Utah Governor Signs .05 DUI Limit !

[Blimey]

You do realize that exact same reasoning can be used against concealed carry. It's ok to have your guns on your property but to take them out in to public people could get hurt. Therefore we need to ban CC'ing. Look I'm not in favor for drinking and driving, but I'm tired of the government regulating every aspect of my life on the claim of making me "safer". I have no problem if some kills someone else while drinking and driving, with them being locked up for life. Heck I would be OK with the death penalty if they caused a death while drinking and driving. But to throw an arbitrary number out there in order to get some more revenue and claim it's for my safety I'm calling BS. It's time people owned up for their own actions and stop worrying about other people.

I think the comparison to carrying is only fair if the person carrying is saying he has the right to open carry with his finger on the trigger at all times. He'll do his very best not to have an accidental discharge, though. We'd say that's a bad idea because the risk of injury/death is extremely high.

At the point you're drunk driving you've really by definition proven you're acting irresponsibly. If there is science behind .05 it should receive the support a law does at .08. If there isn't science, it shouldn't be signed. It sounds like you're basically arguing for no drunk driving BAC limit.

The question is will lowering the level help anything ?

If your legal limit is .08 and you've got a problem with people driving around at .2, what is dropping it to .05 going to do ?

They were already breaking the law, they aren't breaking it *more* now.

People have a fuzzy sense about what their BAC is. Truly if it's lowered from .08 to .05 it may do little more than end up in more DUI convictions, since people don't have a quantitative sense about exactly where their BAC is. Perhaps implicit in all of this is the idea that to be safest you should not have any alcohol in the blood whatsoever; that means no drinking during means for example, if you have to drive.

Eventually we'll all have self-driving cars and we can go back to driving while projectile vomiting drunk and do so safely.

 

[capitalcrew]

You do realize that exact same reasoning can be used against concealed carry. It's ok to have your guns on your property but to take them out in to public people could get hurt. Therefore we need to ban CC'ing. Look I'm not in favor for drinking and driving, but I'm tired of the government regulating every aspect of my life on the claim of making me "safer". I have no problem if some kills someone else while drinking and driving, with them being locked up for life. Heck I would be OK with the death penalty if they caused a death while drinking and driving. But to throw an arbitrary number out there in order to get some more revenue and claim it's for my safety I'm calling BS. It's time people owned up for their own actions and stop worrying about other people.

It absolutely cannot, no.

Driving drunk is EXPONENTIALLY more dangerous than a CCW. When CCW statistics looks like this:

"DUI Deaths Rise in 2016. According to new reports, an average of 28 people a day have been killed in DUI accidents during 2016. In 2015, approximately 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired crashes, which was an increase of nearly 300 from the year before."

then that argument can be made. Driving drunk is retarded on every level and 100% inexcusable. No one is going to get hurt from a CCW unless the holder makes a conscious decision to hurt someone. A lot of people get hurt because a drunk driver makes an impaired decision behind the wheel, and it isn't usually the asshole driving.

 

[Podmonkey]

I am more than OK with this. Actually, I like the new law.

I would bet that is because you and all our other law enforcement folks have seen some god awful grisly shit due to drunk driving.

 

[Jezman]

The question is will lowering the level help anything ?

If your legal limit is .08 and you've got a problem with people driving around at .2, what is dropping it to .05 going to do ?

They were already breaking the law, they aren't breaking it *more* now.

It will help generate more revune. If they really gave two shots about your safety they would put a proper eye for an eye law on DD. Problems is a lot and I mean alot of public representatives are drinkers. I use to own a bar lots of politics visited.

 

[pjzwtl]

Hmm I suppose some think driving impaired is a victimless crime? Of course it is not. I have dug one to many of someone's loved one out of a wreck caused by someone else who decided to roll the dice with life. Driving a car isn't a right it is a privilege I know some don't like to hear that but it is what it is. Unlike the 2A which is a right so trying to compare it to CCW is apples and oranges. Will dropping it to .05 stop folks from doing it? Yea for some it will for the rest of the dumbasses it will stop them when their license gets yanked...hopefully before they buy the farm and bring someone else along for the ride.

 

[MilesTeg]

As far as people saying my comparison argument isn't valid I say to you people your looking it the wrong way. We all know the other side of the isle doesn't use logic but rather emotional arguments. They look at these two things as one in the same and don't have any doubt about it. You don't think they would think someone killed by a DWI is any more of a victim of a defensive shooting your kidding yourself. Both arguments fall flat of reality both of them seem to think you can regulate safety, I hate to break it to you, you can't.

