![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Dec. 31st, 2010 09:34 amTONIGHT - DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE.
DO NOT CONFUSE THIS WITH "DON'T DRIVE DRUNK"
The misleading publicity campaign tonight will be about "drunk drivers." We all know who they are, we all are against drunk driving. The problem is many people don't understand that their own opinion of "I'm fine" is not legal to drive in many instances.
Do you have any idea, for your gender and weight, how many drinks it takes to exceed .08?
Do you know what .08 feels like?
Do you know how many hours it takes to get down below .08 bac?
I trust a lot of people to adequately judge when they are ok to drive; however, if you get stopped at a checkpoint you will become a statistic - another person who is arrested, pays thousands of dollars into the coffers, and is now a lifetime criminal for something nobody thought was a crime other than some family-minister from Nebraska.
Defining your terms is the problem here. We all also hate aggressive drivers, but when they give out tickets for aggressive driving they're not nailing the guys who make frequent lane changes, tailgate, or use the exit ramp to pass people - they're just GIVING OUT SPEEDING TICKETS. Your grandma is as likely to get one of these "aggressive driving profiling campaigns" as some misplaced aggro douchebag.
Tonight I'll be ready to have my civil rights ripped away - stopped at a checkpoint with no reason to suspect me of committing a crime. I'm going to be loud, belligerent, whine about knowing my rights, even have liquor on my breath (by design - I'll be swishing a shot before I drive though I'm not going to drink a single beer), and cause as much commotion as I can without getting arrested.
I like the police, I like laws, but I'm distressed by the disconnect between what we care about and need as society and the ill-defined terms that result in each genuine concern as the applied rule does more harm than good - and nobody seems to care.
DO NOT CONFUSE THIS WITH "DON'T DRIVE DRUNK"
The misleading publicity campaign tonight will be about "drunk drivers." We all know who they are, we all are against drunk driving. The problem is many people don't understand that their own opinion of "I'm fine" is not legal to drive in many instances.
Do you have any idea, for your gender and weight, how many drinks it takes to exceed .08?
Do you know what .08 feels like?
Do you know how many hours it takes to get down below .08 bac?
I trust a lot of people to adequately judge when they are ok to drive; however, if you get stopped at a checkpoint you will become a statistic - another person who is arrested, pays thousands of dollars into the coffers, and is now a lifetime criminal for something nobody thought was a crime other than some family-minister from Nebraska.
Defining your terms is the problem here. We all also hate aggressive drivers, but when they give out tickets for aggressive driving they're not nailing the guys who make frequent lane changes, tailgate, or use the exit ramp to pass people - they're just GIVING OUT SPEEDING TICKETS. Your grandma is as likely to get one of these "aggressive driving profiling campaigns" as some misplaced aggro douchebag.
Tonight I'll be ready to have my civil rights ripped away - stopped at a checkpoint with no reason to suspect me of committing a crime. I'm going to be loud, belligerent, whine about knowing my rights, even have liquor on my breath (by design - I'll be swishing a shot before I drive though I'm not going to drink a single beer), and cause as much commotion as I can without getting arrested.
I like the police, I like laws, but I'm distressed by the disconnect between what we care about and need as society and the ill-defined terms that result in each genuine concern as the applied rule does more harm than good - and nobody seems to care.
