Proposed Statewide DWAI law would allow charges to be brought for a BAC level of 0.05. Thoughts?

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by stillkit

All of that is true, but you can't force bad drivers to turn into good ones by the force of law, whether they're drinking or not. The sad reality is that people will be killed on the highways and no matter what we make illegal, it will still happen...unless we just outlaw cars altogether.

My point is that at some point, there has to be some rationality to all this or it will become nothing more than a back-door prohibition. Few would support eliminating the sale of alcohol again, but apparently many would support making the drinking of it illegal in every circumstance outside the home. Is that really what we want?

Personally, I'd like to just go back to the days when a drunk driver was identified by his demonstrated inability to control his vehicle, not by the amount of alcohol he has in his system. As you point out, there are far to many extenuating circumstances to categorically define everyone who had a beer with lunch as a "drunk."

But, I'm in the minority on this issue.

This makes perfectly good sense, and I totally agree.

I don't think any one is "defending" drunk driving when they object to a "one size fits all"...as in that over .08 or .05 and you are automatically assumed to be completely imparied. Such isn't always true and to presume so is silly if not stupid. And can potentially -- as you indicate -- have the affect of ruining peoples lives and careers.

Sure, for some that (the blood alcohol level above) might be true. On the other hand, some folks have a higher tolerance level for it. To stigmatize someone as a drunk driver for life because they stopped off for a few beers after work, or drank a few glasses of champagne at a wedding ceremony -- which is just about all it would take -- is a witch-hunt mentality. Each case should be judged on its own merits and circumstances.

If the person weaving all over the road, slurring, stumbling around and incoherent, that's one thing. If they are not, but just happen to get stopped at a random road-check and blow over the magic number, that is another.

My memory is a bit shaky on this one, but seems like one time I read that the original founder of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) later resigned her position, and said she was appalled at the neo-prohibitionist slant the organization had taken. Her original intent was to assure that people who drive plastered out of their minds and injure/kill an innocent third party are properly dealt with by the criminal justice system and not be allowed to escape punishment because of lax DWI/DUI enforcement, and the plea there was no criminal intent involved in the manslaughter.

That part makes sense. Yet, it was never originally meant to devote itself to going after anyone and everyone who had a drink or two and drove home.

As it was, the organization took on a life of its own (as most lobby groups do, eventually) and had to justify their salaries by continually pushing for stricter and stricter laws and limits. Whether they made sense or not.

[SloopJohnZ]

A mature person who drinks socially should know when they've had too much to drive. I think some people confuse the difference between driving after drinking and driving drunk. .05 is pretty far from being drunk and pretty harmless. Such a one size fits all law would be an assault on personal responsibility and liberty.

So, no, veto. Vote it down.

[catman]

It's just plain ridiculous. To paraphrase stillkit, some people can't drive well when they are sober, while others can drive well after drinking (not plastered). Let's go by how they drive!

It reminds me of the definition of a Puritan: The fear that someone, somewhere, is having a good time.

[TexasHorseLady]

And, once again, a quote that's coming more and more to be my favorite, because it is so sadly often appropriate, applies here in spades:

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

Anyone who doesn't recognize the slippery slope that we're sliding down here just isn't paying attention or, as said, hasn't been around long enough to watch it in action.

Absolutely against it.

[Eurodawg]

The only way to be fair is 0%. Everything else is very dodgy. 0.05% is nothing, 3 beers, depending on your weight and your done and you go to jail.