[Maritime Q-Scout]

Remember folks there are two debates going on here (seems like most people are arguing like there's only one)

Debate 1: Should people who are determined to have a BAC of 0.05-0.08 by a roadside police officer be given due process, or simply suspend their licence and impound their car without a check or balance?

Debate 2: Will lowering the legal limit from 0.08 to 0.05 BAC make a difference with regard to impaired driving? Does it reduce accidents/deaths? Or should the enforcement resources spent on enforcing the new law be better spent on enforcing more intoxicated drivers?

By arguing for due process does not mean that you think the limit shouldn't be lowered. By questioning the effectiveness of 0.05 over 0.08 does not mean you think drinking and driving is acceptable.



Me, personally, as a poster I answer the two debates as such:

Debate 1: This law requires due process. Period. As all laws should.

Debate 2: I don't think it will make a difference. The lack of methodology of the BC study makes me discount it, as you need show your work (remember that from junior high math class) to show you are correct, presumptive there are too many problems with it. It doesn't effect how I drive or consume alcohol if the BAC is set at 0.05 or 0.08.