Why Shouldn’t We Lower the Blood Alcohol Rate? It is a tragic truth: About 10,000 lives are lost in the United States because of drunk driving each year. Alcohol is wildly known as one of the main reasons of causing social security issue. Small amount can make people feel relaxed, but bigger amount could make them loss their coordination, get feeling of confusion and disorientation, and significantly slowed their reaction time. On average, one person dies every hour because of alcoholic traffic accident in United State. Therefore, the NTSB put out a recommendation last May that the legal blood alcohol content (BAC) level for drivers should be lowered from the current level of .08% to .05%. But for several reasons, we shouldn’t lower the criterion on blood alcohol content. Lowering the criterion on blood alcohol content would make a lot of responsible social drinkers become criminals. A 170 pound man could get to .05 by drinking three beers in an hour, and a 137 pound woman by drinking just two, which means that the man could be legally impaired if he had three drinks, but the woman could earn a set of handcuffs with only two drinks. According to “Lower the BAC level for DWI to .05%,” Jazz Shaw makes a similar point. “Moving the limit from .08 to .05 essentially means that we’d be changing the law so that instead of being arrested for sniffing a beer as you head for the car, you’ll be heading to jail if you look at a beer. These arbitrary laws have been problematic since the beginning, not because we shouldn’t stop people from driving when they are impaired beyond the ability to safely operate a vehicle, but because they are implemented so flatly. Different people respond in different ways to the chemical stimulus of alcohol. S... ... middle of paper ... ...equiring ignition interlocks for every DUI offender. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, interlocks lower the re-arrest rate of drunken drivers by two-thirds. Actually, drivers with ignition interlocks have less alcoholic accidents than those who are punished by suspending their license. Some states have great success with interlocks already. After authorizing strict interlock laws in 2007, Arizona and Louisiana both cut drunken driving deaths by more than 36% in only four years. In a free society, it is too hard to try to reach zero carries. At least, it is clear that we will not see a large-scale push for DUI law reform in the near future. The fatality made by drunk driving will never be root out, but the government could prevent more suffering by using strategy already proven to work instead of making other laws that is not worth at all.
The hypotheses for this program are: Is the ignition interlock program effective in reducing impaired driving recidivism? Does it have an impact on more serious, persistent impaired drivers? Finally, does the program continue to be effective even after the interlock device is removed? (Weinrath)
I think that it is agreed by all parties that the prodigious number of sober drivers in our neighborhoods, city streets, and country roads is at present deplorable to the state of our great nation. Currently, a whopping ninety-eight percent of Americans of driving age feel threatened by those who drive under the influence of alcohol, which means that only two percent of Americans are able to fully relax and enjoy themselves while on the road, and with the growing awareness, this number could be on the rise (MADD Online: General Statistics 1). What a travesty! All drivers, and passengers alike, should be put at the same risk for danger, be it damage, injury, or death.
The facts are plain and simple, that alcohol and driving do not mix. About three in every ten Americans will be involved in an alcohol related crash at some time in their lives. Every single injury and death caused by drunk driving is totally preventable. To curb this national travesty, concerned Americans need to examine the problems, the effects, and the solutions to drunk driving. First of all, America has had a problem with drunk driving since Ford perfected the assembly line. Alcoholism is a problem in and of itself, but combined with driving can have a wide range of effects. The consequences of this reckless behavior can include a first time DUI or licenses suspension; a small fender bender, or worst of all a deadly crash. Most drivers that have only one or two drinks feel fine, and assume they are in control, which is irresponsible and dangerous. Alcohol is a depressant that slows down the body's ability to react and impairs judgment. To drive well, you need to be able to have a quick reaction time to avoid accidents. Unfortunately, people continue to drink and drive. However,...
