Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Push for Blood Alcohol Level to be 0.05 now?

That's not my area of expertise and it's not my job to fix what's wrong with the system. But I can spot a racket when I see one, and I see one. Are you a counselor or employed by the system? You seem to have a keen interest in defending the system.



I may be a fool, but at least I can read and remember what I read and I can tell the difference between the laws, the reason they're on the books, and the privately-run system that handles offenders. I already said the laws themselves were not driven by financial interests, remember:





Yes, I do believe it was unfairly extended. And yes I do have evidence that he won't do it again and it's not a "future prediction," it was ten years ago. Beyond that, he's never been an alcoholic or even a heavy drinker so it's very easy for him to avoid getting into situations where he has to drive after drinking because he doesn't drink that often. Not every DUI offender is a raging alcoholic. After he was arrested his biggest regret was letting down his parents. He was mortified, especially since he was in school at the time so I had to pay for everything. He told me he'd pay back every penny and he did and that sooner than I expected, it was the first thing he spent money on when he got his first job out of school. Even now when we go out for a meal he grabs the check and says "you've been paying for me all my life, it's my turn now."

He truly regrets what he did and he's not going to repeat it. Not because he endangered anyone, and not because of "counseling" or victims panels. Because it was a stupid mistake he never should have made.

A gentleman from Sweden was visiting our family last fall. He would not even drink a beer because he was driving. It appears that the Swedes, and I assume, those from most European countries value the right to drive highly. If they plan on going out for an evening they will take some form of public transportation because there is a much more stringent enforcement of DUI laws with stiff penalties that are unforced.

Two months ago my wife and three youngest children were almost killed when an amped up guy driving a semi bobtail passed a line of traffic going up a long hill. He kept the pedal down all the way to the top and hit a 70 yo man head on. The semi tractor was immediately beside my family in our vehicle and they saw the whole thing happen. We are still dealing with anxiety when driving.

This guy had a history of abuse but wasn’t intimidated by the penalties he would face. If we actually enforced what is on the book these stupid pols wouldn’t be grandstanding like they are saving the world. Wasted empty suits they are.

I drive on occasion wihile enjoying an open can or bottle of beer.

Not nearly as dangerous as a cup of coffee. That schit is dangerous!

There are a lot of long lonesome highways in Wyoming, a long ways between stops. It used to be that many drivers measured distances not in miles or hours but sixpacks. Not so bad now as it used to be, but there are still some of them out there.

Smoke. I write this in good faith. Glad to hear that he's not prone to repeat. I don't know the solution to eliminate the conflict you suggest either, though from what I saw the councilors were already absolutely swamped with customers and I believe had genuine interest in helping folks to not re-offend. Likely it varies in places and with individuals... No not my area of work nor education but I can not fathom how it'd operate otherwise as anyone involved is going to be paid and the offender will be paying... I can wholeheartedly say that the vast majority of individuals mandated to attend victims panels or group sessions that I attended had chit attitudes contending they didn't do nothin' and I shared that attitude in 1993... A statement of fact not an accusation. Folks from all walks of life.... Would anything have unfolded differently had I had more severe penalty that time? I don't know, as I was prone to overindulgence more so than many, but if I'd lost that driver's license for a year like a conviction, and I was guilty of the crime, it'd definitely gotten more attention from me. Years later, greater than ten so it was once more treated as a first offence, I got caught again in very different life circumstances, actually the lowest day of my life so understand I ain't bragging. Seems I got a little more out of the 'system' , or was more open to admit my role in the wrongdoing. I took it beyond the mandates and from there over the next few years I learned a great deal about not just the system but people and the overwhelming horrors resulting from DUI, substance abuse and the often chit selfish attitudes that contribute. Hundreds of stories and individuals. My 'defense of the system' is really more of an appreciation of the severity of the 'problem' of mixing driving on public roads with intoxication. It's intolerable once as it is 100 times. I have zero flexibility on this stance nor sympathy for individuals that get themselves into it - as it's absolutely 100% avoidable. I know folks are generally ok with a little BAC but dammit the consequences are too severe for others that it can, and really does effect. I don't know the perfect max BAC to establish... Certainly it's not something that can just be left to self-regulation, that is obvious. If anyone here has not met anyone fucqked up by DUI, that's swell, just know it is truly very prevalent and has caused extreme yet totally avoidable 'hardship'. For comic relief, to admit what a dumbass I WAS, I'll offer that both DUI events involved the same town, same bar and the same affinity for Black Velvet and Cokes. Cheers.

Lowering the standards isn't a cure in itself. The punishments need to be increased as well

Repeat offenders should be a capitol crime.

First offenses should be a minimum.mandatory12 months confinement with no visitation

Followed by 10 years probation with periodic at will residence checks

If you cause an accident while intoxicated every personal asset you have, to inude your home should be sold with profits going to the victim

In addition to the lawsuit for any injury sustained. Noplea bargains for dui offenses. Either plea guilty to the full charges or take your chance on a trial

Alcoholics are drug addicts just any other drug addict but they are treated better by our legal system because alcohol is a legal drug and socially acceptable. I knew a guy whose 6 year daughter was run over and killed by a drunk driver at a school crossing. His solution for relieving his grief was to become an alcoholic himself and drive drunk.

