Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 42 of 42

Thread: Utah set to drop blood alcohol limit to .05

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Stratovarious View Post
    I've heard reports of drivers forced to keep blowin on that breathalyzer till they show
    over limit, like al gore , he wants a recount till he wins......

    -
    *one hand typing 4 few days/weeks , no spell checkers & grammar police pleez .....
    Happened 2 me... I blew .26!

    yes

    .26


    its bull$#@!
    FLIP THOSE FLAGS, THE NATION IS IN DISTRESS!


    why I should worship the state (who apparently is the only party that can possess guns without question).
    The state's only purpose is to kill and control. Why do you worship it? - Sola_Fide

    Baptiste said.
    At which point will Americans realize that creating an unaccountable institution that is able to pass its liability on to tax-payers is immoral and attracts sociopaths?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by luctor-et-emergo View Post
    Don't worry about your spelling, you're perfectly readable.

    I don't know what to call it, I prevented a potential whiplash and much worse accident on the person causing it as I avoided their car. I like to drive, I like to drive in a little bit of a sporty way.. I use my indicators religiously, even if nobody is around, just a habit. I always try to be a social driver and I anticipate traffic like a motorcyclist, I don't assume people have seen me. I drive about 30.000miles a year through serious traffic for the past couple of years. Before that I drove a little less but I've never had any other accident beyond this experience. I never even made a scratch on my own or someone else car. I pay almost nothing for insurance as a result.

    P.S. I could post some dashcam footage of stuff I see. I don't ever save any of it and my dashcam only holds 1 day worth of driving (2hrs or so). Last week I almost downloaded some footage as someone passed me on a 40mph road at 80mph within a couple of inches of slamming head on into an oncoming semi. Which got me angry, I don't care about people killing themselves, but I do mind if they intend to take me with them or create a longer commute. You may notice I don't have too much empathy for people who want to risk everything for a few seconds of difference to their commute. I don't. I like driving but first and foremost is safety. First thing you learn on the German Autobahn, driving 150mph is to realise that people do stupid stuff and you have to minimise your exposure to that. In some cases, that means slowing down because you see a car behind a semi and they might pull in front of you... It's your own safety.

    yea, I totally get that, I drive in anticipation of what Is going on 4 or 5
    vehicles ahead , if everyone looks like they know what they're doing
    I'm right there, if I see a conflict or aggressive jerk ,I tend to back off
    let them duel it out.
    I don't mind 'speeders' and racers so long as they know when to back off
    and what the traffic will bear, I used to do a bit of that myself
    but would always ease up on approach , get passed then dime it.
    One thing about the racers in my small town is that they usually don't
    tailgate, I give them room to get around me, no point in starting a
    war over it, plus they're down the road and not hanging around in my blind spot.
    .
    I've got 2 finners out for a while, and not bothering to edit and fix errors for now.
    I FIGURE as long as I rember to hit left 'alin, I should be half ok.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by jkr View Post
    Happened 2 me... I blew .26!

    yes

    .26


    its bull$#@!
    .
    That's wut ? FIVE 18 paks?

    I'm having to type in my own smilies....what is a goin on this am.....

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    It's hilly so none of the roads are straight. It also doesn't help that most of them are called Peachtree.


    In fact, it is often joked by natives that half of the streets in Atlanta are named Peachtree, and the other half have five names to make up for it. While “Peachtree” alone almost always refers to this street or its continuations, there are 71 streets in Atlanta with a variant of “Peachtree” in their name.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peachtree_Street
    HA ha ,too funny , we have housing tracts like that , every street is like view lane or view cir, park blvd ave etc...
    ...edit; worse yet is a town40mi fromhere; kingman az
    most streets circle, meander and intersect if you can imagine trying to find
    anything or place, I had to laugh when a local genius tried to convince me of how simple it was
    Last edited by Stratovarious; 12-16-2018 at 10:39 AM.

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Pauls' Revere View Post
    Can Ocasio-Cortez give us all driverless cars for free?
    I'm not a driverless fan by any stretch but joked a few months ago on youtube about allowing a dv
    to take us to and from the' Bar....they're not likely to do that.

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by luctor-et-emergo View Post
    It all depends.