For the people who think the 0.05 is any different from 0.08 and there's scientific proof, then please show me. I actually did look for some and what I mainly found both numbers where arbitrary and the effects vary a lot depending on the individual.

Like I said about drinking and driving is victimless until something bad happens and as far as I'm concerned if you kill someone you get killed. If you injure someone permanently you get locked up for life. No issues with me about drinking and driving being bad, but don't kid yourself that this has anything to do with safety.

 

[capitalcrew]

Yeah except we're not the other side, we're THIS side, and we know better. Driving drunk is bullshit and puts people's lives at risk. CCWs do not.

 

[Snappo]

I was at Hill AFB for 3+ years. There really wasn't a drinking issue back in the early 80's because it was all near beer. You had to drive to Wyoming to get real beer. And the State owned the liquor stores as well, and bars were illegal. You had to join a "private club" with yearly fees; and bring your own booze (they supplied the soda / mixers). Whatever you didn't drink got flushed down the sink. And cops were outside those buildings making sure nobody drove away drunk. So maybe the alcohol situation in Utah has changed lately?

 

[Darth]

Hmm I suppose some think driving impaired is a victimless crime? Of course it is not. I have dug one to many of someone's loved one out of a wreck caused by someone else who decided to roll the dice with life. Driving a car isn't a right it is a privilege I know some don't like to hear that but it is what it is. Unlike the 2A which is a right so trying to compare it to CCW is apples and oranges. Will dropping it to .05 stop folks from doing it? Yea for some it will for the rest of the dumbasses it will stop them when their license gets yanked...hopefully before they buy the farm and bring someone else along for the ride.

It is a victimless crime in exactly the same way shooting a gun is. And don't say that driving is a "privilege." False, since I don't have the option to not pay for this "privilege" of the roads.

I don't care if you get drunk as a skunk and go driving. But if you hurt someone, or put others in immediate risk (read: a guy on a back road with nobody around does not count. Like firing a gun into a crowd.) then it's a crime.

The strange thing people don't realize is that every appeal to emotion (I dig graves for...) drives people further and further away from their side. A la "If you had a kid in Sandy Hook, I bet you'd change your tune."

No, I wouldn't. And if you can't, you've demonstrated that you cannot have an objective view on the matter and that your opinion is invalid.

I GUARANTEE more lives have been ruined by these absurd DWI laws (open container laws in cars are a hoot too) than people killed by drunk drivers.

It's the same old government tactic of "demonize everything that we don't like." Same shit with cigarettes.

 

[Kwalsh]

I have no problem with this, drunk driving is a real problem and there should be a zero tolerance for this

 

[Darth]

As far as people saying my comparison argument isn't valid I say to you people your looking it the wrong way. We all know the other side of the isle doesn't use logic but rather emotional arguments. They look at these two things as one in the same and don't have any doubt about it. You don't think they would think someone killed by a DWI is any more of a victim of a defensive shooting your kidding yourself. Both arguments fall flat of reality both of them seem to think you can regulate safety, I hate to break it to you, you can't.

For the people who think the 0.05 is any different from 0.08 and there's scientific proof, then please show me. I actually did look for some and what I mainly found both numbers where arbitrary and the effects vary a lot depending on the individual.

Like I said about drinking and driving is victimless until something bad happens and as far as I'm concerned if you kill someone you get killed. If you injure someone permanently you get locked up for life. No issues with me about drinking and driving being bad, but don't kid yourself that this has anything to do with safety.

It never has been about safety. Just demonizing the "bad" stuff in society. We didn't learn our lesson from prohibition evidently. Look at the 21 drinking age. They imposed that, DWIs went up.

If it was about safety, it would be the same as "reckless driving." You put people in danger because you are impaired by tiredness, stress, alcohol, anything? Sure, face consequences.

If a cop "collars" someone for DWI, and they charge them with it, and it turns out they did a test wrong and almost ruined the innocent person's life, the cop should go to jail for the exact same charges as the DWI suspect would have gotten.

But they don't. They can fish for their gold star, putting innocent people at risk, with no repercussions.

 

[MilesTeg]

Yeah except we're not the other side, we're THIS side, and we know better. Driving drunk is bullshit and puts people's lives at risk. CCWs do not.

Except it does. Not too long ago a legal CC'r put a round in the floor in Walmart no less in the toy isle. My wife and kid where actually planning on being there at that time of day but got delayed. I also swear she can't go there without getting the kid a damn toy. So if I wanted my emotional argument yes CC'rs are a danger to society.

