Should drivers between the ages of 18 and 21 have a lesser punishment for DUI if their BAC is under .08?

Question

In New Jersey .08 % is the BAC level that must be broken for a DUI...but if the driver is not 21 then .01 % and up is the same punishment

Answer 1

NO NO and NO they should be in more trouble because they are not supposed to be drinking at all. It is totally illegal for them.

Answer 2

No, if you're between the ages of 18 and 21 your BAC should be 0% (excluding medicinal reasons). Even medication can be grounds for a Driving Under the Influence though so do not do it.

Answer 3

Absolutely not, the reason that these laws (under .08 for those under 21) were written is because those under 21 have less driving experience and, in most cases, less inhibition to perform dangerous acts such as drunk driving.

You also need to check your state law, in many .08 is the per se law (meaning that just by being over .08 and in control of a vehicle) you are basically assumed to be DUI.

BUT, in many (if not most states) you can still be DUI under .08 if impairment is proven (your driving abilities are affected).

Answer 4

And so it should be. Young drivers are disproportionately responsible for accidents. They tend to be over-confident, and when they've been illegally drinking, then they are worse.

Adults are allowed to drink; children are not. So a .08 for an adult, an a 0.0 for a child is appropriate. the .01 is an allowance for alcohol that may occur naturally in the body.

Answer 5

in accordance to the Arizona driving force's handbook the suspension era for a driving force under 21 convicted of DUI is two years, no longer ninety days, and that's for any measurable volume (0 tolerance). you could assume the court docket to hit you with the optimum penalty. to boot to loss of employing privileges there will be fines, costs and surcharges ... you could exceptionally lots anticipate over $750, the "very final value" ought to pass over $2,000! I doubt you would be allowed a "hassle" license during the suspension era, DUI offenders oftentimes do no longer qualify for even constrained employing privileges. you're in for a coarse time, you could seek for suggestion from a criminal expert.

Answer 6

Actually, younger people commit more irrational deeds than those who are older. When I was 18 I thought it was just a bunch of bull, but, in retrospect, I have to concede that it's true. So, that being said, why should younger, less experienced drivers be rewarded for bad decision making?

Answer 7

No. Drivers of this age need to learn right up front if they drink and drive they'll pay. I've lost to many good people including a family to drunk driving and I don't have any pity for those who do this. I don't and I don't take any kind of medications that might impair my driving and expect others should do the same.

Answer 8

Should rapists and murderers between 18 and 21 get a lighter sentence? At 18 you're an adult. So tough tittie.

Answer 9

No, drinking and driving KILLS!

It is understandable that the levels would be less for inexperienced drivers but the punishment should be the same.

Answer 10

Should an 18 year old who kills a person in the commission of a robbery be punished any less than a 43 year old who kills a person in the commission of a robbery?

Answer 11

Well being it is illegal for them to possess or consume alcohol, I think they should lose their license for 5 years and pay healthy fines. I would also make them attend alcohol abuse classes with a trip to the morgue!