Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 1/8/2005 3:40:59 AM EDT
CVC 23140(a) Reads something to the effect of "It is an infraction for any person under tho age of 21 to drive while having a BAC of .05% or more."

Is it too restrictive to make driving with a .05% BAC "illegal" for 16 -20 yo drivers? It's not a boookable offense, its an infraction, like a speeding ticket.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 3:42:06 AM EDT
Stoopid. You can't even legally drink if you are under 21, so what's the point of setting a limit?


.04% is okay? Uh, you were drinking illegally
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 3:43:37 AM EDT
I would say that since the legal drinking age is 21, no it isn't to restrictive.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 3:43:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/8/2005 3:44:50 AM EDT by SorryOciffer]
It's dumb, it's ALREADY ILLEGAL! They just want another offense they can tack a fine on to boost revenue!

S.O.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 3:55:38 AM EDT
if you think that is restrictive, come to Arkansas...

.02 BAC here underage will get you a DUI, first offense you lose you license 90 days, @ $500 fine, have to attend an approved alcohol education program and/or an alcoholism treatment program before you are eligible to have your license reinstated...

so no, I don't think that what you laid out is too restrictive... it is not nearly restrictive enough...

Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:01:45 AM EDT
I thought absolute sobriety was already the law.


Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:19:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MrsGungho:
I would say that since the legal drinking age is 21, no it isn't to restrictive.



This is the standard answer to this type question, but in a lot of places (GA for instance) it is LEGAL for someone under 21 to drink, so long as the alcohol was provided by and consummed under the supervision of their legal guardian. On special occasions my father would buy me a drink.

Is an 18 year old's driving any more impaired by alcohol? Drunk driving laws are about the affects of alcohol on one's ability to drive a car. The legality of the consumption shouldn't be a consideration.

In some areas the illegal level of alcohol for someone under 21 is BAC >.02.

This is really irritating, because there are several ways for a minor to legally achieve this BAC level. If the consummption is legal, then the legality of the resulting condition shouldn't be age dependent.

Cabby
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:23:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Lochlainn:
if you think that is restrictive, come to Arkansas...

.02 BAC here underage will get you a DUI, first offense you lose you license 90 days, @ $500 fine, have to attend an approved alcohol education program and/or an alcoholism treatment program before you are eligible to have your license reinstated...

so no, I don't think that what you laid out is too restrictive... it is not nearly restrictive enough...




same in oklahoma
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:43:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By stoner-srt:

Originally Posted By Lochlainn:
if you think that is restrictive, come to Arkansas...

.02 BAC here underage will get you a DUI, first offense you lose you license 90 days, @ $500 fine, have to attend an approved alcohol education program and/or an alcoholism treatment program before you are eligible to have your license reinstated...

so no, I don't think that what you laid out is too restrictive... it is not nearly restrictive enough...




same in oklahoma



Same in Michigan. I think the statute here states "no measurable alcohol" outside of what can be caused by medicines or religious ceremonies.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:46:16 AM EDT
Ohio also .02
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:49:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:51:43 AM EDT
It is certainly legal for a minor to drink alcohol if a parent provides it to them in the home. I am talking about a glass of wine at dinner, not a keg party.

Some households permit this.

Under these circumstances, the law is idiotic.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 4:53:28 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:02:55 AM EDT
I tend to agree... BUT, just a few sips of wine could inadvertently push a kid over such a ridiculously low limit and they most certainly not be impaired in any fashion.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:09:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/8/2005 5:13:44 AM EDT by TacticalMan]

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Stoopid. You can't even legally drink if you are under 21, so what's the point of setting a limit?


.04% is okay? Uh, you were drinking illegally



Yes, you can legally drink under age 21. Your parents are allowed to provide you with alcohol. As is your doctor.

Besides that, the 21 age is BS.

I was allowed to drink from the time I was, maybe, 14yo. Not that there was a lower limit in my family. It was nothing for me to knock back a beer at family gatherings every hour or 2 when I was 15.

