A blood concentration law (of alcohol, or whatever) may be easy to write but it's often a shaky predictor of meaningful impairment at the wheel.
Given that the most common level that triggers trouble with the law is .08, other factors have a huge influence on whether the alcohol level is a problem -- age, physical condition, present state of health, the presence of certain medication, sleep deprivation, stress, road conditions, weather, various distractions, and plain old personality type.
Other conditions (with no alcohol present) have been shown to predict accident potential equal or greater than a .08 blood alcohol level in a healthy and responsible driver. A few of these are, talking on a cell phone, smoking, eating, mental or emotional distress, etc.....
In any case, alcohol levels in the blood only warn of a potential for troublesome behavior on the road. Many, many untroublesome drivers have been severely penalized as a result of wandering into a random testing situation on a Friday night (not a personal experience, BTW). There are not too many instances in law where potential trouble making is punished in the same way as actual trouble making. We had the fun experience of a neighbor leaving a couple of threats on our answering machine to shoot us and our dog a few years ago -- the cops said -- "well, until he actually does something....."
There is also real mischief in the way that blood-alcohol levels are commonly measured -- not by actual measurement of the alcohol in the blood but, in the vast majority of cases, by some form of "breathalyzer."
For starters, no part of the apparatus/system used in this measurement has ever been recognized by the FDA as a medical diagnostic device. Further, there are inherent factors associated with the devices, their methods of use and diagnostic protocols that argue against them EVER being recognized as reliable by the FDA. Among other things, "breathalyzers" allow for no physical differences in test subjects, even though it is widely recognized that the normal range of differences in humans causes significant variation in accuracy of test results.
Instead, "breathalyzers" meet procurement standards established by the DOT, its agencies and individual jurisdictions. It ain't pretty folks. In fact, if you care to check, you will find that money collected from "drunk drivers" provides much of the funding for law enforcement in many jurisdictions.
These comments based on experience as a consultant and witness in DUI cases. I am inclined to believe that nearly 100 percent of those charged as a result of arrest based on observed driving behavior are guilty as hell, regardless of blood alcohol test reliability. Those convicted solely on the basis of blood or, especially, breath test results probably got screwed.
Whatever any of you think of the law or it's application -- Don't drink (AT ALL) and drive. The blood-alcohol level laws mass produce convictions and judges and prosecutors are adept at convincing juries the testing is infallible.
I have the good fortune of living within an easy walk of the ocean, golf and many interesting bars and restaurants. Walking is good for you :-)
M |
