Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-07-2010, 05:05 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
1,065 posts, read 1,756,712 times
Reputation: 476

Advertisements

Proposed new DWAI laws for Texas would allow DWAI charges for as little a BAC as 0.05. Personally I think is this just another nanny state policy designed to exert more control over citizens and feel the coffers at the same time.

0.05 could be 2 beers. This is big government out of control. How about we worry about folks checking their email etc while driving the road which is FAR more dangerous than me driving after I've had 2 beers at Trudy's.

I'm sure many of you will disagree.

Last edited by Bo; 10-07-2010 at 08:24 PM.. Reason: Moved from Austin forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-07-2010, 05:32 PM
 
4,710 posts, read 7,104,601 times
Reputation: 5613
I think it is a false dichotomy to say that we shouldn't change the DWUI laws because some other practices are more unsafe. The two usafe things should each be approached on their own merits. It can, of course, be debated whether blood alcohol levels in the law should change. It is another topic to debate laws to eliminate distractions like texting and using the phone while driving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 05:39 PM
 
3,080 posts, read 3,266,345 times
Reputation: 2509
There were two local news crews on 6th st looking for people to comment on this very topic.

Personally I think it boils down to: is there enough scientific proof to show that a BAC of .05 impairs a person enough to justify this law. And/or is there collected data that shows some reasonably large percentage of accidents (regardless of outcome) where a contributing cause was a driver whose BAC was in the .05 to .079 range. If the answers are no, then to me it's obvious that the law is bogus, at least until said proof can be shown.

A better solution may end up being omitting the DWAI (aka Driving While Buzzed) and lowering the regular limit to something like .075 or even .07 if the facts support it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,509,263 times
Reputation: 27720
I listened to an interview on KLBJ with the Police Chief. He said this is not to catch those at lower numbers but for those who plea bargain down from a DWI so that a 2nd offense is recognized as a second offense. Currently they can plea down and there is no record of a DWI so if they get caught again, it's legally their first offense again and again they can plea down.

So this law is being proposed to close a loophole in another law. And Art is quite happy with that and admitted that in the interview. Almost all callers after that interview said how stupid this was and he should go after fixing the law, not widening the net.

After hearing that interview I decided I'm against this change. It's being done for all the wrong reasons and persons with .05 who were not legally drunk will now be deemed legally drunk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 07:26 PM
 
979 posts, read 2,956,042 times
Reputation: 621
Sounds more like a full employment act for APD. Maybe they can use that new $3 million police helicopter the chief wants to order to do high speed chases of everyone leaving Chuy's to check if they've had one beer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 07:27 PM
 
8,231 posts, read 17,322,756 times
Reputation: 3696
Money grab by the city. DWI is a cash cow. We can all agree that driving while intoxicated or impaired is wrong- but the financial penalties are excessive. Put people in jail for however long it takes, but when the sentence is done, it's done. This new 'impaired' BAC is ridiculous- 1 beer? 2? I would be in favor of lowering the actual DWI offense rather than this no man's land of 'impairment'. Big Brother Cash Cow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 08:46 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,535,499 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimimomx3 View Post
Money grab by the city. DWI is a cash cow. We can all agree that driving while intoxicated or impaired is wrong- but the financial penalties are excessive. Put people in jail for however long it takes, but when the sentence is done, it's done. This new 'impaired' BAC is ridiculous- 1 beer? 2? I would be in favor of lowering the actual DWI offense rather than this no man's land of 'impairment'. Big Brother Cash Cow.

It's all about money. The average cost of a DWI in Texas now is roughly $12,000 in fines and fees. That's big bucks and the more people they can haul in, the more money they'll make. It's not about being too impaired to drive, it's about making more people "criminals," no matter what the Chief of Police says.

Also, consider this if the limit is lowered to that point: Texas already has a law on the books which allows the cops to literally hold you down and take a blood sample on certain, designated holiday weekends. You CANNOT refuse a sobriety test for any reason.

Now, think about the process of incrementalization. Is it likely that law will be expanded to all times, not just designated weekends? Sure it is. In fact, it's probable. For evidence, look at what's happened with the allowable alcohol limit since drunk driving became an issue. At first, as I recall, the limit was .12, then .10, then .08 and now we see a proposal for a limit which would catch anyone having a beer or a glass of wine with supper.

This is how you lose your freedoms folks. One step at a time and all for the sake of "safety."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 08:56 PM
 
37,315 posts, read 59,888,047 times
Reputation: 25341
you should check the drinking laws in England--VERY strict--
people know them and frankly abide by them from what I understand--maybe their beer is stronger there but many people who go out to dinner and have two glasses of wine will not drive home--they plan to take a cab/public tranportation or have a designated driver...
penalties are harsh and it is publically humiliating for someone to be brought in for under the influence...

so I would assume that there is evidence that lower levels of alcohol CAN influence people's driving ability...
frankly there are enough stupid drivers out there who don't need to be drunk to cause wrecks--I am sure than for them two beers COULD put them and other people on the road in jeorpardy...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 08:58 PM
 
37,315 posts, read 59,888,047 times
Reputation: 25341
and I would bet that most people who are against this change (if they are honest) have driven drunk on more than one occassion and not been caught--
and they frequently drive after going out to happy hour or being a friend's BBQ on the weekend or watching the Cowboys and consuming various amounts of alcohol...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2010, 09:08 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,535,499 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
and I would bet that most people who are against this change (if they are honest) have driven drunk on more than one occassion and not been caught--
and they frequently drive after going out to happy hour or being a friend's BBQ on the weekend or watching the Cowboys and consuming various amounts of alcohol...
And I would bet that most who support such a low standard are teetotalers.

Who here really thinks a BAL of 3/4 of 1 percent is enough to make you too impaired to drive safely? I sure don't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:05 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top