Harley Davidson Forums banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Mississippi Cajun
Joined
·
24,349 Posts
Hell, if you use Listerine, you'll probably blow .08. I agree, when they get a handle on the texting, I'd be a lot more agreeable to DISCUSS the BA level change. The problem I have is that NTSB throws this stuff out there and usually there is little substantive data to support their dictates. These numbers are often arbitrary, and it has been argued for years that not everyone is equally affected at a given BA level. Imagine getting up after a good night's sleep after partying with your friends and getting busted on the way to work for residual alcohol that is having no apparent effect, but some butt smashes into you and you end up in ER and the blood test shows a .05 residual BA even though you haven't had a drink since the night before.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
366 Posts
hell two 5.5% beer can blow over the limit, been there done that!
IMO alot of this BS so the state can fine you and/or seize your ride for auction to fund the state for having a couple beer is purely a cashgrab coming under the guise of "protecting us from ourselves".
im not making excuses for obviously hammered drunk drivers just the limit is already stupid low & i'll agree with pb68slab that theres a shiiteload of folks gettn killed from textn while driving i mean wayyyyy more than drinkn right now.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Awhile ago , one of our local thimble-brained politicians sponsored a bill to mandate EVERY privately owned motor vehicle registered in PA to be equipped (at owners expense) with a breathalyzer/ignition interlock. Including antiques , classics and motorcycles.

This was in response to a large number of college kids getting killed driving after binge drinking.

PA has a large number of colleges.

With a lot of out of state kids who have their cars registered in their HOME STATES!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,464 Posts
I had a feally funny joke concerning the 2nd to last sentance in your post, but I refrained.....


Sent from Motorcycle.com App
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
The curiosity is killing me! :dunno
 

·
Try'n to behave
Joined
·
5,854 Posts
Just a way to bump revenue gains to pad the state coffers and politicians pockets.

I would venture to guess that if you researched DUI numbers, they would be falling which would mean less money generated. It only makes sense to lower the limit so they are able to jump those numbers back up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
When I was a deputy, the limit was .10 and most people were well above the limit and falling down hammered. Personally, I believe that .08 is borderline too low. I thought .10 was a fair limit, as some folks can handle alcohol better than others. .05 definitely is a money grab, as a lot of counties don't want to raise the taxes for fear of people screaming about it. Also, with the decline of property values, tax revenue is lower. Still, no excuse to have the police being used to raise revenue like that.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,464 Posts
When I was a deputy, the limit was .10 and most people were well above the limit and falling down hammered. Personally, I believe that .08 is borderline too low. I thought .10 was a fair limit, as some folks can handle alcohol better than others. .05 definitely is a money grab, as a lot of counties don't want to raise the taxes for fear of people screaming about it. Also, with the decline of property values, tax revenue is lower. Still, no excuse to have the police being used to raise revenue like that.
I am so glad that someone else agrees with me. I think .10% should be the minimum as well.

Also, as a highly-functioning drunk, I can handle much higher BAC's and still be able to pass a FST. Might fail a breath-o, but I can still walk, talk, and function with a normal reaction time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
I don't think people driving at .05 are a big problem. I think they need to drop the hammer very heavily on those who are in the aggravated DUI range .15 or higher. I agree that distracted driving (texting, yakking on cell, etc) is a much greater problem.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,464 Posts
Definitely agree that cell phones are a much bigger problem than drunk drivers. Even gov't statistics will show you that more deaths and injuries and accidents occur from people paying more attention to their phone than the road.

All this is, is a gov't ploy to increase revenue. It's total bullshit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
951 Posts
Lowering the limit isnt gonna do much to keep more drunks off the road.................Here is a novel idea, why not really enforce the existing laws we have on the books now? Maybe an increase in penalties for said DUI?

I hear and see too many stories of a drunk killing someone and the drunk had just gotten out of jail for their fifth DUI or some such chit.
 

