Should BAC limits be left up to the individual driver?

All the car loons think speed limits should be treated as "suggestions"
and the driver free to do whatever speed he thinks he can handle.
Should we take the same attitude wrt drunk-driving?

Of course we should! Accomplished drinkers should be allowed to have a
*much* higher BAC than a newbie, since they have developed a tolerance
for the substance. Yhero Tubby Kennedy is a perfect example of that.
You should be able to drive with a very high BAC as well, you drunken
fool.

Of course we should! Accomplished drinkers should be allowed to have a
*much* higher BAC than a newbie, since they have developed a tolerance
for the substance. Yhero Tubby Kennedy is a perfect example of that.
You should be able to drive with a very high BAC as well, you drunken
fool.

"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> All the car loons think speed limits should be treated as "suggestions"
> and the driver free to do whatever speed he thinks he can handle.
> Should we take the same attitude wrt drunk-driving?

I can't believe I'm responding to you, but absolutely yes! Drivers should
be judged on how much they are impaired, rather than an arbitrary numerical
value. I guarantee you there are millions of people who are much more
impaired at, say, .04% BAC than am I at the legal .08%.

>> All the car loons think speed limits should be treated as "suggestions"
>> and the driver free to do whatever speed he thinks he can handle.
>> Should we take the same attitude wrt drunk-driving?

> I can't believe I'm responding to you, but absolutely yes! Drivers should
> be judged on how much they are impaired, rather than an arbitrary numerical
> value. I guarantee you there are millions of people who are much more
> impaired at, say, .04% BAC than am I at the legal .08%.

I agree. Granted that this requires judgment on the part of the police
officer, most cop cars these days have video cameras, & I've seen them
show a jury just how badly the guy was driving before the officer made
the decision to pull him over. That's how it should be done.

Blood concentration is simply not a good predictor of impairment, and
breath measurements are even worse.

This "judgment call" method will become even more necessary once other
drugs are legalized. Some of them can be measured for weeks or months
after they've stopped having any effect on the person.

>>>John David Galt Jan 10, 5:06 pm
I agree. Granted that this requires judgment on the part of the police
officer, most cop cars these days have video cameras, & I've seen them
show a jury just how badly the guy was driving before the officer made
the decision to pull him over. That's how it should be done.


So you think DUI should be allowed unless the cop can prove the driver
is impaired. Do you also think heroin and cocaine possesion should be
allowed unless the cops can prove the user is a threat to society?

Why do you ask about heroin and cocaine? You worried about getting
busted?

wrote:
> Why do you ask about heroin and cocaine? You worried about getting
> busted?

LBMHBF is making plans for the weekend.

wrote:
> Why do you ask about heroin and cocaine? You worried about getting
> busted?

LBMHBF is making plans for the weekend.

Why do you ask about heroin and cocaine? You worried about getting
busted?