Pandora I think you make some good points here. Let me tell you what I think and see if you do not agree.
And Pred... you chime in here too to see if we can't all find some reasonable common ground here. I may have seemed overly harsh in my reply to you (that's just my sarcastic comedic side)... but as a person who likes his beer or a nice Stoly's and 7 I think there's a fair middle ground to be had.
First I think we have to agree there must be the uniform standard as imperfect as that might be.
However I think lowering the "drunk" level from .1 to .08 was an overreach.
The .1 standard was about 3 beers in an hour for an average adult male and probably a little over 2 for an average female... that seemed reasonable to still be competent to drive, to me.
The other thing I think would be more fair is to graduate the punishment by just how high someone tests. As it is now you could blow a .08 or a 3 and under the law you are equally drunk & incapacitated. This seems an overreach.
In my perfect world I'd start @ .1 for being over the limit and that would be the base penalty whatever that might be. Then above .15 the penalty goes up and then @ .2 goes up again and so on.
The object to me is to keep impaired drivers off the roads. The more impaired the more punishment. But if bars & restaurants are going to be allowed to serve alcohol there has to be some reasonable level below drunk that still allow for driving privileges.
So what do ya think... did I make any friends here?
