Why Not lower the legal Limit?

[paguy88]

What is the name of your state? PA

Ok so me and some friends got to talking last night about DUI and BAC..

Ok so no one can argue that once you have 1 drink.. you have NO idea what your BAC is...

so many variables like what did you eat while drinking if anything, what % of ACHL was in the drink.. how tired where you... how fast your body absorbs it etc...

Now with 2 million people a year getting atleast arrested for DUI.. many people think it's the guy/gal that drinks a case of beer then drives.. that's not always the typical person that get charged with DUI... it's you buinessman who was out with a client and has a few drinks or a husband and wife who grabbed some drinks for a wedding aniversery then drives home..

suddenly you are charged with DUI a normal hard working, good neighbor citizen is now a common criminal? I find that real hard to believe..... NOR fair not because drinking and driving is right.. but you have no way of knowing your BAC.

The state say don't hot that magic .08 OK no problem however if I drink I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT MY BAC's.. now when you get told by the cop to do a FST or in other words play simon says road side on some major road way... when blow in a mechine that is not accurate then submitt to a blood draw...

you are stuck... refuse it lose your licenese but don't give the cops evidancce.. do it and you are giving them the evidance to convit you..... either way you lose...


they are looking for OVER .08 but you have no way of knowing what your BAC is...

Its a crime you may be committing and just don't know it... Now if I was into a grocery store and steal batteries I made that decision to stick them in my pocket and walk out the door with out paying.... or if I get a gun walk to up someone and shoot them. i made that desision to do that and know its a crime... if I speed say the speed limit is 65 and I am driving 80 easy to see look at the speedomiter.. I can see I am driving 80.

If I have 2 drinks in a hour and drive... I have NO IDEA what my BAC is... no way of knowing... and dont say they have charts.. the charts are not accurate.. they are based on the average human... last time I check the average human was chinesse female 5'2 110 lbs... that's not me is that you?

why not just lower the limit to say .03 which would cover mouth wash food cooked with ACHOL?



then it would be more clear cut...

anythoughts?

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state? PA

Ok so me and some friends got to talking last night about DUI and BAC..

Ok so no one can argue that once you have 1 drink.. you have NO idea what your BAC is...

so many variables like what did you eat while drinking if anything, what % of ACHL was in the drink.. how tired where you... how fast your body absorbs it etc...

Now with 2 million people a year getting atleast arrested for DUI.. many people think it's the guy/gal that drinks a case of beer then drives.. that's not always the typical person that get charged with DUI... it's you buinessman who was out with a client and has a few drinks or a husband and wife who grabbed some drinks for a wedding aniversery then drives home..

suddenly you are charged with DUI a normal hard working, good neighbor citizen is now a common criminal? I find that real hard to believe..... NOR fair not because drinking and driving is right.. but you have no way of knowing your BAC.

The state say don't hot that magic .08 OK no problem however if I drink I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT MY BAC's.. now when you get told by the cop to do a FST or in other words play simon says road side on some major road way... when blow in a mechine that is not accurate then submitt to a blood draw...

you are stuck... refuse it lose your licenese but don't give the cops evidancce.. do it and you are giving them the evidance to convit you..... either way you lose...


they are looking for OVER .08 but you have no way of knowing what your BAC is...

Its a crime you may be committing and just don't know it... Now if I was into a grocery store and steal batteries I made that decision to stick them in my pocket and walk out the door with out paying.... or if I get a gun walk to up someone and shoot them. i made that desision to do that and know its a crime... if I speed say the speed limit is 65 and I am driving 80 easy to see look at the speedomiter.. I can see I am driving 80.

If I have 2 drinks in a hour and drive... I have NO IDEA what my BAC is... no way of knowing... and dont say they have charts.. the charts are not accurate.. they are based on the average human... last time I check the average human was chinesse female 5'2 110 lbs... that's not me is that you?

why not just lower the limit to say .03 which would cover mouth wash food cooked with ACHOL?



then it would be more clear cut...

anythoughts?

My thought is that you must have had too much to drink before posting this...
Either that, or you just got out of jail for a DUI that you don't feel you deserve.

Driving is NOT a right. If you don't like the way it is, don't drive.

 

[CdwJava]

you are stuck... refuse it lose your licenese but don't give the cops evidancce.. do it and you are giving them the evidance to convit you..... either way you lose...

Another wrinkle is that you can refuse to give the test and the police can still draw blood ANYWAY! Then you lose your license for a refusal AND the police have their evidence.

they are looking for OVER .08 but you have no way of knowing what your BAC is...

Actually, they are looking for signs of impairment. You can be impaired below .08 ... and most people are, they just may not rise to the legal interpretation.

why not just lower the limit to say .03 which would cover mouth wash food cooked with ACHOL?

Food cooked with alcohol and mouth wash would need to be consumed in such ridiculous quantities to register much at all that they should not even make much of a blip on a breath test.

Personally, I'd lower it to .02 since that is where visible impairment begins.


- Carl

 

[CavemanLawyer]

Its not a matter of knowing your BAC and taking the chance on driving anyway, the point of DWI is to prevent impaired people from driving. Any given person can be impaired even before they get to .08 but studies show that all people show signs of impairment at or above .08. That's why its the magic number. DWI is a strict or absolute liability offense. There are very few like it. There is no mental state requirement. Its not like how you have to intentionally steal something to commit theft. If you are impaired and you operate a motor vehicle, you are DWI even if you subjectively believe that you are not impaired. The point is that whether you realize your impairment or not, you are a danger to others on the road. Strict liability offenses place ALL of the burden on the would be offender because unless you are absolutely positive that you are not impaired, than you are risking breaking the law. The point is to encourage people to be overly diligent and not take any chances.

 

[BigMistakeFl]

BigMistakeFl

Thousands of people break this law every day. Tonight, thousands of restaurants will serve alcohol to people who will drive home, or to the next stop on their night out. Driving after drinking is legal and that's the problem. Lowering or raising the "legal limit" still leaves judging whether or not you are impaired up to the person who is drinking. This is unfair to all concerned.

 

[paguy88]

Another wrinkle is that you can refuse to give the test and the police can still draw blood ANYWAY! Then you lose your license for a refusal AND the police have their evidence.


Actually, they are looking for signs of impairment. You can be impaired below .08 ... and most people are, they just may not rise to the legal interpretation.


Food cooked with alcohol and mouth wash would need to be consumed in such ridiculous quantities to register much at all that they should not even make much of a blip on a breath test.

Personally, I'd lower it to .02 since that is where visible impairment begins.


- Carl

cops can not force blood in PA unless a accident... but i know every state is different

 

[paguy88]

My thought is that you must have had too much to drink before posting this...
Either that, or you just got out of jail for a DUI that you don't feel you deserve.

Driving is NOT a right. If you don't like the way it is, don't drive.

wrong on both points

 

[paguy88]

Its not a matter of knowing your BAC and taking the chance on driving anyway, the point of DWI is to prevent impaired people from driving. Any given person can be impaired even before they get to .08 but studies show that all people show signs of impairment at or above .08. That's why its the magic number. DWI is a strict or absolute liability offense. There are very few like it. There is no mental state requirement. Its not like how you have to intentionally steal something to commit theft. If you are impaired and you operate a motor vehicle, you are DWI even if you subjectively believe that you are not impaired. The point is that whether you realize your impairment or not, you are a danger to others on the road. Strict liability offenses place ALL of the burden on the would be offender because unless you are absolutely positive that you are not impaired, than you are risking breaking the law. The point is to encourage people to be overly diligent and not take any chances.

its not? (aside from a drug DUI) that .08 is what they are looking for.... Thats the point some people could drive a car at .08 everyone is different tolerance level and how it effects them.. is there that much difference between .079 and .08? come on...

and if the point is to enocurage people to be overly diligent.. I dont see any groups in my area pushing any action to promot this.. all i see is we are having a DUI check point to scare people...

 

[CdwJava]

cops can not force blood in PA unless a accident... but i know every state is different

Is that by statute? Or a matter of policy for most agencies?

Since federal law permits compelled evidentiary blood draws, unless PA courts have held that PA will NOT compel a blood draw, they can if they want to. I am unable to find a definitive answer on the net, though I found some nursing sites where nurses commented on taking blood from unwilling patients in PA ... so, not sure what to make of it.

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

its not? (aside from a drug DUI) that .08 is what they are looking for.... Thats the point some people could drive a car at .08 everyone is different tolerance level and how it effects them.. is there that much difference between .079 and .08? come on...

A .08 simply makes the prosecution that much easier as the elements change. If someone is .08 or higher, then we need to prove driving and probable cause to arrest and obtain the test. If under .08 we have to prove both those elements as well as impairment.

A great rule of thumb would be NOT to drink and drive at all. Lacking that, a good back-up is do not drive for 2 hours after each drink you consume. If you use the 2:1 rule you should always test at .00 under most all circumstances.

- Carl

 

[Sweetiepi]

If there was an accident, and it is suspected that the person was Drinking & Driving:

1. Why would the police force a blood test if a blood test is required (by the hospital upon Emergency Room entry)?

2. Wouldn't it still provide the same "end result", just in a different format?

Perhaps DUI laws should be lowered to 0.0 so mass transit and encouraged fuel conservation would become the norm nationally? (Wishful thinking)

 

[justalayman]

cops can not force blood in PA unless a accident... but i know every state is different

can you explain this then? Technically they cannot force any BAC tests but there are penalties for refusing to submit. I found nothing that specified which which test is favored over another. They simply seem to be grouped and as such would be at the discretion of the administrator of the test.

