BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Bill McKee

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 19:03:04 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 23:39:38 -0600, wrote:

This note is a bit too long as it is, Tom.

Yeah - it was, but unfortunately, it doesn't quite address the
issue.

Why do you object to a legal requirement to drive sober?

A formalistic treatise on the legal niceties of justice is all well
and good, but you still do not explain, as a practical matter, why
you
take high offense at an issue that is clearly in the interests of
society as a whole.

As you formulate your reply, keep this in mind. For every drunk
driver arrested, that same drunk driver has driven, on average, 271
times under the influence prior to being arrested.

That is behavior that cannot be tolerated.

I doubt that the average drunk driver has driven 271 times DUI. The
real
drunks do, but with the laws now with a very low BAC to make you a DUI
driver, I think the average DUI person is one who does not realize he
has
gone past the magical number. And a mandatory felony is absurd on a
first
arrest.

Well, what can I say. I read that recently and wasn't suprised. I'm
as suspicious of statistics as the next guy, but that's what the stats
present.

With respect to BAC, .08 is not unreasonable. You have to have a
standard. In my opinion, any alcohol present in a driver is automatic
license suspension for one year and impounding the car for the same
amount of time.

With respect to mandatory felony on a first arrest - well, you know my
situation, I'm firmly in the camp of locking them up and throwing away
the key, but seriously, what are you going to do - nothing else seems
to work.

Studies show not much change in crashes from a 0.1 to a 0.08 level. I
am for penalties, but making it a mandatory felony is as stupid as a
you get. And the hardcore drunks drive better at a 0.1 than they do at
a 0.0. The body, I think, suppresses a lot of chemical production that
the alcohol provides. Those alcoholics that I have known need a drink
to get going in the morning. When you can drink a pint and show little
effect, you have a problem.

What studies? I doubt this is the case. There's a huge difference
between having a 1/2 beer and three shots of whiskey.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Google the studies.

So, basically you have no citation.

--
Nom=de=Plume

So basically you are lazy.