If you want a different way this alcohol argument can be applied to guns is magazine limits. What makes 7 rounders after that 10's or even 30's? These are all arbitrary numbers and most of the research for either argument for these type of infringements are biased and can't be taken seriously.

On a more serious topic I'm agreeing with Darth I'm scheduling a doctors appointment to get checked out.

 

[pjzwtl]

It is a victimless crime in exactly the same way shooting a gun is. And don't say that driving is a "privilege." False, since I don't have the option to not pay for this "privilege" of the roads.

I don't care if you get drunk as a skunk and go driving. But if you hurt someone, or put others in immediate risk (read: a guy on a back road with nobody around does not count. Like firing a gun into a crowd.) then it's a crime.

The strange thing people don't realize is that every appeal to emotion (I dig graves for...) drives people further and further away from their side. A la "If you had a kid in Sandy Hook, I bet you'd change your tune."

No, I wouldn't. And if you can't, you've demonstrated that you cannot have an objective view on the matter and that your opinion is invalid.

I GUARANTEE more lives have been ruined by these absurd DWI laws (open container laws in cars are a hoot too) than people killed by drunk drivers.

It's the same old government tactic of "demonize everything that we don't like." Same shit with cigarettes.

No emotion here just reality. Sandy Hook Really Darth? I have dealt with the aftermath of a firearms used for assault as well as suicides none of which weakens my position on the 2A.

You guys can argue the politicians POV all you want we all agree on the content of their character but the fact remains the 2A is a right, albeit a grossly infringed one. DRIVING is not a right. And you say you don't care if someone drives drunk as a skunk but? Funny thing most of the MVA's I had to pull people from are just accidents not really any one persons fault just shit happens but I don't call for a ban on cars?

 

[MilesTeg]

No emotion here just reality. Sandy Hook Really Darth? I have dealt with the aftermath of a firearms used for assault as well as suicides none of which weakens my position on the 2A.

You guys can argue the politicians POV all you want we all agree on the content of their character but the fact remains the 2A is a right, albeit a grossly infringed one. DRIVING is not a right. And you say you don't care if someone drives drunk as a skunk but? Funny thing most of the MVA's I had to pull people from are just accidents not really any one persons fault just shit happens but I don't call for a ban on cars?

I agree the second is a right but the people that try increase regulations don't care about rights or privileges it's about control and build a bigger system that gives them power.

Again your argument about you having to pull out people when only one party is at fault can be used against us too. Think in the shoes of holophobe because you can't control the actions of others you need to regulate more to increase your personal safety. This 100% how they look at guns and your using a similar argument about drunk driving.

Again I'm against drinking and driving I'm for gun ownership and believe in constitutional carry, I'm trying to point out the hypocrisy for being for this legislation but for gun ownership.

 

[Jmac00]

easy fix, don't drive thru Utah....

I wonder how this works with Pot??? can you get a DUI while stoned or would that be a DWS(toned)

 

[Darth]

No emotion here just reality. Sandy Hook Really Darth? I have dealt with the aftermath of a firearms used for assault as well as suicides none of which weakens my position on the 2A.

Yes, Sandy Hook. People lay out an emotional response, "I've dug one too many graves" is literally the epitome of it. They use the same crap in the BLM movement. (He was a good boy. Aspiring to be a doctor!) It is the TEXTBOOK politician response.

You guys can argue the politicians POV all you want we all agree on the content of their character but the fact remains the 2A is a right, albeit a grossly infringed one. DRIVING is not a right.

Yes, yes it is. As I've explained. Please explain to me, without using the words "laid out in the constitution" (as the constitution only limits what the government can't do, not what natural born humans can or can't), how driving is a privilege. If I, as a free human, purchase an automobile with my money, and drive it on roads I am FORCED to pay for, how, exactly, is it a "privilege?"

And you say you don't care if someone drives drunk as a skunk but?

Correct.

Funny thing most of the MVA's I had to pull people from are just accidents not really any one persons fault just shit happens but I don't call for a ban on cars?

Is ramming into another person's car because of a drunken stupor "not anyone's fault?" That I mentioned previously?

You did call for a ban on driving "drunk" (which nobody has defined, and the laughable cop tests prove as not reliable) however.

"I don't want to ban guns......BUT nobody needs an AR..."

 

[pjzwtl]

Darth I am not going to dance all night I stand by my opinion you can stand by yours.

 

[Marine Cpl]

What a bunch of right snatching traitors we have here. Let's make it .01. How about we ban pistol grips while we are at it too. You know. If it could save just one life!

Unfuckingbelievable!

 

[Darth]

Darth I am not going to dance all night I stand by my opinion you can stand by yours.

