| Joe Aldeguer |
[Feb. 9th, 2010|11:54 am] |
Joseph Aldeguer
Every state has some sort of “drunk driving” statute. The term “drunk driving” is in quotes because none of these laws require that you be “drunk” or “intoxicated” to be guilty. All that is required is that your ability to operate a vehicle has been impaired to any extent at all or that your Blood alcohol level exceeds the state limit (which is now .08% in all states). Some states call it DUI (Driving Under the Influence), but it refers to the same offense. The consequences of DWI differ drastically from state to state and are influenced by your age, blood alcohol limit (BAC), whether you have been arrested for DWI in the past, and whether you caused injury or death during the DWI.
The American system of justice is based on the principle that it’s better to let the guilty go unpunished than to punish the innocent. Breath tests of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) are really simply estimates of BAC, which can only be tested accurately by drawing a sample of blood. That’s why not all states permit the use of breathalyzer estimates to be used.
Because of many reasons, breathalyzers are several times more likely to record a falsely high than a falsely low BAC reading. This suggests that the innocent are several times more likely to be falsely convicted than the guilty are to go unpunished.
However, a new state law now specifically prohibits alcohol breath test readings from being barred from court just because they might be invalid or incorrect. The law makes it easier to get questionable, possibly inaccurate, breath-test readings admitted into court.
Apparently, prosecutors want to increase their conviction rates, regardless of the guilt or innocence of the citizens suspected of driving while under the influence of alcohol.
Many underage persons select busy sales times and hope that rushed clerks won’t do the math, or will make a mistake doing the math, on their legitimate driver’s licenses. If unsuccessful, they simply go from store to store until they are able to make a purchase. Some sting operations suggest that underage purchasers may have to go to a dozen or more vendors before being successful. However, there’s no penalty to underage purchasers for employing this successful strategy. On the other hand, vendors face serious consequences for violating Alcohol Beverage Control law and criminal penal law and can lose their jobs (if a clerks) or businesses (if owners).
Home Owners Advocacy Centers This suggests that young people should learn to drink in moderation before learning to drive. Inexperienced drinking combined with inexperienced driving appears to be a highly dangerous mix.
This is not a strange or radical idea. Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Jews, Portuguese and many others around the world teach their children how to drink in moderation as pre-schoolers. What's a strange and radical idea is imposing a minimum drinking age of 21. Of all the nations of the entire world, the U.S.is the only country to maintain this extreme social experiment. The other countries that have tried it (Ukrainia and South Korea) have concluded that it doesn't work and have abandoned it.
What to do? Make sure you know your state's law on drunk driving and consider hiring a lawyer to assist you through the process. Many lawyers limit their practice to drunk driving, know the system and may provide a free consultation. Click to find a DUI attorney in your location or post your case to an attorney.
For more information visit: Home Owners Advocacy Centers or Joseph Aldeguer |
|
|
![[info]](http://www.iziblog.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}