·
MPG'S? Who gives a
Joined
·
9,925 Posts
0.05 is pretty much my b.a.c. level at all times...:rofl:

Seriously though.... They really need to increase the penalty for distracted driving instead.
 

·
Earthbound misfit, I
Joined
·
2,448 Posts
I stopped drinking 16 years ago. .02 would be fine with me.

I agree that talking/texting is a much bigger problem though.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
447 Posts
Talking / Texting -- Oregon passed a bill that the fine for this is $1,000.00. Yeah, a full blown GRAND, USD. There's a bill circulating to move it to $1,500, or $2,000. If that seems somehow "excessive," just remember -- you don't need to talk on the phone.

Biggest impact on dropping the DUI limit is that bars/taverns are liable for serving intoxicated patrons if that patron gets stopped for DUI. That's a huge liability -- particularly when, at 0.05% it's hard to tell if a person is "impaired" or not. Nevermind that any of the drunken buddies I've ever hung with generally have liquor in their rig. So, coming home from the bar and ol' bubba is hitting the jug out of the glove box, kills off his stash and tosses the "dead soldier" out the window --

When pulled over, he's over the limit and the bar gets sued for serving someone "visibly intoxicated." And of course bubba will never concede to having been drinking and driving.

I don't want to be on the highway with drunks. At a safety class for First Responders the local Sheriff noted that in this county, after dark there's a 50% chance that the driver in the vehicle coming at you has been drinking.

I trust myself not to drink and drive/ride. I don't trust a lot of the drunks on the road not to drink and drive. (Our MAYOR got busted for DUI on his Harley! -- And part of his "punishment" was that the city hired a chauffeur for him.)

The "solution" is just like cell phones -- You don't have to drive when you're drinking.

Trust me here, I'm serious about drinking, a great deal. But I don't EVER get in a vehicle and drive if I've been drinking, or smoking pot. (It's legal across the river!) Them's the rules, and I've never had an issue w/ compliance.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,283 Posts
I get the agrument for reducing the limit although I believe it is fine where it is. What I disagree with are the excessively low penalties for people that kill and hurt other people with a vehicle.

I strongly feel that the focus should be much higher fines and prison time for people charged with vehicular manslaughter and "negligent" homicide, even in non-lethal accidents that leave people crippled. Whether people are texting, drunk, tired or distracted they made personal decisions that resulted in the destruction of someones life and I hate seeing a slap on the wrist and having it chocked up as a minor "ooops".
 

·
Mississippi Cajun
Joined
·
24,349 Posts
I get the agrument for reducing the limit although I believe it is fine where it is. What I disagree with are the excessively low penalties for people that kill and hurt other people with a vehicle.

I strongly feel that the focus should be much higher fines and prison time for people charged with vehicular manslaughter and "negligent" homicide, even in non-lethal accidents that leave people crippled. Whether people are texting, drunk, tired or distracted they made personal decisions that resulted in the destruction of someones life and I hate seeing a slap on the wrist and having it chocked up as a minor "ooops".
I used to have that opinion of the penalties, and for sure, some people get away with some pretty serious chit when it comes to DUI, but I watched my nephew get hammered with a year of in house arrest with the ankle bracelet. That included him paying a rental fee for the bracelet, a monitoring fee, and he had to pay the probation officer fee monthly plus the huge fine (and attorney costs). During that time, the probation officers would drop by and check his refrigerator and trash for beer bottles and such which made entertaining his friends and rock band members (he plays bass) pretty grim. Then he had an additional 2 years of probation without the bracelet and no driving privileges (believe me, I got to take him to work a bunch of times before he figured out how to work our his transportation situation. Finally, with all of that behind him, he gets his license reinstated and the cost of insurance is out of sight for him....and he still owes my brother a ton of money for when he got busted in the first place.
The penalty for him got his attention, and he will be behaving himself for a long time because we all are on his ass and told him if there is a next time, good luck.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top