The National Transportation Safety Board has recommended all
states lower the legal blood-alcohol content (BAC) from 0.08 to 0.05.
The NTSB
offers two arguments. One, statistics show that people with a BAC of 0.05
percent are 38 percent more likely to be involved in a crash than those who
have not been drinking. People with a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 percent are
169 percent more likely.
Second, the
standard in most of the industrialized world is 0.05 percent. The blood-alcohol
level was reduced to 0.08 in the all states. Wyoming switched to 0.08 percent only
after Congress enacted legislation that withheld highway construction money
from states that didn’t adopt that standard.
Given the make-up
of the Congress, it’s unlikely they would enact such coercive measures. Given
the inclinations of the Wyoming legislature, it wouldn’t matter if Congress did.
The real question is whether further reducing the legal limit is the best way
to reduce alcohol related highway deaths. Poignantly, even a representative of
Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the most outspoken organization seeking a
reduction in drunk driving, was lukewarm to the idea.
He told the press
the 0.05 proposal “was the safety board’s (way of) trying to focus on a group
of people who are more social drinkers, who haven’t been targeted in a while.” He
said that while MADD would not oppose the change it would pursue other
remedies.
That’s exactly
what legislators should do. If the states don’t do a better job of taking
drunks off the road, support for the NTSB proposal will only increase.
Drunk driving
remains a problem that cannot be solved by constantly increasing the penalties.
Harsher sentences have never been shown to cure the addiction behind nearly all
the arrests and serious accidents. But social drinkers with .05 blood alcohol
content aren’t the problem.
A recent survey
of DUI arrests for in Wyoming makes that case. The average BAC reported for persons arrested for driving under the influence
was 0.1529, more than 3 times the NTSB recommendation.
Forty-five percent of those persons arrested for driving under the influence had an average blood
alcohol content above 0.16, the average BAC reported for 404 traffic crashes that involved
alcohol was 0.1628. (“Wyoming
Alcohol
Use Issues Survey-2006 www.uwyo.edu/wysac)
A 2012
University of Wyoming survey, indicated
55% felt that roadside sobriety checkpoints would be very or somewhat effective
in reducing drinking and
driving in their communities, over two-thirds (68.6%) of Wyoming
residents say they would support (strongly or somewhat support) a
tax increase in this case, and 64.3% prohibit selling or serving alcohol to
someone who is obviously intoxicated.
Wyoming
law currently gives civil immunity to bars that sell more booze to already
intoxicated customers even when those customer stagger out the door, drive away
and kill innocent people while driving intoxicated. Repeal of that immunity
would be a powerful disincentive to serve customers to the point of
intoxication.
Finally,
the state should require all courts handling DUI cases to use those strategies
proven to work in Laramie County’s DUI Court. By requiring treatment coupled
with frequent testing, intense supervision, ignition lock devices and other
monitoring, the Laramie County DUI Court has proved successful in changing the
lives of many people who have a long string of DUI arrests and other risky,
alcohol related behaviors.
Budget
cuts threaten the future of these programs but they have a proven record,
demonstrating outcomes making them a far more effective alternative to reducing
drunk driving than either increasing the length of sentences or reducing the
blood alcohol content level.
Instead
of targeting social drinkers or further adding years to mandatory sentences,
legislators should support research-based strategies with proven results.
You have some interesting points. However, we should look at some more stats.
ReplyDeleteIn 2012, there were 13,893 crashes reported in Wyoming. Of those, 971 involved alcohol. If you look at the fatal crashes, of the 109 fatal crashes in 2012, 41 involved alcohol. Obviously a much larger percentage. However, our percentage of alcohol-related crashes has been steady to falling for the past several years. In 2008, it was 47 percent (fatal crashes/fatal crashes alcohol-related) and in 2012, it was 38 percent. In injury crashes the percentage of those involving alcohol has been steady at about 14 percent.
Let's not forget here are always a number of other contributing factors to any crash such as speed, lack of wearing seat belts, road conditions, weather, car condition, etc.
Lack of seat belt use is a far greater cause of death in Wyoming than driving drunk. Our number 1 way to die in a vehicle in Wyoming: A young male driving who isn't wearing a seat belt and rolls his vehicle. That death rate is over 90 percent.
Now, I'm not totally against lowering the BAC, but to what limit? If it's o.o5, then why not go all of the way? 1 drink? Install interlock devices in all vehicles? At what point do we stop? I'm also not a big fan of "the standard of the rest of the world ..." so we must do it argument. We're not the rest of the world and our problems and solutions are not that easily generalized.
Additionally, surveys tend to quantify feelings and emotions, not facts or even what programs would or would not work. Not a big fan of citing those. And to hold bars accountable? That's fine, but at what point does the burden and responsibility lie upon the person drinking? Some states go so far as to hold the server personally responsible (Missouri comes to mind).
However, people handle their alcohol differently and I am not a fan of holding a server responsible - effectively ruining their life - for the mistake of an idiot who takes to the wheel drunk. Drunk driving is certainly a choice, but not a choice to be laid in the lap of someone who may not have the education to discern who is over the limit and who is not, especially when you lower that limit to a drink or two.
As you pointed out, the average BAC for someone involved in a alcohol-related crash is over twice to nearly three times the legal limit. So would lowering the BAC limit actually do any good? If people aren't paying attention to the law now, how is it more effective to lower the limit?
This is and has always been a complex issue. We forget driving is a privilege, not a right, however, we've designed our world to be primarily accessible by car. We set standards and laws, then apologize for people who break them. So, we make them tougher, which in turn oppresses everyone.
Driving drunk has been an issue since the car was invented. Tougher laws haven't worked. Increased enforcement hasn't worked. Education hasn't worked. Prohibition didn't work. Ultimately, the responsibility lies with the driver. Interesting thoughts you've presented and certainly ones that have made me think as well. Thanks!
This rule should be strictly implemented..There are other innocents that are being involved in such accidents involving drunk drivers like a friend who works as an atlanta it support,good thing he wasn't hurt that bad.This is one of the major national problem that the government should really have a strict policy/rule to impose on.
ReplyDelete