunk driving, just like cellphones & such. Why should someone who is 6’4”/270lbs (myself) be held to the same level as a 105lb person who is noticeably impaired? The technologies exist to take care of these issues on the side of the road. If they were used and people were not allowed to use loopholes to get their cases thrown out, things would be better faster. I actually support simpler drunk driving laws, but that begins by acknowledging everyone has a different point of intoxication.

Why not just make driving in general illegal? That would drastically reduce the problem…

Spoken like a true idiot...

When have I once even hinted in the slighest that I'm all for withdrawing peoples rights and their businesse's?

To sarcastically suggest "lets make driving in general illegal" is simply childish and has no relevance to this thread.

I understand everyone has a different point of intoxication, I actually mentioned that in a previous post although it seems you missed that...

You may be 6'4"/270lb's while I'm considerably smaller than yourself but I'd hazard a bet I'd drink you under the table mate, I understand more than anyone the effects of alcohol and the differing intoxication thresholds.

My original point was an alcohol limit may encourage people to bend the rules slightly and consumed more than legally allowed.

I feel it would be more beneficial to ban alcohol before driving entirely therefore people won't be tempted to "have one more"

The conspiracy angle of this thread was related to the amount of money the government would lose if there wasn't a catchment area.

To talk about taking away people's rights is simply ridiculous, are you suggesting its a person's right to drink alcohol before they drive a vehicle? Almost as stupid as suggesting I would ban driving in general no?

Next time please read the thread before you contribute.



[edit on 7/4/10 by Death_Kron]