Drink driving law change, anyone agree?

Question

I think that drinking and driving should be made illeagal alltogether. Why when it is so obvious that alchohol affects some people sooner than others and vice versa, don't they just say no one is allowed to drink alcohol and then drive?

It's not. I think you're allowed 80mgs of alcohol in your blood to be within the legal limit, what I am suggesting is that you're not allowed to consume any alcohol at all if you're going to drive.

There doesn't have to be any leeway because a lot of people are in accidents involved with people who are still drunk from the night before. With a law that says no drinking and driving at all there's no confusion and if people fail then it's their own fault.

So what if alcohol sales suffer, smokers are now treated as lepers in this country so why should it be any different for the alcohol industry!

Answer 1

I have been saying this for years if you want to drink DO NOT DRIVE it is as easy as that, I have lost friends to idiots who have had a drink. When we go out one of us just does not drink any alcohol or we get a taxi.
The law should be changed and if a death is caused by drink driving it should be classed as murder or at a minimum manslaughter, the driver chose to drink and chose to get behind the wheel or ride on a vehicle, no excuses should be acceptable and if the person is injured they should be done for GBH a vehicle is a lethal weapon in the hands of a person who is under the influence of drink or drugs.

Answer 2

While the 'laws' that you suggest do make a lot of sense, they would be totally impossible to 'enforce' in any real way. Unfortunately, there will always be people who think it's 'okay' to drink and then get behind the wheel of a car and drive it ... and those people will continue to 'kill innocent people' in other cars and in the cars they are driving, no matter what the 'laws' say. I think that this world would be 'much better' if people were not allowed to drive 'private vehicles' in the city ... but I know that there would be far too many people 'on the busses' if that was made into a law ... and what about the bus drivers? Don't they 'deserve' to have a 'car' to ride in or drive when they aren't working?
And shouldn't 'drinking and driving' be put in 'quotation marks' to show people that you are talking about making doing BOTH at the same time/near time illegal ... as you put it, it seems to say that you are for making both drinking (one thing) and driving (another thing) althogether illegal ... when what you are saying that 'drinking and driving' at the same time/near time should be made illegal.
This is a 'good question' though, and I think that you should think about a career in either 'law' or 'government' because the world needs people like you who can 'think' along these 'very controversial lines' if we want to 'change the world for the better' in all ways.

Answer 3

The problem is that alcohol is pervasive in social situations (in relatively minor amounts). You go to a friend's house to watch a football game, you have a beer or two over an hour or two; you go to a business reception, you have a glass of wine; you go out to dinner, you have a martini beforehand.
This small amount of alcohol does not impair a driver to a significant degree. And if you couldn't have any BAC, just like speeding, nearly everyone would be guilty (it would just depend upon whether you got caught). And, many, many americans live in places where there ARE no taxis, where there IS no public transportation, where you have no other way home.

I don't like drunk drivers, but we have to be realistic in our society. We are a mobile society; we drive. We are a drinking society (mostly acceptably and socially). Regardless of how long you wait, there will probably still be some alcohol in your system, long after you've stopped drinking. .08 is fine now--a person hardly perceives impairment at that level. Otherwise, we'll just be back to people getting lucky or unlucky. (P.S. Think about the other times alcohol is in your system -- ever take cold medicine and then have to run to the store? Ever take communion and then have to drive home from church? Ever have a late night, even sober, and then have to drive to work the next morning?)

Answer 4

I think the problem is that it would be nearly impossible to enforce. So many people have a glass of wine at dinner, for example, that in areas w/o public transit, they just couldn't go anywhere afterward.

I'm not saying I disagree with you on the merit of such a law; I lost a sister to a drunk driver. But as long as alcohol itself is legal, there *is* still a difference between having any alcohol (like, say during communion at church) and being drunk. Hence the test to judge how much alcohol you've had.

Answer 5

I quite agree, but there should be more emphasis put on drivers who have had no alcohol and are still involved in accidents, I would have thought more road accidents are caused by sober drivers. It does seem people overlook this fact because of all the publicity regarding drunk drivers. I am completely for the drink driving laws as they stand

Answer 6

I understand your position but this would have huge economical effects! Millions of people have a beer after a big game or after finals in college, especially at a local bar and then drive home. You have to have a reasonable limit so that alcohol can still be consumed slowly and responsibly. Unfortunately, even if this law were made illegal, people would still break the law about as much as they do now, and in almost every case, get away with it because most of them don't get caught. Trust me, I understand what you are saying but I just don't think this is fair to the workers in the economy or to the responsible drinkers!

Answer 7

There would be people losing their licences the day after the drink, because they still had a small amount of alcohol in their blood. It takes a long time to clear the system completely, although you might feel totally sober the morning after.
I'm all for lowering the limit, but I think there still has to be a little leeway for this reason.

Answer 8

I certainly think that people who kill due to drink driving should have their licenses taken away for ever, its seems tough but if they take a life ... as for banning alcohol altogether for drivers, yes, but catching them breaking the law would use the same method of catching drivers over the limit, i.e. someone would have to dob them in, or, they'd have to be randomly stopped, plus they'd be the usual brouhaha concerning loss of alcohol sales etc which means profit would be affected which means it won't ever happen (specially when you think how this government has brought in 24 hour licensing laws).

Answer 9

I understand what you mean. You think that the limit should be 0, right? I don't necessarily agree. I feel that I should be able to have a beer and drive and hour later. There still may be a very slight trace of BAC after that, but I would definitely not be impaired or breaking the current DUI/DWI laws. JMO

Answer 10

That's why they set the levels as low as they do. At .08, many people are still quite able to drive at least as safely as many people do stone sober. especially someone that's engrossed with talking with their honey on the cell phone, or putting on makeup, or lighting up a cigarette, or smacking their kid around.

Maybe they should come up with a rating system. Put little beer cans on the license for how much you can drink and still drive. If you're already a lousy driver, you only get a half a can.