Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Should the blood-alcohol limit for drivers be lowered to 0.05 percent?

  1. Yes
  2. No
 
 
 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(57)

PleaseGetAClue

May-15-13 11:18 AM

how about ONLY for Mayoral candidates and all local politicians and appointees

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dirtracefan

May-15-13 11:37 AM

I see the constant Bickering and child like controversy's are still going on in Gloversville with the Mayor and the Common Council, if this kind of Non-sense continues Gloversville is going to remain in the shape it is now, high taxes, loads of blight, I could list more but what good will it do, we all know what the problems are.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

revoltnow

May-15-13 11:38 AM

portney. that should be a no vote. and your responce should be., *****no because it won't apply to ?????

double standards.. just another reason to get out on alection day and REVOLT

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

moderation

May-15-13 12:47 PM

I am torn about this issue. I lost a sister to a drunk driver growing up. I'm not sure the answer is .05, but I do think anyone that registers above .20 should face felony charges and jail time for a first offense.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

May-15-13 12:54 PM

This is nothing but a revenue stream fro the states. In 1980 when the NHTSA started keeping statistics, 35% of all highway fatalities involved alcohol. Now 30 years later, the ratio is still at 35%. These Draconian drunken driving laws are not doing what they expect. All they do is ruin peoples lives without saving any.

Next, BAC is a Horrible test of drunkenness. One who drinks daily can easily perform just fine at BACs as high as 5.0%. The occasional drinker can be dysfunctional at 0.5%.

The real problem is that we hand out drivers licences like candy at Halloween. The number of ignorant and unqualified drivers on the roads are the real problem... Address that.

9 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

May-15-13 1:36 PM

might as well add a 28th amendment to the Constitution re-instating the 18th amendment. Here we go again attacking the symptoms and not the problem.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

May-15-13 1:50 PM

I am not a drinker but give more chances for government to invade a persons life... no thanks!

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

May-15-13 2:14 PM

drugsrus, once again your comment makes no sense. The 18th outlawed the production, transport and sale of alcohol illegal, but did NOT outlaw the consumption or possession of it.

This has absolutely nothing to do with blood alcohol levels or driving while intoxicated.

You keep inventing arguments for this that simply do not exist. Stop running interference.

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hilltopper

May-15-13 2:57 PM

All cars should have sensors that render the vehicle inoperable if alcohol is detected in the driver. All cell phones should have a lock out for text messaging if the phone is moving at more than 5 MPH. Both drunk driving and texting while driving put innocent people at risk.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ktjrws

May-15-13 2:57 PM

Seeing that Governor Cuomo is no longer married to a Kennedy I'm sure he will support this bill.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

May-15-13 3:05 PM

Hilltopper, that's a proposed law, and a very intrusive one at that. I'm not a heavy drinker and I've never been arrested for drunk driving. But I know my limits and when to let a friend or family member take the keys. So why should I have my privacy invaded for doing something as common as driving?

And who's going to calibrate the sensor? Only certain people by law are allowed to do that considering the results may be used in court.

H-ell, there are certain mouthwashes that will yield results based on your breath, not the content in yur blood. That's grossly unfair and and imprudent approach to fight this.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

1stwardcitizen

May-15-13 4:23 PM

The Mayor would have to show up to work if anything is to get done. You can't run a City from Facebook or a bar stool. Jim Handy is a good man that will show up to work and improve our City.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

May-15-13 5:53 PM

swizzer, -failed again- It has been a few years since there has been alcohol in mouthwash. And let's look into your analsys - production, transport, and sale is illegal - but not consumption or possession -- OK how do you legally possess or ingest something that can't be made, carried, or sold. And back then blood alcohol levels and DUI/DWI were not of concern. Most times the cop who pulled you over took your keys and simply gave you a ride home. You could pick up your car keys at the police station the next day and everybody had a good laugh at your condition the night before.

And that amendment put an end to "legal" licensed production. Those illegal moonshiners who have been around for a couple of hundred years are still at it today and they have guns too.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

May-15-13 6:49 PM

drugsrus, no YOU'RE incorrect: look at the active ingredients in most mouthwashes (not those weak ones that taste better than they work) and find anything ending in -ol, to mean it contains the necessary hydroxyl -OH group in ALL alcohols. Not all alcohols are of the drinking found in beer kind you know.

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

May-15-13 6:50 PM

drugs, you're still wrong about Prohibition, so let's spell it out to de-mystify what those drugs have done to your mind:

"The Eighteenth Amendment (Amendment XVIII) of the United States Constitution effectively established the prohibition of alcoholic beverages in the United States by declaring the production, transport and sale of (though not the consumption or private possession of) alcohol illegal. The separate Volstead Act set down methods of enforcing the Eighteenth Amendment, and defined which "intoxicating liquors" were prohibited, and which were excluded from prohibition (e.g., for medical and religious purposes)."

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

May-15-13 7:18 PM

swizzer, you need to go back to "See spot run". Unless you are using JD, or JW for mouthwash everything I see in the drug store says on the label - "alcohol free" - Listerine, Scope, and the rest.

You still haven't told me how I can possess and consume something that can't be manufactured, transported or sold. I'll wait but I won't hold my breath.

The answer is still NO

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

usedtolivethere

May-16-13 8:22 AM

drugs and rs...you both should be tired of and embarrased by the "I'm right and you're wrong" exchanges you go through everyday. It's childish and no one cares

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

May-16-13 9:40 AM

The heck with the B.A.C. Lets get a coffee pot.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

taxtired

May-16-13 9:42 AM

Wonder if the county has an extra one laying around?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bblake

May-16-13 9:56 AM

according to the nys dmv website we have a dwai law. you can get arrested for .05 up to .08 lets enforce the laws we have. this should not be an issue for this state.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

May-16-13 12:31 PM

Actually drugsrus there is Alcohol in todays mouthwashes as well. Go check the ingredients of Listerine.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

May-16-13 12:33 PM

"I can possess and consume something that can't be manufactured, transported or sold."

You make it yourself....DUH!!!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnSteady

May-16-13 1:23 PM

Lower it and we'll see even more DWI Lawyer ads on TV. Look at the ones that continually get arrested for DWI 5, 6, 7 times but got off due to the lawyer. One of these days those lawyers will have to live with the fact that they helped kill someone when their repeat client finally kills someone!

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnSteady

May-16-13 1:25 PM

Taxtired, Sorry no coffee, the pot was stolen!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

May-16-13 8:11 PM

No matter who made it, it was not supposed to have been made. Prohibition was a great example of an overreaching government... isn't history is supposed to teach us something? Then Twenty-first Amendment repealed the Eighteenth Amendment. However, United States federal law still prohibits the manufacture of distilled spirits without meeting numerous licensing requirements that make it impractical to produce spirits for personal beverage use. So you couldn't make it for yourself...

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 57 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web