2006-11-20 15:49:55 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I know about the constitution, i'm asking a hypothetical question like would there really be any less accidents or would there just be the same amount with different causes?
2006-11-20 16:07:36 · update #1
Designation of a driver as a law will be unconstitutional because drivers are not permanent in nature and this would entail regular changes in registration.
2006-11-20 15:53:36 · answer #1 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There should be, but i've never heard of one.
Why? Because drunk drivers kill innocent people, thats why.
Whole families have been destroyed by drunk drivers. And they get away with it time after time. The laws need to be changed, to require mandatory jail time for drunk drivers.
PS - Before everyone jumps on me, yes i have driven drunk. It was stupid, irresponsible and criminal. I should have been arrested, but luckily i got home without hurting anyone.
2006-11-20 15:57:17 · answer #2 · answered by toobusytostress 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The use of a designated driver is a good idea. However, who is going to make sure the DD is not under the influence when he starts driving?
What is going to happen if you try to enter a bar alone? "Sorry, you can't come in without a designated driver"? Please...
2006-11-20 16:17:59 · answer #3 · answered by Kevin k 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a law that requires you to have a DD (it is the negative implication of a prohibition on driving drunk.)
If you enact a positively phrased law requiring DDs, it would be violated just as much as the current prohibition against drunk driving.
2006-11-20 15:55:50 · answer #4 · answered by lordofthebarnyrd 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I think there should be. because there have been to many unnecessary deaths due to drunkeness and families that hvae been devestated emotionally , financially, and physically.
2006-11-20 15:55:06 · answer #5 · answered by lady t 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