As you can see, drunk driving can cause many tragedies on a family or just the nation in general. Many people think that if we lower the Body Alcohol Content than there wouldn’t be as many people getting injured or killed a year. The question “Should tougher DUI laws be enacted?” is yet to be answered, but maybe in there next few years we will get an
Mike Brake’s “Needed: A License to Drink” is a well-written essay that covers the serious issue of alcoholism and goes on to offer a creative proposal to solve the situation. Brake addresses alcoholism as a “primary public health-problem” which holds merit, considering Brake sites alcohol is the cause of 19,000 auto fatalities each year. To remedy these preventable fatalities, Brake proposes to institute a national system of licensing with appropriate penalties for violators. He goes on to say that these licenses should be issued the same way as driver’s licenses. An applicant would have to read a manual, and take a written exam which would include questions such as “How many drinks would it take to intoxicate a 150lb man?” and “What is the penalty for drunk driving?” After passing the written test applicants would be issued a drinking license that would be required for buying any alcoholic drink.
“Drink the first. Sip the second slowly. Skip the third. The speedway ends at the cemetery” (Rockne). Every day, almost 30 people in the United States die in motor vehicle crashes that involve an alcohol-impaired driver. This amounts to one death every 48 minutes. The annual cost of alcohol related crashes totals more than 51 billion. In Recent discussions of drunk driving, a controversial issue has been whether the driving while intoxicated laws should be increased due to the amount tax payers are paying for drunk driving crashes. On the one hand. Some argue that the driving laws for driving drunk should remain the same and not change. From this perspective the laws about driving under the influence should greatly increase to be stricter, this will help decrease the death rate per year in the United States. On the other hand, however others argue that the laws about driving while drunk are already too strict and should remain unchanged. In sum, then, the issue is whether the laws about driving drunk should be greatly increased to be more effective, or remain unchanged. Because drunk driving can result in unnecessary and premature deaths, unsafe roadways, billions of dollars spent on taxpayers due to DUI’S, and losing a loved one. Drunk driving laws should be altered to be more efficient.
Drunk driving is a problem that we hear about every day and it is something that effects everyone, but it only becomes real when it affects us directly. What we don’t know is when a problem like drunk driving will become “real” for us. Drunk driving is an issue that has taken a toll on our country and should be stopped. Drunk driving has been an increasing problem for many years. It effects not only the driver but all of society. The good thing is there are many ways the percentage of drunk drivers can be reduced. Although many people believe drunk driving doesn't affect them because they don't drink and drive, it is something that affects the whole community.
The first step in preventing DUIs is to prevent an intoxicated individual from driving. It is not always possible to prevent an individual from driving while intoxicated but various measures have been implemented to deter an individual who has been previously charged with a DUI to re-offend. The ignition interlock device is one such technology that is most widely used for deterring repeat DUI offenders. The ignition interlock device works by preventing the car from starting if the minimum BAC level in the breath of the driver is detected.
Impaired driving is a major issue in our society and is an issue that can easily be preventable unlike many other legal issues. The punishment of impaired driving is barely considered when impaired drivers operates a vehicle while under the influence. It is seen as lenient and study shows that it is a conviction that is repeated multiple times. In order to avoid all of these issues and to fill in the flaws of our government system, the punishments regarding the accused’s conviction of crimes related to impaired driving should be far stricter than the current punishments in order to completely stop impaired driving within our flawed
There is a need for the introduction and implementation of new drunk driving laws by the legislature, because presently the united States drunk driving laws are too lenient. The continuous rate of drunken driving fatalities makes a case that the united States drunk driving laws are too lenient and makes a call for stricter laws. According to Valenti “countries with strict drunk driving penalties have a far lower incidence of accidents than the United States (1). The United States being a first world country is weak in enforcing strict punishment for drunk drivers. Valenti is emphasizing on the fact that the united States need to improve their present laws and be firm in enforcing these new laws. There is a need for the United States to improve on their severity of its drunk driving penalties just the way the other part of the world have done and this is giving them a reduced rate of drunk driving fatalities. The claim of the leniency of the United States drunk driving laws is further stated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), this is a prominent body when it comes to the issue of drunken driving fatalities. It claims that the drunken driving laws are severe enough. “Despite great strides in awareness, education and enforcement in the last two decades the United States still has one of the most lenient drunken driving standards in the world”. (NHTSA of existing laws. There is a need for stricter laws to be introduced as the United States ranks behind the world when it comes to effort to combat drunk driving and more efforts need to be put in place by the implementation of harsher laws so as to reduce the high rate of repeat offenders and first time offenders.