You can beat just about any DUI charge, THAT DOESNT INVOLVE an ACCIDENT if you have enough money. And beating the first one is advisable if you think there’s a chance you will get a second one. THAT’S where it gets hairy.

Just look at dui charges in different counties with similar populations if you think the revenue stream doesn’t play a big part in dui Enforcement.

If you think arbitrary BAC levels should be the deciding factor in charging a person with dui, you are ignoring some relevant facts. I’ve known guys who were a real danger driving if their BAC was not at a comfortable level FOR THEM.

Like Miles said, it’s a different deal for different people.

And... in Texas.... you can be charged with a dui with a BAC as low as .02. The .08 level is just prima facie evidence that needs no supporting evidence.

In most small towns the rich guys kid will get a ride home and the poor kid will go to jail no matter if the level is reduced or raised.

Alcoholics and Drug Addicts are two different species. The Medical Professionals recognize this. The Medical Codes for the two conditions are different.

Hell, FredIII fuc*ks his 5 year old cold stone sober.

Boomer, thanks for your post and what you said makes sense. I know there are good counselors who really want to help, and I know there are a lot of people who need the help and benefit by it. Probably most who get a DUI, and I'm not saying my son shouldn't have had to go through the program. I guess the thing that grated on me (and him) was that he didn't get many if any of the good counselors. One of the people who he had to work with was a fat lazy woman who treated him like schit and didn't do anything to help. Another guy ran group sessions and would show up 15 minutes late every time and then just have the group sit around and talk about their issues and not add anything--no insight, advice, or actual counseling. And they kept their jobs because there was nothing the people paying the bill could do about it they were a captive audience you might say.

I know that doesn't mean all counselors are like that and I didn't mean to imply that they are. Sounds like you had a much better experience, and that's all good.

This is way over the top...I hope God doesn't judge you as harshly as you judge others.

You were born in the wrong century and missed your calling. You should have been Henry VIII’s headsman.

Shouldn't be a problem for one so much holier than thou......

I haven't read all the responses here, but this is obviously a very charged subject. I lost a girlfriend when I was 16. She died at the hands of a drunk driver who hit her car, killing her instantly. I lost my father to alcoholism. I can only imagine how many times my dad drove drunk.

.05 seems very low. I think it's safe to say most folks would blow a .05 shortly after drinking one beer, or two at the most. Do I think this is little more than a revenue generator for the police? No. But I also fully understand that way too many people aren't afraid to get behind the wheel when they have no reason to be driving.

Lots of arguing here, but can we all agree that the best remedy here is just to not drive drunk in the first place? I'd have to think most of us have lost a friend or loved one to a drunk driver.

I have made north of 400 DUI arrests over the last 20 years. I can tell you from experience that at .05 most people show very little sign of impairment. It varies from person to person but I think .05 is too low. The idea is to keep people safe. I do not believe at .05 a driver is automatically unsafe. I did not read all the replies but did notice the a few about DUI being a revenue stream for the police. Here that is actually completely untrue. None of the fines return to the PD. We pay for the officer's processing time and court time. NO money comes back into the PD we actually have a budget line to pay for blood tests.

Lots of the comments about revenue streams came from me, and mine were not directed at the police, just the people who make money off the offenders after sentencing.

I hope you’re being sarcastic.

Should be the same as driving with high blood pressure. What if they should stroke out and cross the double line?

Diabetics often present as drunk. I went to a call many years ago for a possible DUI and when we got there the cop was behind the lady and she was going round and round at a roundabout at no more than 5mph. I reached in and put her car in neutral and got her stopped, once stopped that cop was hell bent on dragging the pregnant lady through the window in an angry response to her not respecting his absolute authority. I suspected that she wasn’t drunk in her third trimester but suffering a diabetic emergency. We told the cop to stand down or he was going to have to go through all 4 of us and not like the outcome. Our lieutenant told him that if he didn’t get out of our way to render aid that he would be restrained on our gurney while we did our job. Her blood sugar was so high it didn’t register on our machine so we got an IV and transported her. She and her baby were okay after medical intervention but Mr. Cop got some remedial anger management training after we all filed complaints. If it had been a different crew responding that lady and her unborn baby were going to have the chit knocked out of them by a badge heavy douchebag.

Lowering the BAC won’t do anything positive for society, it’s just more feel good liberalism. Cardiac patients, diabetics, hypertension, epilepsy, stroke, etc should be treated the same way if you Stalinists want to be tough on potential crimes. Throwing someone in jail over what could happen is very different than being tough on someone that actually causes injury or damage.

There’s a lot of liberals here and they mask themselves as conservatives until a thread like this comes up. Pathetic really...