 

[Marine Cpl]

According to my body weight, if I have 2 beers, I'm pushing a DWI with this .05. 2 fucking beers that don't even give me a buzz.

Whats next? Are you guys going to say that if I drink 2 beers, I shouldn't carry a handgun?

 

[Jmac00]

lets play a guessing game:

Saturday morning at 2am, what percentage of cars/trucks on the road do you guys think have impaired drivers behind the wheel

my guess is over 70% (honestly, I don't have a clue)

My guess would be between 2am and 3am on a Saturday morning the cops could pull over 7 out of 10 cars and get the driver for impaired driving.

 

[MilesTeg]

According to my body weight, if I have 2 beers, I'm pushing a DWI with this .05. 2 fucking beers that don't even give me a buzz.

Whats next? Are you guys going to say that if I drink 2 beers, I shouldn't carry a handgun?

No that just silly we will make beer illegal. What's the worst that could happen?

 

[Darth]

According to my body weight, if I have 2 beers, I'm pushing a DWI with this .05. 2 fucking beers that don't even give me a buzz.

Whats next? Are you guys going to say that if I drink 2 beers, I shouldn't carry a handgun?

Don't bring other factors in to it sir. Their "number" is good enough for them.

Just like poppy seed bagels trip a drug test.

Whatever the gubment says! Yessir!

You ACTUALLY put someone in danger? Get charged. Otherwise, you can shove those numbers up your ass.

 

[Darth]

lets play a guessing game:

Saturday morning at 2am, what percentage of cars/trucks on the road do you guys think have impaired drivers behind the wheel

my guess is over 70% (honestly, I don't have a clue)

My guess would be between 2am and 3am on a Saturday morning the cops could pull over 7 out of 10 cars and get the driver for impaired driving.

No idea.

What number of cops are out to get a pat on the back?

 

[holdover]

Enough is enough, It should be left to an officers discretion . If an officer pulls you over tests you and feels that your ok to drive , Im good with that, if he feels your a danger than he can take your keys or arrest you . In a free society your always going to have some risks involved. Do you know where there is no drunk driving accidents or gunfights ? Its called jail . I don't want to live in jail to be safe. I don't want to live in a perfect zero tolerance world . You wonder why people get an attitude towards cops, because laws like this will throw a lot of people who had a half a beer in jail. . fuck that Nazi shit.

 

[holdover]

No that just silly we will make beer illegal. What's the worst that could happen?

No,no,no, You force the manufactures to make beer with 0.5 alcolol per beer. 0.5 per shot of whiskey.

 

[Darth]

Enough is enough, It should be left to an officers discretion . If an officer pulls you over tests you and feels that your ok to drive , Im good with that, if he feels your a danger than he can take your keys or arrest you . In a free society your always going to have some risks involved. Do you know where there is no drunk driving accidents or gunfights ? Its called jail . I don't want to live in jail to be safe. I don't want to live in a perfect zero tolerance world . You wonder why people get an attitude towards cops, because laws like this will throw a lot of people who had a half a beer in jail. . fuck that Nazi shit.

No, "officer discretion" may be the reason I hate cops.

They either HAVE (and that is capitalized to mean HAVE, not THINK thry HAVE) evidence, or not),

or do NOT)

...have reason for arrest.

I'd rather 1,000 cops die than one innocent man go to jail.)

 

[GOPerfect]

Some of the responses here are just plain stupid and or ignorant. No wonder why America is so Fucked!

 

[holdover]

That's not really a problem , If you fail the tests they have some discretion in whether your a danger or not. as opposed to no discretion and you go to jail for haveing 2 beers . you may be less than 1/2 mile to your house, the cop may give you break.No, Its not a perfect system Darth , you catch an asshole cop and your going to Jail , but you were probably going to jail anyway. but at least there is some leeway with the officer .

Believe it or not Buffalo police exercise AMPLE discretion towards people in the city . Everybody knows that if you swerve your car , your going to have a bad night , but if you seem to drive ok , they tend to look away . They see people leaveing bars and getting into their cars , but they are paying attention to the the ones who are obviously wasted. And the people in Buffalo are grateful for not living under NAZI rule. If they started enforcing the law harshly , 25% of the nightlife in the city would die in 4 months 50% in in 6-8 months 75% by the end of the year .People will not go . Its good for business its good for the city its good for the people.

 

[nordon]

I cant wait for the law that regulates how much toilet paper is required to wipe your ass.

For me, I would need to pay a massive tax, 12 lber every morn, with "brown crayon" syndrome.