WestSideBilly

I'm not sure who you're talking about, but I'm not talking about the small percentage of DUIs that are given to alcoholics or heavy drinkers. If you're at all thinking about what you're doing, it's quite easy to tell if you're impaired - can you follow moving objects with your eyes without your head following? Can you walk in a straight line? If you're slurring and stupid drunk, then you deserve a DUI. But the majority of DUI stops are in the .08 to .12 range, where impairment is subjective and varies immensely. I know people that can barely function and wouldn't register a .08, and a few (like me) who don't really have signs of impairment until past .10 (definitely a mixed blessing).

The people that get crazy drunk and still want to drive around to the next stop... I have no sympathy for. The threat of a $10,000 fine won't deter them, though, but it does pad the government's coffers nicely.

julius

But it's always nice to err on the side of caution; if there are people who are impaired at .08, or even .04, then maybe it's better to have the law say .08 instead of .10. It only makes sense to me.

WestSideBilly

I wasn't arguing for a higher limit; I don't think it would serve any real benefit. My only argument is that enhanced/increased enforcement and higher monetary penalties are not being done strictly with safety in mind.

vonHultgren

Still some very good advice and some very good experiences shared here.
Thanks George for getting this started.


As for Sideways comment on the bike chap...that blows me away, wouldn't have expected that in a million years