Give them an inch...

[Quantum Windbag]

...they will take a mile.

A campaign to create a new category of driving while intoxicated is being promoted at the Capitol as one way to curb growing problems in Texas’ system of punishing drunken drivers.Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo, among the supporters of the change, said the idea behind a new offense of “driving while ability impaired” — DWAI — would cover drivers whose blood-alcohol content is between 0.05 and 0.07.
That would be less than the 0.08 level required before police can charge a motorist with drunken driving.
A first-offense DWI is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a $2,000 fine, plus potential driver’s license restrictions. No specific penalty has been proposed for DWAI.
Though Acevedo said he does not support lowering the DWI limit below 0.08, “the new offense would give prosecutors and judges and juries another tool to use” in thwarting impaired drivers across the state.

Austin chief pushes for new drunk driving charge

Just what we need, more ways for the government to come after people. Another reason to harass people at roadblocks, and more money for cities. On top of that, if history is anything to judge by, it will actually kill more people.

Forum: Lower DUI Threshold More Dangerous? | Radley Balko | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary

 

[Oddball]

I called this one back in the '80s.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0767924320/]Amazon.com: Nanny State: How Food Fascists, Teetotaling Do-Gooders, Priggish Moralists, and other Boneheaded Bureaucrats are Turning America into a Nation of Children (9780767924320): David Harsanyi: Books[/ame]


A great article on the book here:

Prohibition Returns! - Reason Magazine

 

[JBeukema]

Wait... let me get this straight.


You're mad because they don't want people operating a deadly weapon while consuming alcohol?

 

[California Girl]

I'll declare a huge bias in this issue, having lost a loved one because some bastard was drunk while driving. In my (emotional) opinion, anyone who drinks and drives should be shot. A quick and painless death - which is much more humane than what they do to others.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Wait... let me get this straight.


You're mad because they don't want people operating a deadly weapon while consuming alcohol?

Nope.

I am mad because they are using fraud in order to get more money. My question is why aren't you? Do you have some sort of congenital defect that requires government to protect you from yourself?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'll declare a huge bias in this issue, having lost a loved one because some bastard was drunk while driving. In my (emotional) opinion, anyone who drinks and drives should be shot. A quick and painless death - which is much more humane than what they do to others.

Did you know that alcohol related fatalities increased after they passed the 0.08 laws? Or that this increase occurred after a few consecutive years of an actual decline in fatalities?

 

[Big Black Dog]

The best friend I ever had was killed by a drunk driver. I have no sympathy for anybody caught driving while intoxicated. I think a mandatory jail sentence of 6 months or more would be a good start and maybe a huge fine - say in the area of at least $5,000.00. A second conviction should be a two year jail sentence at least. I like to drink now and then BUT I never ever drive after I have been drinking. If you do, shame on you and I hope you get caught every time.

 

[JBeukema]

Wait... let me get this straight.


You're mad because they don't want people operating a deadly weapon while consuming alcohol?

Nope.

I am mad because they are using fraud in order to get more money.

?

 

[jillian]

I'm not really sure why anyone has an objection to drunk and impaired people being kept off the roads.

if they stay off the roads, they can drink as much as they like.

it always strikes me funny.... you can invade a woman's privacy by forcing her to carry a pregnancy to term; you can discriminate against people for the most personal of reasons, eg., what they do in their bedrooms...

but better not tell you not to drink or make you wear a seatbelt goshdurnit....

warped.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm not really sure why anyone has an objection to drunk and impaired people being kept off the roads.

if they stay off the roads, they can drink as much as they like.

it always strikes me funny.... you can invade a woman's privacy by forcing her to carry a pregnancy to term; you can discriminate against people for the most personal of reasons, eg., what they do in their bedrooms...

but better not tell you not to drink or make you wear a seatbelt goshdurnit....

warped.

Why do people always bring up abortion in an attempt to defend their right to interfere in peoples lives?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Wait... let me get this straight.


You're mad because they don't want people operating a deadly weapon while consuming alcohol?

Nope.

I am mad because they are using fraud in order to get more money.

?

Read the second link from the OP.

