Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

wolf1moon t1_j42bg9a wrote

Reply to comment by rubix_redux in State senator proposes lowering WA’s blood alcohol limit to .05 by OldManJared

Here's a article that references a few studies on the matter. https://www.tlflawfirm.com/blog/is-there-really-that-big-of-a-difference-between-05-and-08-bac/

The pertinent metric was a 1.38 incident rate compared to completely sober drivers. It's 2.69 at .08. given the target zero goal, and that . 075 seems like it would still be pretty high risk of accidents, I think this makes sense. That said, a sliding scale of punishment seems to be appropriate imo.

10

duuuh t1_j42ecyr wrote

The link doesn't give you the original sources and I'm extremely skeptical of these things because so much of the 'information' in this space is driven by Mothers Against Drunk Driving, which is really more of an abolitionist group than anything else.

14

wolf1moon t1_j44zw4n wrote

MADD is a 1920s organization. People can't be taking it seriously. I've never heard of it outside a historical sense

0

duuuh t1_j450hmy wrote

It was founded in 1980.

2

wolf1moon t1_j455lxu wrote

Oh huh, what I was thinking of is a different acronym. Could have sworn that was the same one

0

iamlucky13 t1_j42p2vx wrote

Thanks for the article.

In retrospect it seems really obvious, but I like Colorado's idea of having a less serious charge for a less level of impairment. Making 0.05% an infraction with a fine would still have a deterrent effect. It actually would probably be easier to prosecute, since infractions do not have to proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

6

BabyWrinkles t1_j44yuxs wrote

I think maybe put differently: how many individuals pulled over or tested after an incident are blowing between a .05 and .08? I don't know many folks who are brethalyzing before leaving the brewery and going ".09, darn, gotta wait another 30 mins."?

1