Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I saw last week that the NTSB is recommending that states lower their blood alcohol limit to .05 as their drunk driving standard. What say ye'?

I'm agin it.

The Montana guys will hate this...they measure distances and drive time in beers.

.08 is fair.

AshevilleApp wrote:I'm agin it.

If you love Jesus then YOU agin it.

Agains't it. I would not be legally driving to work in the morning.

El Griz wrote:Agains't it. I would not be legally driving to work in the morning.

Do you get a citation in Montana if your BAC isn't high enough? I'll have to keep that in mind driving 93 to Whitefish in August.....

kalm wrote:The Montana guys will hate this...they measure distances and drive time in beers.

and?

ASUG8 wrote:

El Griz wrote:Agains't it. I would not be legally driving to work in the morning.

Do you get a citation in Montana if your BAC isn't high enough? I'll have to keep that in mind driving 93 to Whitefish in August.....

OH. I chartered you a Helicopter from Missoula to Glacier. I cannot risk having you die before the football game.

grizzaholic wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:
Do you get a citation in Montana if your BAC isn't high enough? I'll have to keep that in mind driving 93 to Whitefish in August.....

OH. I chartered you a Helicopter from Missoula to Glacier. I cannot risk having you die before the football game.

I'd have done the same for you as far as you know.

Stop using BAC as if it's some kind of magic and infallible number for determining if someone is driving impaired. Determine if someone is driving impaired by actually testing their hand-eye coordination and reflexes.

Pwns wrote:Stop using BAC as if it's some kind of magic and infallible number for determining if someone is driving impaired. Determine if someone is driving impaired by actually testing their hand-eye coordination and reflexes.

A game of slap-hand for instance

Pwns wrote:Stop using BAC as if it's some kind of magic and infallible number for determining if someone is driving impaired. Determine if someone is driving impaired by actually testing their hand-eye coordination and reflexes.

They've got you both ways. You can appear impaired with a .03 and probably get arrested, while you could pass every roadside circus trick at .05 and still be arrested for being above the limit.

ASUG8 wrote:

Pwns wrote:Stop using BAC as if it's some kind of magic and infallible number for determining if someone is driving impaired. Determine if someone is driving impaired by actually testing their hand-eye coordination and reflexes.

They've got you both ways. You can appear impaired with a .03 and probably get arrested, while you could pass every roadside circus trick at .05 and still be arrested for being above the limit.

It is about making money, NOT saving lives.

If it was about saving lives the BAC would be 0.00.

grizzaholic wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:
They've got you both ways. You can appear impaired with a .03 and probably get arrested, while you could pass every roadside circus trick at .05 and still be arrested for being above the limit.

It is about making money, NOT saving lives.

If it was about saving lives the BAC would be 0.00.

And the freeway speed limit would be 45.

grizzaholic wrote:

kalm wrote:The Montana guys will hate this...they measure distances and drive time in beers.

and?

Down with the Foe?

.05 is a great way raise money and to make criminals out of people that just want to stop for a drink after work.

What about the children? Please, think of the children.

How about a compromise? .0693 anyone?

93henfan wrote:What about the children? Please, think of the children.

How about a compromise? .0693 anyone?

perfect.

Ridiculous. An arbitrary number to make money for the most corrupt organization there is.

93henfan wrote:What about the children? Please, think of the children.

How about a compromise? .0693 anyone?

If they were going to make a BAC limit at all, 0.10 was a more rational point at which to establish it and one could make the argument that it should be in the 0.12 to 0.14 range. But we ceased being rational about the "drunk driving" thing a long time ago. Public policy is driven by zealots.

.05 seems to be a ridiculous metric. According to JSO's graph, lowering it will have little effect regarding crashes...and I bet you it ends up unintentionally hurting small businesses like pubs and restaurants.

Hopefully self-driving cars aren't too far off and none of this will matter in a decade or so.

Shit! I dropped my roach clip trying to type this response, and then spilled beer all over the console when I bent down to get it! Fuck.

death dealer wrote:Shit! I dropped my roach clip trying to type this response, and then spilled beer all over the console when I bent down to get it! Fuck.