 

[syrenn]

I'm not really sure why anyone has an objection to drunk and impaired people being kept off the roads.

if they stay off the roads, they can drink as much as they like.

it always strikes me funny.... you can invade a woman's privacy by forcing her to carry a pregnancy to term; you can discriminate against people for the most personal of reasons, eg., what they do in their bedrooms...

but better not tell you not to drink or make you wear a seatbelt goshdurnit....

warped.

Why do people always bring up abortion in an attempt to defend their right to interfere in peoples lives?

No one is interfering in peoples lives. No one is telling people not to drink. They are saying don't drink and drive.

 

[Oddball]

No one is interfering in peoples lives. No one is telling people not to drink. They are saying don't drink and drive.

I don't think so...What's happening is that the nannies are going for a prohibitionist zero tolerance policy.

Read the linked Reason magazine piece in #2.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm not really sure why anyone has an objection to drunk and impaired people being kept off the roads.

if they stay off the roads, they can drink as much as they like.

it always strikes me funny.... you can invade a woman's privacy by forcing her to carry a pregnancy to term; you can discriminate against people for the most personal of reasons, eg., what they do in their bedrooms...

but better not tell you not to drink or make you wear a seatbelt goshdurnit....

warped.

Why do people always bring up abortion in an attempt to defend their right to interfere in peoples lives?

No one is interfering in peoples lives. No one is telling people not to drink. They are saying don't drink and drive.

No, they are telling them not to drive while not drunk. Most drunk driving accidents happen when the driver is well above the legal limit. this is no different than lowering the speed limit from 55 to 50 simply because a bunch of people are driving down the road at 100, it will have absolutely no impact on drunk drivers, and will only inconvenience people who are not dangerous.

 

[syrenn]

Why do people always bring up abortion in an attempt to defend their right to interfere in peoples lives?

No one is interfering in peoples lives. No one is telling people not to drink. They are saying don't drink and drive.

No, they are telling them not to drive while not drunk. Most drunk driving accidents happen when the driver is well above the legal limit. this is no different than lowering the speed limit from 55 to 50 simply because a bunch of people are driving down the road at 100, it will have absolutely no impact on drunk drivers, and will only inconvenience people who are not dangerous.

Agree, but the bottom line is still don't drink and then get in a car and drive.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No one is interfering in peoples lives. No one is telling people not to drink. They are saying don't drink and drive.

No, they are telling them not to drive while not drunk. Most drunk driving accidents happen when the driver is well above the legal limit. this is no different than lowering the speed limit from 55 to 50 simply because a bunch of people are driving down the road at 100, it will have absolutely no impact on drunk drivers, and will only inconvenience people who are not dangerous.

Agree, but the bottom line is still don't drink and then get in a car and drive.

Here is where this interferes in a persons life. After a long, hard day at work you come home and have one drink to relax. A bit later your best friend calls because her car broke down, and she needs a ride. you have to tell them that they have to call a taxi because you just finished a drink, and do not want to get a ticket, even though you are not drunk.

 

[JBeukema]

Most people who run someone down say they're not drunk...

 

[fyrenza]

Another one of these WTF cares?

If you're going out, to drink,

do so with a chauffeur ~ either a designated driver or taxi.

Not too hard to figure out, I shouldn't think.

 

[California Girl]

I'll declare a huge bias in this issue, having lost a loved one because some bastard was drunk while driving. In my (emotional) opinion, anyone who drinks and drives should be shot. A quick and painless death - which is much more humane than what they do to others.

Did you know that alcohol related fatalities increased after they passed the 0.08 laws? Or that this increase occurred after a few consecutive years of an actual decline in fatalities?

Did you mistake me for someone who gives a damn? As far as I am concerned, you get behind a wheel having had one beer, you should go to prison for life.

 

[California Girl]

No, they are telling them not to drive while not drunk. Most drunk driving accidents happen when the driver is well above the legal limit. this is no different than lowering the speed limit from 55 to 50 simply because a bunch of people are driving down the road at 100, it will have absolutely no impact on drunk drivers, and will only inconvenience people who are not dangerous.

Agree, but the bottom line is still don't drink and then get in a car and drive.

Here is where this interferes in a persons life. After a long, hard day at work you come home and have one drink to relax. A bit later your best friend calls because her car broke down, and she needs a ride. you have to tell them that they have to call a taxi because you just finished a drink, and do not want to get a ticket, even though you are not drunk.

Excuses.