Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
Wait, you blew more than three times the legal limit and your only punishment was a one year license suspension and higher insurance costs? That is what should be changed if we want to adjust the drunk driving laws, not going after people in the 0.05-0.07 range.
|
That was 1991 and I believe until the late 80's it was only a 6 month suspension that could be reduced to 3 months in court. My capacity was irrelevant because as I mentioned the RCMP were used to seeing people at 0.12 being totally incapacitated. The bottom line is that 0.08 is the cut off and I don't see any benefit or logic to changing fines/suspensions according to level of being over the limit. Do you expect drinkers to stop drinking at 0.15 before getting behind the wheel because they don't want to risk an extra year of license suspension? No real extra deterrant there. You have to punish them all and to send the message and 0.05 is closer to 0.08 than 0.00.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreatWhiteEbola
I was eluding to my capacity to handle alcohol or even the years that I have been drinking... but you win this pissing match, congrats.
|
Take it easy there young fella. It's only a pissing match if you make one out of it. My capacity to handle alcohol is as relevant to this thread as yours which is pretty irrelevant as from person to person it varies greatly.