This thread has obv gotten out of hand.
Its sad that MADD is being villified more than the OP and the drunkards in this thread. I have a friend of the family that works for MADD because her two sons were BOTH killed in seperate drunk driving incidences.
My guess is nobody in this thread is qualified to discuss the appropriateness of 0.08 as a level.
The only part of the thread that made me laugh was when the DUI defenders kept mentioning that it was a fact that there were articles proving that a reduction from 0.10 to 0.08 has not resulted in less traffic fatalities.
http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/cgi/...stract/6/2/109
Article:Effects of recent 0.08% legal blood alcohol limits on fatal crash involvement
Results—States adopting 0.08% laws experienced a 6% greater post-law decline in the proportion of drivers in fatal crashes with blood alcohol levels at 0.10% or higher and a 5% greater decline in the proportion of fatal crashes that were alcohol related at 0.10% or higher.
Conclusions—If all states adopted the 0.08% legal blood alcohol level, 400–500 fewer traffic fatalities would occur annually.
I found this article after looking for 2 minutes.