3 ms·

A BAC of 0.08 is not high at all. "Consider the 2000 federal law that pressured states to lower their BAC standards to 0.08 from 0.10. At the time, the average

A BAC of 0.08 is not high at all. "Consider the 2000 federal law that pressured states to lower their BAC standards to 0.08 from 0.10. At the time, the average BAC in alcohol-related fatal accidents was 0.17, and two-thirds of such accidents involved drivers with BACs of 0.14 or higher." http://reason.com/archives/2010/10/11/abolish-drunk-driving-laws http://reason.com/archives/2010/10/11/abolish-drunk-driving-...

lkbm 12y ago
Percentage of people in accidents at a given BAC is the wrong stat to look at. You need to look at _chance of accident_ at a given BAC, v. at 0 BAC. And at 0.08, you're chance of accident is 393% of that when sober. 0.07 is 322%.[1] 1. http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/812117-Drug_and_Alcohol_Crash_Risk.pdf http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/812117-Drug_and_Alc... (Table 8)
- mariodiana 12y ago
  Why? Ratios mean nothing out-of-context. So, you look at Table 8 and tell me what are the chances of having an accident at BAC 0.00 in hard numbers. Because if the chance of an accident is infinitesimal, then I'm not worried so much about infinitesimal-times-four.
  - lkbm 12y ago
    True, it would be better if it weren't set with BAC 0 = 1, but this is certainly more meaningful than share of accidents. Neither of the stats we used provide probability of an accident. Mine are relative probability for one behavior v. the other; yours are confounded by the unreported number of people engaging in each behavior.
    - mariodiana 12y ago
      Here's my real point. I believe, and I'm not alone, that the 0.08 limit is unnecessarily and arbitrarily low, and has more to do with neo-temperance hysteria than sound judgment. There is a central divide in alcohol use and an individual's response to it. Barring young people inexperienced with alcohol (and lacking a fully developed frontal lobe), most people drink a bit, feel tipsy, and then decide that they need to sober up. They're self-aware, responsible, and careful. That's their response to alcohol. But another segment of people have a completely different response to alcohol. They have a couple of drinks, feel a sense of euphoria, and want to drink and drink and drink some more. These people are alcoholics. They may be very high-functioning — able to hold down a job and all — but they respond both physically and psychologically in a fundamentally different way. The first group might get behind the wheel, if they judge that they feel alright, and drive home as carefully as they can. The second group — now drunk — will get behind the wheel and drive recklessly, exceeding the speed limit, blasting the radio, taking turns too fast and so forth. The first group might be at BAC 0.05 or 0.08, or even at 0.10, but taking all due precautions. It's not ideal, but it's a far cry from the second group, now at 0.15 or 0.2 or 0.3 (which takes some practice as you know, since unpracticed drunks would be passed out at this BAC), who are now whipping down the road. The first group occasionally has "too much to drink." The second group is blasted every Friday and Saturday night, and sometimes every happy hour. It's this second group that is causing the lion's share of the tragedies we see on the roadways. The shame of it is that our whole culture has to suffer because of this. A person who is no real threat to his fellows and who may very well be guilty of no other infraction at the time can have his life ruined by over-zealous prosecution. I think we would do well to reconsider the problem and what we're tying to solve, rather than simply getting MAD(D) about such things and patting ourselves on the back for making things "tougher," year after year.
      - boyaka 12y ago
        The groups aren't as dichotomized as you describe. I would consider myself part of the first group except that I do drink for the euphoria. I occasionally drink, period (rare social occasions), but when I do I'll want at least 6+, and I'll be sure to have a place to rest or a ride home. I even have a breathalyzer. Your definition of an alcoholic is off.
fossuser 12y ago
For clarification I wasn't saying that it's 'too high', but just that it allows for more drinks than people think. If the parent commenter was a European who doesn't drive that much and was surprised about how Americans drink and drive, they're usually not aware of how many drinks effect BAC and what the laws are.

lkbm 12y ago

Percentage of people in accidents at a given BAC is the wrong stat to look at. You need to look at _chance of accident_ at a given BAC, v. at 0 BAC. And at 0.08, you're chance of accident is 393% of that when sober. 0.07 is 322%.[1] 1. http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/812117-Drug_and_Alcohol_Crash_Risk.pdf http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/812117-Drug_and_Alc... (Table 8)

mariodiana 12y ago
Why? Ratios mean nothing out-of-context. So, you look at Table 8 and tell me what are the chances of having an accident at BAC 0.00 in hard numbers. Because if the chance of an accident is infinitesimal, then I'm not worried so much about infinitesimal-times-four.
- lkbm 12y ago
  True, it would be better if it weren't set with BAC 0 = 1, but this is certainly more meaningful than share of accidents. Neither of the stats we used provide probability of an accident. Mine are relative probability for one behavior v. the other; yours are confounded by the unreported number of people engaging in each behavior.
  - mariodiana 12y ago
    Here's my real point. I believe, and I'm not alone, that the 0.08 limit is unnecessarily and arbitrarily low, and has more to do with neo-temperance hysteria than sound judgment. There is a central divide in alcohol use and an individual's response to it. Barring young people inexperienced with alcohol (and lacking a fully developed frontal lobe), most people drink a bit, feel tipsy, and then decide that they need to sober up. They're self-aware, responsible, and careful. That's their response to alcohol. But another segment of people have a completely different response to alcohol. They have a couple of drinks, feel a sense of euphoria, and want to drink and drink and drink some more. These people are alcoholics. They may be very high-functioning — able to hold down a job and all — but they respond both physically and psychologically in a fundamentally different way. The first group might get behind the wheel, if they judge that they feel alright, and drive home as carefully as they can. The second group — now drunk — will get behind the wheel and drive recklessly, exceeding the speed limit, blasting the radio, taking turns too fast and so forth. The first group might be at BAC 0.05 or 0.08, or even at 0.10, but taking all due precautions. It's not ideal, but it's a far cry from the second group, now at 0.15 or 0.2 or 0.3 (which takes some practice as you know, since unpracticed drunks would be passed out at this BAC), who are now whipping down the road. The first group occasionally has "too much to drink." The second group is blasted every Friday and Saturday night, and sometimes every happy hour. It's this second group that is causing the lion's share of the tragedies we see on the roadways. The shame of it is that our whole culture has to suffer because of this. A person who is no real threat to his fellows and who may very well be guilty of no other infraction at the time can have his life ruined by over-zealous prosecution. I think we would do well to reconsider the problem and what we're tying to solve, rather than simply getting MAD(D) about such things and patting ourselves on the back for making things "tougher," year after year.
    - boyaka 12y ago
      The groups aren't as dichotomized as you describe. I would consider myself part of the first group except that I do drink for the euphoria. I occasionally drink, period (rare social occasions), but when I do I'll want at least 6+, and I'll be sure to have a place to rest or a ride home. I even have a breathalyzer. Your definition of an alcoholic is off.

fossuser 12y ago

For clarification I wasn't saying that it's 'too high', but just that it allows for more drinks than people think. If the parent commenter was a European who doesn't drive that much and was surprised about how Americans drink and drive, they're usually not aware of how many drinks effect BAC and what the laws are.