Dreams are people’s expectations for a better tomorrow. However, intoxicated drivers shatter those dreams without a reason or warning. Even with all the advertisements that highlights the dangers and effects of driving drunk, yet people still chose to drive while intoxicated. Many advocates are working hard to get these people off the streets, and they have been able to reduce the number of alcohol related crashes. Organizations such as Mothers against Drunk Driving have acted alongside law enforcement to reduce the horrific statistics. However, so many innocent lives are still taken by drunk drivers. In order to lower the rate of drunk driving in the United States, there is a need to revoke drunk drivers’ licenses, a need for higher rate of conviction, and a need to make ignition interlocks
It really is no secret that if the minimum legal drinking age were lowered, a large number of teens would then drink for perhaps the first time. “The age group with the most drivers involved in fatal crashes with Blood Alcohol Content levels of .08 or higher during 2011 was the twenty-one to twenty-four-year-olds” (“National Highway Traffic Facts”). Young adults are just as irresponsible at eighteen as they are at twenty-one, maybe even more irresponsible. The teenagers will indulge themselves on what they feel is a luxury the first chance they get. The young adults abuse the alcohol, and then go driving because even at twenty-one through twenty-four they are still not as responsible. If the age is lowered to eighteen, many eighteen-year-olds will go out and drink alcohol for the first time. The age group may rise to number one in fatal crashes. The National Highway Traff...
Traffic accidents and fatalities are most common to newly drinkers, regardless of the age that they start drinking. Since, accidents happen to new drinkers no matter what the age, there should be no problem with lowering the drinking age from eighteen to twenty-one. A man that was found to be a new drinker, Richard Thomas Warren, age thirty, of Milton was driving near an intersection on Santa Rosa streets at 12:42 a.m. when he crashed into the front entrance of an attorney’s office. This man who hasn’t been drinking for very long, this proves that no matter what age you start drinking,whether its eighteen or thirty, you can make the same mistakes and lowering the drinking age will not be a very big concern if it is lowered to eighteen.
They are never going to be able to reclaim their normal life, while the offenders after a few days in prison are released and put on probation. Situations such as this begs to ask a question of fairness and justice. The penalties for a DUI in Texas are insufficient and need to be changed. A person with a first offense of a DUI gets a minimum of 3 to 180 days’ jail time and up to $2,000 in fines and penalties and requires no use of an interlock ignition device. South Dakota’s DUI penalties include no minimum jail time or fine for a first or second offense, no administrative license suspension, and no ignition interlock requirement. It had the number one fatality rate from 1995-2013 and the number nine rate for 2013 alone. Nevertheless, there are still far too many people dying each year because intoxicated people get behind the wheel. Many people believe that changing the law for a DUI would not help, that drinking is uncontrolled and one of the toughest addictions to break, bars will remain open, and stores will continue to sell beer. If it was you or your loved one that died as a result of someone else 's driving drunk, would you still feel the same way? Would you still think that the laws shouldn’t change? Driving is a privilege and a responsibility. Drivers should always take this responsibility to heart before getting behind the wheel of an automobile. They should think about the pedestrians walking along the
Individuals having a breathalyzer will help lower the number of alcoholic related traffic deaths, but some can be flawed and it is difficult to always have a breathalyzer available considering they cost money. Therefore, it is clear alcohol in driving individuals body continues to be a major factor in fatal car accidents, so why not eliminate alcohol completely from roads? “In 2014, 9,967 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States. “Alcohol and driving simply do not go together. Driving requires one’s attention fully always. While on the road one must be able to react vigorously to the constant changes going on. Driving is a huge responsibility and can be very dangerous and potentially lead to death when drinking alcoholic beverages. They have been too many lives taken from drunk drivers, so why not apply to Zero Tolerance Law to all ages in means of eliminating accidents involving alcohol? Voices of victims involved with alcohol related accidents often said they weren’t thinking or didn’t realize how much they had to drink.