jump to last post 1-9 of 9 discussions (15 posts)

Do you favor lower blood alcohol content for DUI?

  1. Mighty Mom profile image85
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    Saw on the news the U.S. is considering lowering the blood alcohol content (BAC) to be chargedwith Driving Under the Influence from .08 to .05.
    Apparently other countries have the lower rate and it's saved thousands of lives.

    Would you like to see the BAC reduced to .05 in your state?
    Do you think your state is likely to adopt this change?
    Do you think it's fair or unjust to responsible drinkers?

    Here's a link showing drunk driving statistics by state.


    1. LauraGT profile image92
      LauraGTposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, absolutely.  A BAC of .08 represents someone who is substantially impaired.  For an average weight woman, it's 2-3 drinks in an hour, and for an average man, it's around 3-4 drinks in an hour.  One scary thing about drinking (as it relates to driving) is that it reduces people's ability to make sound judgments and can make people feel like they are more functional than they actually are.

      The US limits are not particularly strict.  This is an issue where there is a direct correlation - more restrictive BAC limits = fewer traffic fatalities.  It simply makes sense to reduce the limits to help save lives.

  2. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago


    One law. Reckless driving. One punishment(stiff).

    I don't care if you're drunk, stoned, texting, or falling asleep. If you swerve between lanes, hurt, or kill somebody, you pay the time.

  3. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    The reason I say this is because I'm tired of us trying to teach behavior by having laws that punish symptoms. All of these things are symptoms of being irresponsible and callous towards the rights of others.

    Stop treating every symptom differently, and show people that there are very serious consequences for the problem.

    How much more seriously do you think people would take driving if they knew that one mistake caused by texting would lose them their privilege to drive forever? What if they knew driving with a revoked license meant prison?

    I'm sorry, we have coddled personal responsibility completely out of the nation.

    1. Wendi M profile image78
      Wendi Mposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      To your point Jaxson, I was asked to take someone to an AA meeting on Monday because he had (temporarily) lost his license due to a DUI.

      I am a recovering alcoholic and tend to take my program seriously.

      As soon as we left the meeting he informed me that he liked drinking, and had no intention of quitting...he's just attending meetings to get his license back.  Also, his blood alcohol level read at .138 (according to him.)

      I certainly agree with the stiff fines, regardless of what kind of reckless driving is involved.  But I also agree that the blood alcohol level should be raised.

      And, you are correct....there is no accountability left in this country!

      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        Put them in prison and put them to work. Society should directly benefit from incarcerated individuals, instead of having to subsidize their (often) rather nice lifestyle.

        You killed someone driving drunk? You can spend the rest of your life on a chain cleaning up roads, painting buildings, whatever, but doing something productive for society.

        If it were up to me, nobody would be committing crimes to get back into jail... so they can get free food, shelter, tv, exercise machines, etc etc etc.

  4. Mighty Mom profile image85
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    Wendi M,
    That doesn't surprise me at all. Court-ordered meetings can introduce someone to
    the rooms of AA.
    But they won't stay unless THEY see the benefit of quitting drinking.
    How often does it take 2,3 and even 4 or 5 DUIs to bring someone to their knees?

    1. Wendi M profile image78
      Wendi Mposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly Mighty Mom!  This man is in fact on his 3rd DUI!  I just don't get it!

  5. Alphadogg16 profile image91
    Alphadogg16posted 4 years ago

    I 100% agree with JaxsonRaine, there is no accountability, no one is held responsible for their actions.....then its the bars fought for serving them. I know people now that have 4 & 5 DWI's and are still drinking and driving. Although they are suppose to be Felonies. You are risking the lives of others. The punishment should be stiff and harsh. No exceptions.

  6. Mighty Mom profile image85
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    I'd like to see this addressed as more of a public safety issue than a crime and punishment issue.
    Install those breathalizer devices in vehicles. If you blow above a BAC of whatever the
    legal limit is, your vehicle won't start.
    I think it's fair to say that anyone with 4 or 5 DUIs is a very sick mid to late stage
    alcoholic and is very very dangerous on the road.
    However, steep fines, jail time, lost licenses are not going to ever stop the real alcoholic.

