Should the BAL for DWI be 0.0%
Debate Rounds (3)
Other countries such as Armenia, Hungary and Romania all have BAC levels of 0.0%. (ri) By having it be 0.0% it would decrease the amount of DWI's and people being in jail due to drinking and driving. (s) The roads would also be a safer place if this law were to be put into effect. (c)
Lowering the BAC to 0.0% might not be a great idea because there are certain prescription medications that people take that could cause erratic behavior and make an officer stop and think that a person may be intoxicated. (c/e) There was an instance in 2008, where an Arizona woman was arrested for DWI. Her blood test came back as 0.0%. Officer claims woman had bloodshot eyes, flushed face, and he smelled alcohol on her breath. Woman was not intoxicated, did not even have a drop to drink, she was the designated driver. (i)
How can it be that one person can have one drink and be okay to drive, while another person may have the same drink and not be okay to drive? (e) There is no way to tell who would be okay and who wouldn't be okay. (s) There is no way to see how hard alcohol can hit some people. (s)
Your blood alcohol content depends on how much you drink, how much you weigh and how much time passes in between drinks (q). There should be harsher punishments for people who drink and then get behind the wheel of a car. By having the BAL be 0.0% and applying these harsher consequences, it will allow people to see that drinking and driving is not allowed. (c)
The BAC should be 0.0% for people under the age of 21, because they shouldn't even be drinking legally in the first place. (i) But for the rest of the general population, why shouldn't someone be able to go out, have a drink with their friends, and be able to drive home one to two hours later? (q) Their BAC would more than likely be over 0.0%, but all of their reasoning and physical attributes should be perfectly normal. (i)
There are zero-tolerance countries that use scare tactics to keep people off the road, like immediate revokation of license, hefty fines, car seizure, etc. (q) While the US does not keep to strict ideals like that, why can't they implement these ideas without lowering the BAC? (i) I'm sure it would get people to think twice before drinking too much and then getting behind the wheel.
Many people will argue that they can "hold their alcohol", but there is simply no way to be able to determine this. (e) When drinking alcohol, people do and say things they might not normally say when they are sober, this resulting in people believing that they are okay to drive when it reality they are not okay to drive. (ri) The idea isn't safe. It puts the lives of others in great danger as well as your own. (e) The roads would be a much safer place if there was a law enforcing a no tolerance when it comes to alcohol being in your system while operating a vehicle. (c)
Having a zero-tolerance policy in the US would not only prevent people who are perfectly fine from getting on the road, but, it would also affect the business of restaurants and bars tremendously. (c/e) Would you be more willing to go out and have a drink or two with friends if you knew that you couldn't even get behind the wheel of your own car? (p) Businesses would suffer tremendously, which would then be further contributing to the decline of the economy. (e)
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.