United Future

Posted at 2010-04-13 12:04:26.897. Permalink.

I don't support the lowering of the limit because I haven't seen any evidence that suggests accidents are being caused by people with blood alcohol levels in the 50-80mg range. What we are told is that "alcohol is a factor" in so many accidents.

My impression is that a significant number of accidents, particularly the really bad ones, are caused by people who are well and truly over the existing limit, often unlicensed, and repeat offenders. i.e. people with drink/drug problems.

That's my impression. I would like to see detailed stats before supporting any reduction. That would include a breakdown of the actual blood/alcohol levels by severity of the accidents. Then we would have better data with which to make a decision. The police checkpoint stats are not relevant, the accident stats are.

The authorities must have this data if they are making these recommendations, so they can make it available to the public. Or, don't they have the data and are just guessing or worse still going for soft targets (law-abiding citizens) while ignoring the real (and difficult to deal with) cause? So, do the stats exist or are the authorities spreading the BS?