Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentLaw & Ethics · 1 decade ago

Do you agree with MADD's push to lower DUI level from .08 to .04?

Obama Picks MADD CEO To Head up Federal Highway Safety Agency

Radley Balko | April 20, 2009, 12:06pm

Obama has nominated Mothers Against Drunk Driving CEO Chuck Hurley to head up the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

But even that isn’t enough. Under Hurley, MADD has been pushing to have the legal threshold reduced to .04 BAC, which would turn anyone who had a glass of wine over dinner into a “drunk driver” as far as the law was concerned—and subject them to penalties more severe than those applied to many violent felons…

http://reason.com/blog/show/132977.html

3 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I don't support ANY fixed BAL as the standard. Some people are too impaired to operate a vehicle after LOOKING at a beer. Others are no more dangerous at 0.10 than sober.

    that said, I don't believe the LEADERSHIP of MADD CARES about road safety. They are more concerned about POWER. Note: I deliberately distinguish the leadership from the 'rank and file' membership.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 3 years ago

    i do no longer care approximately what they are doing, I care with regard to the factor. DUI decreased is the thank you to regulate alcohol intake extra suitable than DUIs. i'm against all leisure drugs that regulate suggestions chemistry (like alcohol) i do no longer think of that's the thank you to do it via fact once you without postpone start to decrease alcohol, you cope with unintoxicated rioters. once you decrease DUIs, you get offended human beings dealing with law enforcement officers, on a similar time as the everybody is for particular under the effect. they are going to be under adequate effect to steer away from anger administration yet no longer adequate to cause them to omit with a fist. Riots ought to take place. Amnesty for unlawful extraterrestrial beings isn't precise. If we alter the emigration regulations at the instant in place, I say we enable the unlawful extraterrestrial beings do a "redo" and struggle by it criminal without punishment. in the event that they fail then, we kick em out. That way they ought to flow by legally one way or yet another. If there is not any room for them interior the emigration device we are saying bye bye and placed them on a brilliant checklist. each and every each and every now and then unlawful extraterrestrial beings are genuinely escaping froma existence or dying subject. A 2nd probability ought to be so as yet direct amnesty? NO!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • df
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    OK- this whole thing is getting ridiculous, .04 ?? Let's try to get people to stop phone calls & texting & eating & putting on make-up while driving.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.