Joe,
The guy was having trouble counting his change, he definitely did not need
to be on the road. As far as a zero tolerance, I don't believe any states
have zero tolerance. I know there are some countries in Europe that do have
zero tolerance.


"Joe Blizzard" wrote in message
...
"Dr. Dr. . R. Name" wrote
I know it is not really a 2 liter, I just don't know what size the BIG
bottle of beer is. ; )

If you don't know a quart from a double-deuce, you're really not qualified
to comment on this subject. (Just funnin' witcha)

Seriously, though, I think a zero tolerance policy, and for that matter
the virtual zero tolerance policies that we currently use, are
counterproductive. Targeting responsible drinkers with random tests is as
much a waste of resources as strip searching little old ladies at the
airport. Organizations like MADD and the NSC have done an outstanding job
of changing societal attitudes toward drunk driving, but there are still
hard-core hard-cases who don't respond to public scorn. The problem is not
people with trace amounts of alcohol in their system, the problem is
drunks, and that's who we should be concentrating our scarce law
enforcement resources on.

In the unlikely event that Doug Kanter has a good day fishing and
celebrates with that beer of his, he's probably not going to be instantly
transmogrified into a marauding menace to society. But the way our current
enforcement policies work, he could be treated the same as that guy who's
been drinking all day and tearing around in his 50mph cigarette boat. I'll
take common sense over zero tolerance any day.