Redwinger
Wine guru
4038
Wed Mar 22, 2006 2:36 pm
Way Down South In Indiana, USA
Mike Filigenzi
Known for his fashionable hair
8187
Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:43 pm
Sacramento, CA
Hoke
Achieving Wine Immortality
11420
Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am
Portland, OR
Redwinger wrote:Looks like there is an effort underway to lower the U.S BAC from .08 to .05%.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/14/us/ntsb-b ... ?hpt=hp_t1
Most of Europe, as well as other nations, are currently at 0.05. The proponents claim that many, many lives will be saved, but I'm skeptical. I question when big numbers are bandied about. Did France and Germany experience a big drop in fatalities after the limit was lowered? How much of a factor, if any, was stepped up enforcement after the enactment?
No idea if this effort will be implemented, but the Feds have the $$$ to assure compliance by the various states.
Mike Filigenzi
Known for his fashionable hair
8187
Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:43 pm
Sacramento, CA
Alan Wolfe
On Time Out status
2633
Sat Mar 25, 2006 10:34 am
West Virginia
Paul Winalski
Wok Wielder
8052
Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm
Merrimack, New Hampshire
Fredrik L wrote:And in Sweden we of course have 0.2 and over 1.0 we not only lose our license, we are most likely to go to jail.
In my neighborhood, for example, for many it's understood that if one drinks at all, then one qualifies as a drunk. I think it's bible belt morality.
Hoke
Achieving Wine Immortality
11420
Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am
Portland, OR
Hoke
Achieving Wine Immortality
11420
Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am
Portland, OR
Fredrik L wrote:Sorry about that, we measure in per mille not in percent. 0.02 it is, but we did have one Scandinavian - a Finn by the way - the other year who survived a BAC of 1.1!
More than one percent of his blood was alcohol! (I am quite sure it was not Otto!)
Greetings from Sweden / Fredrik L
David M. Bueker
Riesling Guru
34412
Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:52 am
Connecticut
Hoke
Achieving Wine Immortality
11420
Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am
Portland, OR
David M. Bueker wrote:It ends up having to be neo-prohibitionism because we do not have the public transport (or even taxi) infrastructure to support no driving.
A spit cup and a dump bucket are key equipment.
David M. Bueker
Riesling Guru
34412
Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:52 am
Connecticut
Hoke wrote:David M. Bueker wrote:It ends up having to be neo-prohibitionism because we do not have the public transport (or even taxi) infrastructure to support no driving.
A spit cup and a dump bucket are key equipment.
Since most people actually drink rather than taste, this advice isn't likely to help anyone but the most elevated of wine geeks, I'm afraid. .
Sam Platt
I am Sam, Sam I am
2330
Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:22 pm
Indiana, USA
Brian K Miller
Passionate Arboisphile
9340
Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:05 am
Northern California
Sam Platt wrote:The recent drunk driving fatalities on my area have involved drivers in excess of 0.2 BAC. I don't believe that dropping the legal limit from 0.08 to 0.05 will have ANY impact on such people. The proposed BAC max. reduction seems like a feel good move to me.
Trying to get a cab here in the hinterlands of Central Indiana is laughable. When I attempted to do so a few weeks ago I was told there would be a three hour wait!
Shanken News Daily wrote:Proposal To Reduce Legal Driving Limit To 0.05% BAC Attracts Wide-Ranging Opposition
The National Transportation Safety Board’s proposal for the legal limit for a driver’s blood-alcohol content to be reduced to 0.05% has attracted a torrent of criticism—both from likely and unlikely sources. Among those who have come out against the NTSB proposal are hospitality groups like the National Restaurant Association and the American Beverage Institute, both of whom claim that efforts against drunk driving should focus on chronic offenders with higher blood alcohol levels. But, in a surprising turn, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) has also come out against the measure, saying it would likely take years to implement and that the reduction from the current 0.08% BAC threshold to 0.05% wouldn’t be as effective as the further use of technologies like the ignition interlock, a breathalyzer-like device installed on a car’s dashboard that requires drivers to prove their sobriety before allowing the vehicle to start.
For its part, the NTSB says that a driver with a BAC of 0.05% is 38% more likely to be in a crash as compared with a driver who hasn’t consumed any alcohol. By comparison, the safety board says a driver with a level of 0.08% is 169% more likely to be involved in a car accident than a completely sober driver. The NTSB also says that reducing the legal limit to 0.05% would put the U.S. on par with the global consensus on drunk driving, maintaining that more than 100 countries already have limits at or below 0.05%, including 25 of the 27 E.U. members. The NTSB can’t make law, but instead makes recommendations to both the federal and state governments. This recommendation will surely evoke further opposition from the hospitality industry, both at the local and national level.
David M. Bueker
Riesling Guru
34412
Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:52 am
Connecticut
David M. Bueker wrote:Robin - admittedly short on details, but this link states that MADD supports the proposal.
http://ripr.org/post/madd-supports-lowered-bac-05-idea
Robin Garr wrote:David M. Bueker wrote:Robin - admittedly short on details, but this link states that MADD supports the proposal.
http://ripr.org/post/madd-supports-lowered-bac-05-idea
Meaning that Marvin was wrong?
Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot, ClaudeBot, Google [Bot], Yandexbot and 1 guest