[mattduke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')After two years of attempting to get the computer based source code for the Alcotest 7110 MKIII-C, defense counsel in State v. Chun were successful in obtaining the code, and had it analyzed by Base One Technologies, Inc.

Draeger, the manufacturer maintained that the system was perfect, and that revealing the source code would be damaging to its business. They were right about the second part, of course, because it turned out that the code was terrible.

[jasonraymondson]

What?!?!?

Crack?

People who drink should never be behind the wheel. Hell, in my opinion people should not be allowed to drink period.

[mattduke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')ure, we can do informal calculations in our head, based on our weight and the amount of alcohol we have had over some period of time. But at best these will be estimates. We have to wait for the government to administer a test to tell us whether or not we are criminals. That’s not the way law is supposed to work. Indeed, this is a form of tyranny.

Now, the immediate response goes this way: drunk driving has to be illegal because the probability of causing an accident rises dramatically when you drink. The answer is just as simple: government in a free society should not deal in probabilities. The law should deal in actions and actions alone, and only insofar as they damage person or property. Probabilities are something for insurance companies to assess on a competitive and voluntary basis.

[mattduke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jasonraymondson', 'H')ell, in my opinion people should not be allowed to drink period.

[jboogy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat have we done by permitting government to criminalize the content of our blood instead of actions themselves?

[Schmuto]

I'm a staunch libertarian, but I can't get behind this one.

It's not a question of "probabilities."

It's a certainty.

When you drive with more than a certain amount of ETOH in your blood, your driving deteriorates.

We test people before giving them a DL for good reason - those who can't drive above a certain level of competency are not allowed to drive.

If you are above a certain BAC, you are below that level of competency.

Simple as that.

If you're one of the aberrations who can drive perfectly with a BAC of .2, then you get screwed. Sorry.

If you are convicted of DWI, you have not been convicted based on your probability of doing something wrong.

You have been convicted because you, in fact, DID do something wrong - you lowered your driving competency below a level that we, as a majority, deem to be acceptable to be on public roads.

The same twisted logic being applied here can also be applied to allow blind people to drive.

After all, they haven't killed anybody yet.

[Jotapay]

If you drink, it's best to stay at home or at the home of a friend. Don't go out in public. Avoid the drama altogether.

[jasonraymondson]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', 'I')f you drink, it's best to stay at home or at the home of a friend. Don't go out in public. Avoid the drama altogether.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Schmuto', 'I')'m a staunch libertarian, but I can't get behind this one.

[dinopello]

Ug, went out drinking for the first time in a while for a 45 yo birthday. Tequilla shots and all. Bars are about 1 km from my house. Everyone walked or took metro.

In Virginia you can be driving with an open container of alcohol, but you can't be walking down the street with one.

[mattduke]

According to edmunds, driving while drowsy triples the odds of crashing. Clearly we need roadside tests conducted to measure sleepiness.

[Novus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jasonraymondson', '
')
People who drink should never be behind the wheel. Hell, in my opinion people should not be allowed to drink period.

[jboogy]

merely thinking about the internal combustion engine should be punishable by death or at least they should lose an eye or something.