Quote:
Blood alcohol content between 0.06 - 0.10:
Effects on behaviours: - Blunted Feelings
- Disinhibition
- Extroversion
- Impaired Sexual Pleasures
Impairment: - Reflexes
- Reasoning
- Depth Perception
- Distance Acuity
- Peripheral Vision
- Glare Recovery
|
This is where some critical thinking must come into play. At .06 these effects are extremely mild if not non-existant in many cases. Even someone at .10 may only face slight effects, albeit stronger than lower BAC levels.
In any case, someone at .06 will often be more capable of driving a car than somone who's moderately fatigued. Both individuals (in this state, anyway) are legal to drive.
As such I am curious as to the reason for the outrage against someone at .06 versus someone who's simply tired? Clearly, safety and capability aren't REALLY the concern - at least, not completely. I believe that there has been an outright attempt and demonizing alcohol by politically motivated organizations such as MADD.
Look, if these people REALLY wanted to solve the problem, they wouldn't be after people with low BAC levels. Another point that seems to be ignored here is that people at .06 aren't the ones out there killing other people.
Penalizing those who are at a minimal risk the same as those who are at a dangerous one is counter-intuitive, in my opinion.
Also, something to consider is the law with respect to OTHER drugs. Let's say someone had a prescription for Vicodin, took a pill and drove. Is that illegal? The answer is yes and no. Yes if that person is found to be impaired, no if that person is not. Food for thought.