that's not drunk driving

[John Galt]

[The Tooth]

Not being able to drive when drunk ruins your life? As for "not doing anything wrong", being in control of heavy machinery possessing no small amount of kinetic energy while judgement and reflexes are seriously impaired is wrong. We've decided such. That's why there are laws against it. I know you want to drive while drunk, but that's no reason to make it okay to drive while drunk. As I've said before, the government is not your mommy and its job is not to give you your way and make you feel better. Public safety is more important than seeing to it it that you aren't sad. So suck it up and take a cab.

[The Tooth]

[John Galt]

it ruins people's lives who are not drunk and who are arrested for "drunk" driving

changing the defineition of DUI doesn't mean that more people are driving actually drunk. if legal limit was .9 then does that mean people driving at .8 were not completely drunk (and amazingly alive... but that's beside the point)? no, they are drunk. a reasonable level for what is truly "drunk" - based on what duis generally are given out for -- is 0.15. not 0.08 or 0.05.

[lil bit]

The meaning of DUI is Driving Under the Influence. It isn't necessary to show signs of intoxication to be under the influence of alcohol.

[dontworrybehappy]

And nothing says it MUST be alcohol that you are under the influence of. You can be on some meds and if they screw with your head and you crash, you could get a DUI. ANY substance that effects your motor skills could get you tagged.

Thank God for the breathalyzer. That makes sure that Joe Drunk who can function with a 12 pack in his system is taken off the streets, despite being able to pass a field sobriety test. Just because you can hold up a leg and count backwards from 10 doesn't mean you should be driving.

[eynon81]

[eynon81]

[eynon81]

[lil bit]