§ 1547. Chemical testing to determine amount of alcohol or
controlled substance.
(a) General rule.--Any person who drives, operates or is in
actual physical control of the movement of a vehicle in this
Commonwealth shall be deemed to have given consent to one or
more chemical tests of breath, blood or urine for the purpose of
determining the alcoholic content of blood or the presence of a
controlled substance if a police officer has reasonable grounds]
to believe the person to have been driving, operating or in
actual physical control of the movement of a vehicle:
(1) in violation of section 1543(b)(1.1) (relating to
driving while operating privilege is suspended or revoked),
3802 (relating to driving under influence of alcohol or
controlled substance) or 3808(a)(2) (relating to illegally
operating a motor vehicle not equipped with ignition
interlock); or
(2) which was involved in an accident in which the
operator or passenger of any vehicle involved or a pedestrian
required treatment at a medical facility or was killed.
(b) Suspension for refusal.--
(1) If any person placed under arrest for a violation of
section 3802 is requested to submit to chemical testing and
refuses to do so, the testing shall not be conducted but upon
notice by the police officer, the department shall suspend
the operating privilege of the person as follows:
(i) Except as set forth in subparagraph (ii), for a
period of 12 months.
(ii) For a period of 18 months if any of the
following apply:
(A) The person's operating privileges have
previously been suspended under this subsection.
(B) The person has, prior to the refusal under
this paragraph, been sentenced for:
(I) an offense under section 3802;
(II) an offense under former section 3731;
(III) an offense equivalent to an offense
under subclause (I) or (II); or
(IV) a combination of the offenses set forth
in this clause.
(2) It shall be the duty of the police officer to inform
the person that:
(i) the person's operating privilege will be
suspended upon refusal to submit to chemical testing; and
(ii) if the person refuses to submit to chemical
testing, upon conviction or plea for violating section
3802(a)(1), the person will be subject to the penalties
provided in section 3804(c) (relating to penalties).
(3) Any person whose operating privilege is suspended
under the provisions of this section shall have the same
right of appeal as provided for in cases of suspension for
other reasons.
(b.1) Other suspension for refusal.--
(1) If any person placed under arrest for a violation of
section 1543(b)(1.1) or 3808(a)(2) is requested to submit to
chemical testing and refuses to do so, the testing shall not
be conducted; but, upon notice by the police officer and
provided no suspension is imposed pursuant to subsection (b),
the department shall suspend the operating privilege of the
person for a period of six months.
(2) It shall be the duty of the police officer to inform
the person that the person's operating privileges will be
suspended upon refusal to submit to chemical testing.
(3) Notwithstanding section 3805(c) (relating to
ignition interlock), if any person receives a suspension
pursuant to this subsection who at the time of the offense
was required to comply with the provisions of section 3805
prior to obtaining a replacement license under section
1951(d) (relating to driver's license and learner's license)
that does not contain an ignition interlock restriction, the
suspension imposed pursuant to this subsection shall result
in the recall of any ignition interlock restricted license
previously issued and the driver shall surrender the ignition
interlock restricted license to the department or its agents
designated under the authority of section 1540 (relating to
surrender of licenses) and, prior to the issuance of a
replacement license under section 1951(d) that does not
contain an ignition interlock restriction, the department
shall require that the person comply with the provisions of
section 3805.

 

[justalayman]

if you want to know what your BAC is, try buying one of these guys.

http://www.rupissed.com/breathalysers.html

It won;t prevent you from driving and many drunks will still dismiss the readings but it would answer your questions as to what your BAC actually is.

 

[CdwJava]

If there was an accident, and it is suspected that the person was Drinking & Driving:

1. Why would the police force a blood test if a blood test is required (by the hospital upon Emergency Room entry)?

Because one test (the hospital's) belongs to them and not to the police. They would have to seek a subpoena to obtain the records. PLUS! The hospital tests for alcohol in a different manner than criminal labs (plasma vs. whole blood) - the hospital results also tend to be higher.

2. Wouldn't it still provide the same "end result", just in a different format?

Not necessarily. (See above.)


- Carl

 

[CavemanLawyer]

cops can not force blood in PA unless a accident... but i know every state is different

Forced blood draws are available in ALL states if a warrant is obtained. In some states forced blood draws can be taken without a warrant if there is an accident causing serious bodily injury or death, and in some states it can be done just if it is a felony DWI (multiple prior DWI convictions).

The implied consent laws work identically for blood and breath. You consent to giving them just by driving, but there is no way to force someone to submit if they choose to refuse, so you penalize their refusal with a DL suspension. Once someone refuses, if you don't fall within a statutory exception (ex: accident with injury) than you can always just go get a warrant for a blood draw where you strap them down and take blood. But this is not typically done for misdemeanors since it may be cost and time prohibitive.

Also under implied consent laws, you have already consented until you actually refuse. This means that if a person is passed out drunk or unconscious from an accident, their blood can be taken without having any warnings given to them and without giving them a chance to refuse.