Whereas I get that, scientifically .. I'd prefer a no-tolerance driving law. Just about everyone that goes out and has a couple drinks thinks they're below and has one more .. too easy to actually have too much. It's a much simpler law to say NONE.
Legal Pot
- Thread starter Stoked
- Start date
Whereas I get that, scientifically .. I'd prefer a no-tolerance driving law. Just about everyone that goes out and has a couple drinks thinks they're below and has one more .. too easy to actually have too much. It's a much simpler law to say NONE.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Totally agreed. I'll also note that .09 is legal in some states.
Don't disagree, but my point still stands .. we're spending the money either way... and, imo, having no laws is not an option.
So we all know cell phones in use, even for a voice call, debilitate drivers more than someone who's at a BAC of 0.14, right?
https://www.distraction.gov/download/research-pdf/Comparison-of-CellPhone-Driver-Drunk-Driver.pdf
So should we ban anyone who own a cell phone from driving, or arrest people for having an "open cell phone" in the car?
Let's try to make our streets safer and quit creating boogymen to attack.
https://www.distraction.gov/download/research-pdf/Comparison-of-CellPhone-Driver-Drunk-Driver.pdf
So should we ban anyone who own a cell phone from driving, or arrest people for having an "open cell phone" in the car?
Let's try to make our streets safer and quit creating boogymen to attack.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
I don't think you should punish all of the people who aren't doing anything wrong, just because you want to catch the irresponsible people in the cross fire.
If you're irresponsible and you drink too much and your driving really is dangerous, then you should be arrested. If you smoke way too much weed and it makes your driving dangerous, then you should be arrested.
But if you only drank a little, or smoked a little, and you can drive just fine, then you shouldn't be arrested for driving.
This seems way extreme for you Jared. I personally know 3 people killed by drunk drivers. Their friends and family would find the boogey man comment incredibly insensitive. And yes, people are beind tried for manslaughter when killing people while texting.
There is way too much stupid in this thread. I'll duck out and leave you guys be. Cheers!
Please cite this "scientific data" or STFU for the sake of the rest of us that think that legalized marijuana is a good idea if it's controlled in a similar manner to alcohol.
A reasonable person exists.
SaltyDawg
Well-Known Member
Look it up in the last thread on this topic where I cited several studies. I'm not going to search for it on my phone.
It is illegal in some states.
Those people have my sincere sympathy. The people who are responsible should face murder, not manslaughter, charges in my opinion. That said, I highly doubt the drunk drivers responsible were below a 0.12. Maybe they were, but I seriously doubt it. We don't make laws to make people who have suffered feel better about their tragedy. So, despite their feelings I think we need laws that make more sense.
I also agree that .08 is really low to consider basically and potentially ruining someone's life over (considering that that's a light to moderate buzz for most people). While you could argue to not drink and drive AT ALL, reality says that that's not really an all-purpose solution to a country that likes to drink and has the worst public transit system in the developed world. But when laws are put in place, they're usually purposefully a bit overkill so that an officer can use some discretion on whether to cite an offender or not.
My solution? People in general could afford to be a lot more responsible in how they plan these things (DDs, cabs), but that's not a government solution. Trying to work out a way to expand and emphasize public transit seems like a sensible route.
My solution? People in general could afford to be a lot more responsible in how they plan these things (DDs, cabs), but that's not a government solution. Trying to work out a way to expand and emphasize public transit seems like a sensible route.
Burden of proof. And I tend to avoid your posts.
Thanks for the sincere reply, GF.
My problem is that too many of these drunk drivers would swear they're under the legal limit. It's a tough call.
On one hand, shame on them for not being resposible enough to know whether they're over the limit .. on the other hand, it would save some innocent lives if we just got tougher.
As a matter of disclaimer, I speak from personal experience.. I've ent out WAY TOO many times with the intention of having 'a couple of drinks' and the next day I'm at home, safe, and can't even remember driving home. Fortunately I've never hurt anyone or even gotten caught, but I won't ever do it again. I won't even have one now, because I don't trust myself. Should other 'responsible' drinkers that drive be penalized for those, like me, that are less responsible? No. But I also hate the loss of innocent life.. which is what makes it a tough call.
My problem is that too many of these drunk drivers would swear they're under the legal limit. It's a tough call.
On one hand, shame on them for not being resposible enough to know whether they're over the limit .. on the other hand, it would save some innocent lives if we just got tougher.
As a matter of disclaimer, I speak from personal experience.. I've ent out WAY TOO many times with the intention of having 'a couple of drinks' and the next day I'm at home, safe, and can't even remember driving home. Fortunately I've never hurt anyone or even gotten caught, but I won't ever do it again. I won't even have one now, because I don't trust myself. Should other 'responsible' drinkers that drive be penalized for those, like me, that are less responsible? No. But I also hate the loss of innocent life.. which is what makes it a tough call.