View Single Post
Old 10-16-2009, 08:27 PM   #18
VtSteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,320
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 230
Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishoot308 View Post
Phantom;

Then we are very much in agreement!

Regarding this statement you made however...

"Perhaps a limit imposed on those who cannot impose one on themselves could be a good idea."

The state has already done this and I believe it to be .08 Anyone who breaks this law should be punished to the fullest extent of the law! No other laws or policies need apply.

Thanks for your reply!

Dan
the .08 is imposed by the insurance companies, and the Feds use it to control the flow of highway dollars to the states. That's about all they do. Insurance companies like it for obvious reasons, states do it for even more obvious reasons. If you look at the statistics, the vast majority of accidents that are alcohol-related involve levels far higher than .08.

For such a provincial country, you'd think we'd have a better safety record. We don't. Maybe it's the culture?
VtSteve is offline   Reply With Quote