I am by no means alcoholic.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:15:14 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:25:50 AM EDT
In Arkansas its .02 and the charge is "DUI" whereas an adult is .08 and a "DWI"......
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:34:38 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:41:43 AM EDT
Being 20 myself. I do drink. I never drive after. Even if I take one sip of something. I don't think a new law is needed, one exsist currently.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:45:16 AM EDT
In PA i believe it's already .02 for drivers under 21, but i could be wrong.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 6:05:23 AM EDT
I think anything >0.00 should be considered DUI if they are under 21.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 7:16:30 AM EDT
When you talk about underage drinking and driving, there are two issues that coincide: underage drinking and driving while impaired.
ANYONE who is over the age of 10 should be charged with a DWI for driving with a BAC over .08, or when they are "impaired".
I kind of think that if you are of draft-able age, you should be held to the same standards, and receive the saem privileges, as an adult. I say "kind of think" because I could be persuaded that actual service should be the bright line.
Nevertheless, in most states, below a certain age, you can't drive below a certain age with any alcohol in your sytem.
The federal government requires states to adhere to some standards regarding impairment while driving, and witholds highway (?) funding if the states balk.

Which, I'll admit, raises the issue of "creeping federalism"...

As to teenage drinking being already illegal, Texas law distinguishes "Minor in Possession" from "DUI", and while both are "fine-only", both merit "detention", and IIRC, the various penalties that the magistrate can impose differ by statute.
I was fortunate enough to be taught by a father that alcohol should ideally be used in moderation, but never, in his own words, "to act a g****m fool"
I also beleive that any impairment while driving, whether because of drug or alcohol use, mental impairment, cell-phone use, CD changing, kid-spanking, or whatever, should have some kind of consequences.
Exactly WHAT those consequences should BE should be judged by the circumstances.
And, needless to say, how much you want the government to intrude...
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 2:07:10 PM EDT
wouldn't the libertarians argue that drunk-driving is a victimless crime
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 2:19:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Avtomat:
wouldn't the libertarians argue that drunk-driving is a victimless crime




No because when they have a wreck with someone else that interferes with that persons rights.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 2:41:32 PM EDT
.01% is unlawful in Washington for minors. Avoid cold or cough medecines
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 2:48:46 PM EDT
In Maryland, if it doesnt read 0.00% and you're under 21, you're going to the pokey.

Kharn
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 2:55:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BenDover:
It is certainly legal for a minor to drink alcohol if a parent provides it to them in the home. I am talking about a glass of wine at dinner, not a keg party.

Some households permit this.

Under these circumstances, the law is idiotic.



Will the average American male or female blow a .05 BAC with a glass of wine or a beer?
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 2:57:38 PM EDT
I might be wrong but I am pretty sure a similir law is already on the books here in FL. Diffrence is I think the cut off is .02%

echo6
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 3:27:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BenDover:
I tend to agree... BUT, just a few sips of wine could inadvertently push a kid over such a ridiculously low limit and they most certainly not be impaired in any fashion.



Just a few sips will put spomeone over a .05% BAC? Maybe a 90 pound female with an empty stomach.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:25:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Blackriflefever:

Originally Posted By Avtomat:
wouldn't the libertarians argue that drunk-driving is a victimless crime




No because when they have a wreck with someone else that interferes with that persons rights.

That is a separate crime. Wouldn't driving drunk without crashing be a "victimless crime?" why don't we just criminalize it only when there is a crash?
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 5:31:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SorryOciffer:
It's dumb, it's ALREADY ILLEGAL! They just want another offense they can tack a fine on to boost revenue!

S.O.




+1



There are too many laws on the books that are ONLY there to produce revenue.
Link Posted: 1/8/2005 7:38:57 PM EDT
Gee . In Alaska if you are under 21 and blow a .01% you can lose your license even if you are just standing on the side of the road .
Top Top