Quote:
Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC
The new DUI law is justifiable from a scientific perspective since the studies seem to clearly indicate that impairment begins at .05, but where I would change it, is have it be a much lesser crime and punishment then hitting .08 or above. The level of impairment should correspond with the severity of the punishment.
As a side note, I was shocked to discover that .05 is the most common legal limit in most European countries, so I have a hard time hearing the complaint that this is some crazy idea that would only happen in Utah. I admit I am biased in this area because I have lost 3 friends to drunken driving and have seen the devastating effects.
|
Truly sorry for your loss. I can imagine the BAC of the offending parties was not .05. The studies are bullshit. Almost every statistic involving alcohol related accidents is untrustworthy. An example is this: you have a beer after work, get in your car and a sober mother broadsides you. There you go! "Alcohol related accident". The truth is the NTSB has had a boner for .05 for ever. They targeted the lowest-of-all hanging fruit, Utah, to be the first place and the pasty wax figurines with poor-fitting suits on the hill complied like good little doggies.
I always hear about the Europeans and Canadians etc. I was at the Senate hearing yesterday and, when asked what the effects of this law will be on the hospitality industry, one of the old jowly white muppets on the stand pointed to Calgary saying: "I was in Calgary last week and they have a .05 BAC limit and I saw them partying all over the place!". To which I responded, "Hey that's a great idea! Let's do what Calgary, the rest of Canada and most of Europe does. You can drink when you're 16-19 there too, there are no restrictions on booze shots or proximity requirements and you have real draft beer! EXCELLENT IDEA!".