    I've seen a test on TV where they had a cop with a breathalizer, a prosecutor and an average Joe who likes a beer...
    At the end of the segment the average Joe was having fun while the prosecutor was nearly having a mental breakdown...

    It turned out that on a nice summer day, with a normal lunch, this average Joe could drink 9 normal pilsners before being over the limit. Every time waiting 10 minutes after finishing the beer and testing again, essentially drinking beer for an entire afternoon. The best part was this guy thought himself he definitely wasn't allowed to drive anymore after 6 beers (even though he felt okay).

    We also have the .05 limit here. I don't know where the limit should be. I prefer roadside sobriety tests over breathalizers to weed out people who can't drive, not perfect but at least it shows you're not able to function properly.
    Checkpoints? Sure, those are great. You can do so much at those. Check for illegal immigrants, check for any outstanding warrants, check for drugs, weapons and excess cash. Roadside checkoints are a dream (to the authoritarian police state).

    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    .05 is basically just a backdoor ban and witch hunt for revenue from violations , it has nothing to do with safety and is only about statism . It is more or less about the same as retard east coast and kalifornia UnConstitutional weapons laws . There will be no improvement of safety just less freedom and in this case more dollars for them.
    They are neo-prohibitionists. Which is worse, living under Sharia law, or living under LDS law? There are similarities.

  9. #37
    Do-gooders and safety nazis eat this kind of $#@! up. "It's for the children."
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  10. #38
    How about folks who never had a drink, blowing 0.12 g/dL?
    Gut Fermentation Syndrome

  11. #39
    Presumptive vs. Actual Impairment

    https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2018...al-impairment/

    By eric - December 14, 2018

    Yesterday, my buddy got into an accident. An actual accident – because it was one he could not have avoided. A minivan pulled out in front of him, struck his Jeep – which spun several times before ending up in a ditch. My buddy is largely unhurt – except for his heart. Because his Jeep, which he loves and also put a lot of work into – is probably totaled.

    The interesting thing about this accident is that it is the result of impairment – but one treated with relative kid gloves by the cops and courts and insurance mafia.

    My buddy’s Jeep sits in a wrecking yard because a senile, confused old man pulled out in front of him. A nice enough old man, according to my buddy. He admitted fault, was apologetic.

    Certainly he didn’t mean to pull out in front of my buddy.

    But impaired, nonetheless. And his impairment resulted in actual damage to property and could have resulted in actual damage to my buddy, himself.

    Yet this form of clearcut impairment – driving while senile/glaucomic – is handled very differently – far more leniently – than other forms of arbitrary, presumptive impairment.

    And not even that.

    If, for example, you have the bad luck to drive by a cop while traveling slightly faster than the speed limit and he turns around and pulls you over to issue you a ticket for speeding – and in the course of interviewing you, sees the empty beer bottle you decided not to throw out the window – you can be arrested for “drunk” driving.

    Even though you drank the beer three hours before – and even though one beer cannot get anyone over the age of eight “drunk.”

    Even if your BAC is well within the margin of legality. You have an “open container” – and that is enough. (Best to litter, in this case.)

    If you are not 21 and drank a beer – or even had a sip of one and Officer Unfriendly catches a whiff on your breath – you also face arrest/conviction and severe consequences for “dunk” driving – even though you obviously weren’t.



    You can also be arrested for “drunk” driving even when you haven’t been driving.

    Just being in the car is enough – even if it’s in the back seat and you’re fast asleep. The actual driving part of “drunk driving” is no longer necessary, legally speaking – even though it is hard to imagine what possible harm a parked car might cause. You are still subject to arrest for “driving” drunk – and will be roasted over the coals by the system and the insurance mafia, just the same as an 18-year-old who has a 17-year-old girlfriend is labeled a “sex offender” for life by the same system.

    It is also presumed that a certain arbitrary percentage of alcohol in your blood means you are impaired – ipso facto – and you are treated as if you did actually cause harm to persons or property – even though the former has not been established and the latter is manifestly not the case.

    Your actual driving is irrelevant. All that matters – to the cop, the courts and the insurance mafia – is the arbitrary BAC level.

    To get back to my buddy’s accident – or rather, the accident which befell him – in order to make the point:

    The old man who veered into his path, struck his Jeep and (probably) totaled it received a minor traffic citation – Failure to Yield Right of Way – and was allowed to go home once all the paperwork was handled.