  7. profile image0
    Deb Welchposted 4 years ago

    I agree with dropping the BAC for DUI.  NY should adopt it,
    bars and restaurants are furious because they will lose business,
    obviously.  There is enough happening while driving on
    busy highways - adding the alcohol mix to the bloodstream should
    be guarded and re-evaluated.  It doesn't matter whether male or
    female, how much you weigh or how much an individual can
    handle before their vision is impaired - they should set the BAC
    lower to prevent death, accidents, injury, damages plus all the
    red tape and rigamarole that is attached to drunk driving.

  8. peeples profile image94
    peeplesposted 4 years ago

    I see this the same way I see most gun laws. People who are going to drink and drive will do so no matter the law and responsible people will continue to be responsible no matter the laws.

    1. LauraGT profile image92
      LauraGTposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Actually, there's a lot of data on this.  Decreasing the BAC limits is correlated with decreased traffic fatalities. Of course, some people will still drink and drive - nothing is 100%, but across the entire population, these types of policy changes can impact behavior.  Marketing campaigns that make people aware of the laws and consequences, and that promote positive behaviors can also have a big impact on changing people's behaviors.

  9. stclairjack profile image84
    stclairjackposted 4 years ago

    a drunk is gona drive weather you move the decimal point or change one digit,. or not... a true alcoholic that does iresponsible things is already playing with lives long before he/she got behind the wheel,.. most drunks have wrecked thier lives long before they wreck thier first car... theyve more than likely killed a marriage and at least 3-5 treasured friendships before they kill the inocent victem they never met on the road.

    i'm not trivializing the lives of drunk driving victems, but i am saying that the problem is far bigger than that,.... alcohol dependance is a serious problem for many MANY people, some who funtion well in society for 20-30 years before something finaly slips,... for many its landing in court for the DWI... best case scenario BEFORE they kill someone.

    in as much as getting affoul of the law can be the wake up call that changes someones life, be it with drugs or alcohol,.. then yea,... i'm glad there are laws that can be used as tools for recovery,.... but,....

    in missouri there are cities that not only pull you over and give you a DWI or DUI,.. they impound your car/truck and legaly steel it,.... take your property from you and sell it at auction, if you owe money on it the bank will be notified and they have the option of buying it at the auction,.. or not,.. so you could be left with debt to a bank for a truck you no longer own,... this may be your FAMILIES only mode of transport, so perhaps now NO ONE is getting to work in your house hold... no one will get to the dr,... not quite sure how you get to your court hearing on time iether,... (seems like a whole new set of reasons to drink if you ask me) but they do indeed impound and TAKE your vehicle and sell it,.... its become quite the qiet racket in my home state,... meanwhile a persons life is utterly ruined by possibly one incendent, thier entire families lives may be in ruin because an ambitious proffit driven justice system wants to make money cleverly disguised as "throwing the book at them"

    i've watched more than one person go through the system for drunk driving charges,... and the system is rigged for failure,... the hurdles are high, and there is no room for individual descretion,... without a trememdous family and friend suport structure there is a VERY high rate of failure,... and thats ok with a system that PROFFITS from failure,... make no mistake about it,.. its not about rehabilitating people, or protecting people,.. its about conviction rates and jail census,.... period.

    if lowering the BAC is to be used for nothing more than impounding more vehicles for sale at a proffit,... and getting more wins on the prosecuting attournys campaign badge,... then no... i dont suport it at all,... and trust me,.. that is exactly what it will equate to.


    texting while driving has out-paced drinking and driving as killer behavior in my state and many others,.. but i guess since the person who killed somebody while texting still takes a good mugshot,... and the drunk is still easier to point an accusing finger at,.... and more entertaining to watch take the sobriety test on youtube,.. we'lll chase a lower BAC..... since confiscating a cell phone and selling it on ebay isnt nearly as proffitable as steeling cars and selling them at auction,... we'll chase a lower BAC.

    1. LauraGT profile image92
      LauraGTposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      So, I think the issue here is not alcoholics.  You're probably right, people who are dependent on alcohol may not change their behaviors. But, the vast majority of people who drink are not alcohol dependent, and changing the behaviors of those more "recreational" drinkers is probably more the target for this type of policy change.

      And, laws are becoming more strict about texting and driving, and will continue to do so as evidence mounts about how these laws can be effective in saving lives.