What do you think about Drunk Driving???

Question

Over half of the fatal crashes in the united states are due to drunk/buzzed drivers. i saw a recent study that showed people with a BAC of .06 were impaired enough to markedly decrease thier reaction time and judgement. however, in some states the legal BAC is .1 and in others it is .08

do you think lowering the legal limit to .06 for all states would decrease the amount of traffic fatalities? and DUI offenses?

i am a DUI offender myself (sober 17 months) i really think that if the limit was lowered more people would be more likely 'not' to order that last drink, or have a drink and drive at all for that matter. what do you think? would it make people more accountable or would it do nothing at all?

http://www.driveandstayalive.com/articles%20and%20topics/drunk%20driving/artcl--drunk-driving-0005--global-BAC-limits.htm
that is the global bac limits. the u.s. is among the highest and most lenient. funny, cause we seem to have the most cars and traffic too.

Answer 1

In my younger and stupider days I sometimes drove drunk. I survived without killing anyone, but that was pure blind luck, nothing else. Oh, and maybe an angel or two riding with me.

I am opposed to drunk driving. I favor tough penalites for those found guilty of it--especially repeat offenders. I don't know if changing the BAC is necessary or would help, but the trick is to get young drivers to recognize that driving a car is a serious undertaking, with more risks than just about any of us do day to day.

Drunk driving, overly aggressive driving, speeding, and driving while sleep-deprived are all bad driving habits that seem to hit young drivers a lot but often carry over to older drivers.

Thank you for your attitude. We all make mistakes, and it sounds like you have learned from yours. The system should always have ways to forgive those who are willing to do better.

Answer 2

Not much more than a pint is the limit Everyone is different but a pint is probably about the marker. It used to be closer to 2 pints but they reduced it. It's unfortunate that they can't find a way to test if you're drunk rather than the exact amount of alcohol in your system. So many people get banned for driving in the morning because they still have alcohol in there ststem even though there sober.

Answer 3

I think there would be just as many stupid people no matter what the law is. No one seems to want to talk responsibility even though they KNOW it is wrong. My husband had a DUI. He had to have the blow start in his car. Now he NEVER drinks and drives. Because he doesn't want that thing in his car ever again. Maybe if they issued more of those things people would be more careful. But as for lowering the limit, I don't think so.

Answer 4

"Nationally, 12.8% of all drivers involved in fatal accidents during 2001 are known to have been intoxicated according to the BAC laws of their state. This number is based on a systematic examination of the official records of each and every accident involving a fatality during that year in the US. It is based on factual evidence rather than on estimates or even guesses.

The higher number (about 39%) commonly reported in the press refers to accidents in which there was believed to have been some alcohol consumed by anyone associated with the accident. For example, if a person who was believed to have consumed any alcohol is stopped at a red light and is rear-ended by an inattentive completely sober driver, that accident is considered to be alcohol-related."
http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrivingIssues/1066933326.html

Lower DUI Thresholds More Dangerous?
"When President Clinton signed the .08 law in 2000, every state was forced to either comply with the law or give up millions of dollars in federal highway money. Critics at the time pointed to numerous studies showing that motorists aren't significantly impaired at .08, and that in fact, most drunk driving fatalities occur at .15 or higher. Lowering the national standard from .10 to .08, then, was a bit like lowering the speed limit from 55 to 50 to catch motorists who zip along at 100 miles per hour. "
http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrivingIssues/1133834173.html

Here are some interesting facts about drinking and driving that you wouldn't see in your local newspaper:
http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/DrivingIssues/index.html

Drinking and driving laws in this country are more about getting votes and making money than saving lives. Politicians can appear to be tough on crime, yet compassionate at the same time.

Answer 5

I think it`s tragic how many fatalities are caused by it. Innocent people. I don`t think you should be drinking AT ALL if you drive. NOTHING. Can`t get much safer than that. Why would you take that risk, some people get tipsy after just one drink, even if that is under the legal limit.
Congratulations on your sobriety!

Answer 6

I think it will just make criminals out of more people. DUI penalties keep getting harsher, but DUI offenses keep increasing. I suppose once everyone is in jail they'll decrease, and that's what it seems like the government is trying to do.

Answer 7

...firstly, I want to congratulate you on 17 month sober...that is a wonderful accomplishment...

...lowering the legal limit is always a good idea...it may increase the court traffic...but better there than on the streets...I know you mentioned a few days ago about a court date, yourself...I said a prayer for you...hope it worked out for you and I think you are very special to come on here publically and admit it...Bravo !

Answer 8

Lowering the BAC won't reduce the number of crashes or arrests.

Answer 9

It's against the law.
Any one who drinks needs a designated driver.

Answer 10

there should be zero tolerance... and anyone caight or worse hurting someone should be jailed for a minimum five years