all I'm saying is it should be how people are driving - because, realistically, that is what matters.
Whether their blood alcohol is .02 or whatever, if they are driving impaired - whether it is due to eating in the car, having 1 beer before going home (and EVERYONE is impaired at one beer before driving to some extent by definition), talking on the cell phone, etc - all these acts are intentional acts and should be penalized the same.
How can we say that a driver talking on the cell phone doesn't know that their driving is impaired? They are not drunk - they KNOW they are putting people's lives at risk - yet we turn the other way and condone it. Same with the soccer mom with 10 rowdy kids in the back of the van.
We all say that if you have 1 drink (because it affects people differently) you shouldn't be driving because you are impaired to some degree - and I'm saying that children in the back seat and cell phones (for example) can be just as much impairment.
Now I'm not talking about those folks who are extremely drunk - like a .20 or something like that. Their driving makes it very clear they are impaired.
But ANYONE that is so distracted that they cross the center line - no matter what the reason - should get the same penalty - because they have the same probability of causing an accident. And THAT is what we are trying to prevent.
FYI - for the record - I've never had a DUI, nor ever been stopped. Rarely even have a beer and drive.
I just think it's nuts not to penalize these other types of offenses as harshly - we've had some bad accidents up here due to cell phone use while driving. IMHO - if you are on the phone while an accident occurs, it should incur EXACTLY the same penalty as DWI.
Think about it - if you are sober, you should definitely know better - it's not like you were too drunk to know better - and if you are on the phone while driving, you know you are putting other people's lives at risk.
Just having a bad day - and wanted to rant.
Whether their blood alcohol is .02 or whatever, if they are driving impaired - whether it is due to eating in the car, having 1 beer before going home (and EVERYONE is impaired at one beer before driving to some extent by definition), talking on the cell phone, etc - all these acts are intentional acts and should be penalized the same.
How can we say that a driver talking on the cell phone doesn't know that their driving is impaired? They are not drunk - they KNOW they are putting people's lives at risk - yet we turn the other way and condone it. Same with the soccer mom with 10 rowdy kids in the back of the van.
We all say that if you have 1 drink (because it affects people differently) you shouldn't be driving because you are impaired to some degree - and I'm saying that children in the back seat and cell phones (for example) can be just as much impairment.
Now I'm not talking about those folks who are extremely drunk - like a .20 or something like that. Their driving makes it very clear they are impaired.
But ANYONE that is so distracted that they cross the center line - no matter what the reason - should get the same penalty - because they have the same probability of causing an accident. And THAT is what we are trying to prevent.
FYI - for the record - I've never had a DUI, nor ever been stopped. Rarely even have a beer and drive.
I just think it's nuts not to penalize these other types of offenses as harshly - we've had some bad accidents up here due to cell phone use while driving. IMHO - if you are on the phone while an accident occurs, it should incur EXACTLY the same penalty as DWI.
Think about it - if you are sober, you should definitely know better - it's not like you were too drunk to know better - and if you are on the phone while driving, you know you are putting other people's lives at risk.
Just having a bad day - and wanted to rant.
Last edited:
