quote Originally posted by Tinton: Alcohol affects people differently. 0.08 for someone might be completely different for someone else. So, they shouldn't use a breathalyzer, instead they should administer field tests. Tests that actually WORK. Like, tests that you can perform perfect while sober but have extreme difficulty with while impaired by anything, substance or otherwise. Maybe they can administer the test to you when you get your license, as a baseline, then record the results on your license. Then, if you're caught under the suspicion of driving drunk, and you take the test and if you score much lower than your baseline, you get hauled off to jail. Right now the tests are pretty much designed to make you fail, impaired or not. I know I couldn't recite my ABC's backwards, sober, if my life depended on it.

Not saying i have the answers ( other than people just doing the right thing so its not an issue in the first place ) but I would support accurate tests based on impairment when there is valid cause of suspicion, not of some abstract chemical level.. I also don't support your sarcastic comment about roadblocks. Honest people have a right to move around at will.


EDIT: Hey, page 2 !

[This message has been edited by Nurb432 (edited 04-06-2011).]

quote Originally posted by Nurb432: .. I also don't support your sarcastic comment about roadblocks. Honest people have a right to move around at will. EDIT: Hey, page 2 !

Ahh--1st in line I see. Pull over to the side Sir, turn your ignition off and please step out of the vehicle. The officer with the clipboard will tell you what to do.

quote Originally posted by Tinton: Nice trollbait, Jazzman. I'll bite. You're acting like driving drunk is the worst decision in the world. Yet every day thousands or maybe even millions of people across the U.S. drive home drunk and don't have any problems. I'll be devil's advocate and say that driving drunk isn't any worse than driving tired. I know its a very bad idea to drive if you can't stand or even talk straight, but most people don't get that drunk and attempt to drive. The way the laws are set up, you can have 1-3 beers and still get a DUI even if you're not impaired at all. For many people, the impairment from 1-3 beers is as much or less than if you were to attempt to drive on only 4 hours sleep, or after working a couple 8 hour shifts. Driving while tired is just as dangerous but its condoned by society because apparently its "constructive" while driving drunk is "destructive" behavior. Gotta be at work at 9, but you only got 4 hours sleep last night? You're perfectly fine to drive, even though your reaction time, decision-making skills, etc are all impaired. Went out and had a couple beers with dinner, and now you have to drive home? You're a criminal! DUI's and MADD and all that shiat is just a massive witch-hunt, 100x worse than the Salem trials 400 years ago. So no, a drunk getting out of a DUI because of extenuating circumstances isn't the same as a child molester getting out of a pedophilia conviction. For those that have lost family to drunk drivers, I'm sorry for your loss. But that's no reason to hold a grudge against EVERYONE who might drive drunk. My grandmother was killed by a tractor trailer, the driver was completely sober at the time. Going by MADD's logic, I should hate ALL tractor trailer drivers for the entire rest of my life, and spend time giving lectures and seminars on how/why driving trucks is bad.

No trollbait, Tinton, just my honest opinion. If you were to make this same comment to my friend Mark who lost his daughter carrying his grandchild to a drunk driver he'd likely squeeze your neck until your eyeballs popped out of your head. The tone and feel of your post reminds me of greasemonkey's attempt to minimize what he did. I don't hold a grudge against anyone who drives drunk. I just hope they either A: Get arrested and jailed before they kill another family, or B: When they have that final drunk driving wreck that they don't take anyone else off this mortal coil along with them. I'm not on the wrong side of this issue, that's for sure.

everything bad that can happen if you drive drunk is already illegal.
drinking & driving laws are based purely on potential, as are all other driving laws, including having to stop at red lights & speeding.
so - which is more hazardous to oneself & to others: NOT stopping at red lights or drinking/driving?

many forget one simple thing: when you sign off on your drivers license - you sign off on basic rights. most significant is protection from unreasonable search & seizure. and, as these laws grow & the costs to drive grow - many will choose to just plain old NOT partake in the "civil" system of driving, and just go back to using their private property (cars) as they choose on public right-of-ways (roads) - AKA - drive without licsense/insurance. There is actually nothing "evil" about doing that. And, the punishments sofar are pretty slight.