    Another man – who didn’t veer into anyone’s path, or cause damage to anyone’s property or person – but who is found to have a .06 BAC at a “roadside sobriety” checkpoint – will find himself in manacles first, the backseat of a police car second and a jail cell third. He will be charged with a serious misdemeanor, one slim notch below a felony.

    He will pay exorbitant lawyer bills even if he isn’t convicted.

    And if he is convicted, he will also pay exorbitant fines as well as exorbitant insurance premiums for years to come. Probably, he will have his license to drive rescinded or restricted. He may be ordered to attend – and pay for – weeks of “alcohol awareness” sessions (i.e., ASAP).

    This will happen in the absence of any harm caused – on the basis of presumed impairment.

    It is not necessary for the court to establish that the offender’s actual driving was dangerous, as by testimony about weaving or some other objective evidence of poor driving.

    it is only necessary to establish that the “drunk” driver had “x” BAC at the time of his arrest.

    Try to imagine what the results would have been if my buddy had been run off the road by a young – and actually drunk – driver. It would have been more than a ticket. And yet, the end result – my buddy’s wrecked Jeep – would have been precisely the same.

    But the treatment meted out to the cause would have been very different.

    It is certainly not equal justice – even though it is entirely “under the law.” Neither the young drunk nor the glaucomic/senile oldster meant to do any harm. Does this affect the state of my buddy’s Jeep?

    But alleged impairment by alcohol is somehow regarded as a far more egregious offense than other forms of objectively demonstrable impairment – i.e., a totaled Jeep.

    Even when the alleged impairment doesn’t actually result in any harm at all.

  12. #40
    I don't care for most of the stupid standup comedy specials on Netflix. But this one by Ron White is pretty good.
    https://www.netflix.com/watch/80244900
    He has a great bit on DUIs. Jump to 5minutes into it.

    "That not a sobriety test, that's an agility test and im not very goddamn agile..."

    "You know what a fair drunk driving test is? Drunk driving! Get in the car, let's do a couple of blocks, let me show you some skills!"



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Just don't agree to the driver's license contract and don't consent to jurisdiction. Or alternatively, if you agreed to the contract, set your terms for your end of administering the contract dispute up front when approached by the cop. Who works for free? Think about it.

    It's all business and all voluntary.

    Quote Originally Posted by AF's article
    It is also presumed that a certain arbitrary percentage of alcohol in your blood means you are impaired – ipso facto – and you are treated as if you did actually cause harm to persons or property – even though the former has not been established and the latter is manifestly not the case.

    Your actual driving is irrelevant. All that matters – to the cop, the courts and the insurance mafia – is the arbitrary BAC level.
    "Implied consent" and "arbitrary presumptions" are based upon agreeing to the terms of a contract, hence why there's no proof of actual impairment needed. A "driver" agreed to the letter of the contract (the statutory BAC limit) and is violating the terms of the contract. That's all that matters in business law. Did you violate the contract you agreed to? Yes? Liability established. All victimless "crimes" are actually nothing more than contract terms violations being enforced under color of law.

    It's all business!
    Last edited by devil21; 12-18-2018 at 12:34 PM.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  15. #42
    3rd verse:
    You know, just the other night, these cops pulled me over outside a bar.
    They turned on their lights, and ordered me outta my car.
    And I was only kidding when I called 'em a coupla dicks,
    But still they made me do the Stupid Human Tricks,
    And now I'm stuck in this jail with a bunch of dumb hicks
    And I still don't know why.


    Don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Threads

  1. Utah may lower the legal alcohol limit to .05% -- a first in the nation
    By RonPaulFanInGA in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 01-04-2017, 04:37 PM
  2. Man’s blood alcohol content too high for police to measure
    By eduardo89 in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-04-2014, 03:47 PM
  3. Arrested for DUI with blood alcohol level of..... 0.00???
    By jllundqu in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-10-2013, 11:22 AM
  4. Feds Want To Lower Legal Blood Alcohol Limit for Drivers
    By Lucille in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 141
    Last Post: 05-18-2013, 12:29 PM
  5. UTAH Alcohol law Question?
    By Bluesky0081 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-30-2009, 01:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •