My view: Lowering legal limit to .05 won’t save lives

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.


  • Edmunds Tucker St George, UT
    Oct. 4, 2017 4:49 p.m.

    '' (indeed [Utahans] already have the lowest DUI fatality rate in the country)'' - Suunds good to me. Don't bury that in the 5th paragraph, make that note the headline. We want Utah to stay #1 with the lowest.

  • blondegoddess Midvale, UT
    March 16, 2017 9:10 p.m.

    So because 20 people died last year in alcohol "related" accidents we change laws that affect millions negatively. Why aren't we outlawing prescription drugs then? 24 people die every month from prescription drugs - shouldn't that be the bigger concern?

  • Spangs Salt Lake City, UT
    March 14, 2017 1:15 p.m.

    @MikeRichards wrote:

    "Old drivers have gained enough wisdom to know that they're old, that they need to keep a safe distance between vehicles and that they need to drive at or under the speed limit."

    Well, when I drive drunk I always keep a safe distance between vehicles. AND I always drive under the speed limit. Just like the old folks. I have enough wisdom to know that when I'm drunk I need to be more careful. That cool?

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    March 14, 2017 1:00 p.m.

    It looks like Noodlekaboodle wants society to foot the bill so that drinkers can escape responsibility. Why should society give free rides to drunk drivers? Why not require everyone who sell or serves alcohol to confisticate car keys before selling or serrving alcohol? Why not require those who sell and serve alcohol to not return those keys until the drinker's BAC is below 0.05%? Why not require anyone who drives to a bar or party or any other venue where alcohol is consumed to rent or buy an interlock for his vehicle that will not allow the vehicle to start unless the driver's BAC is below 0.05%

    Why not make those who drink and drive 100% responsible for their actions instead of letting drinkers demand free taxi and TRAX service?

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    March 14, 2017 12:00 p.m.

    If the state of Utah cared one bit about keeping impaired people off the roads, they'd allocate the money to run TRAX and other UTA services after last call on Friday and Saturday nights. They wouldn't get to puff their chests to their non drinking, conservative constituents. But they would actually save lives.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    March 14, 2017 9:40 a.m.

    "1aggie - SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    March 12, 2017 9:35 a.m.

    In Utah, more fatal accidents involve people over the age of 65 than drunk drivers.

    This new law seems like a "solution" seeking a problem."
    =============

    Can you provide a documented source for that claim? I tried to verify it and was not able to find it.

    =================

    Okay, if this won't solve the problem, let's pass a law that will. How about reducing the BA to 0.00%

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    March 14, 2017 5:11 a.m.

    airnaut, 12:35 p.m.,

    If you want to promote smoking dope and drinking and then pretend that those on dope and alcohol are safe drivers, then go ahead, prove the rest of us wrong who believe that driving while impaired deserves swift and sure justice; but watch out. Thumbing your nose at law will eventually cause great harm. We have laws to protect society against those who think that they can smoke dope and drive and those who think that they are immune from the effects of alcohol.

    Old drivers have gained enough wisdom to know that they're old, that they need to keep a safe distance between vehicles and that they need to drive at or under the speed limit. Those foolish drivers who are on dope or alcohol and those drivers who are so full of rage that they spend all of their time criticizing everyone else are never aware that their lack of self-control is a danger to society.

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    March 13, 2017 12:40 p.m.

    Mike Richards - South Jordan, Utah
    March 12, 2017 7:39 a.m.

    The duty of the Legislature is to represent the people and the counties of Utah.

    We all know that a driver, when impaired, has slower reflexes than he does when he is not impaired. We all know that alcohol dulls the senses, which is just another way of saying "impaired". What we don't need to argue is how much impairment is good for Utah when we already know that the answer is zero impairment.

    =======

    Old Age slows reflexes even more so.

    Why do you not go after the deadly "old" drivers?

    zero Mike? zero.

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    March 13, 2017 12:35 p.m.

    My view: Lowering legal limit to .05 won’t save lives

    ========

    And neither willing banning medical marijuana

    BTW --
    Why don't we have a graduated BAL?

    .24 is 10 times worse than .08 but only 3 times over the current limit.
    I think the penalty should directly correlate to the amount of the abuse.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    March 13, 2017 12:18 p.m.

    this will save no live but will increase leaving the scene of an accident and hit and runs which are minor fines compared to a DUI.

    Also for those completely ignorant of alcohol, who believe in error that to look in the direction of alcohol causes intoxication, you are commenting out of ignorance not wisdom from the ancients.

    Can't even spot a drunk by their driving anymore, that tilted head, that illuminated face, texting doesn't leave a trace on your breath, nope this is just more religious dogma codified into law, for those who believe it won't affect them. The .05 are not the problem, the police admit readily that .08 is borderline sober and arguable in court.

  • cavetroll SANDY, UT
    March 13, 2017 11:04 a.m.

    @ casual obsesrver
    "The author's conflict of interest as a lobbyist for the alcohol industry disqualifies him."

    If that's the case, most of our legislators should be disqualified from passing any legislation. The author is stating his opinion on a matter that he is intimate with. Nothing more.

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    March 13, 2017 10:27 a.m.

    Sarah Longwell

    Are you making the case for a 0.00 limit?

  • casual observer Salt Lake City, UT
    March 13, 2017 10:17 a.m.

    The author's conflict of interest as a lobbyist for the alcohol industry disqualifies him. His job is to sell more alcoholic beverages, not protect the citizens of Utah from DWI. Utah's legislators (should) have the opposite priorities. As for "law abiding citizens," they don't drink and drive. The extensive list of countries with a blood alcohol limit of 0.05 confirms that Utah's law is not simply a local anomaly, but a recognition that driving under the influence is not acceptable.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 13, 2017 6:03 a.m.

    "This means that when someone is texting and driving after a glass of wine with dinner and kills someone on the road, the crash is designated as “alcohol-involved.” "

    To add to this. With any serious accident tests will be performed on the driver to determine if they were under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Standard practice.

    What about distracted cell phone caused accidents? It is typically not even checked to determine if the driver was using the cell phone when an accident occurred. I contend that the number of Cell phone related accidents is way way under reported.

    The problem with a .05 BAL standard is that the penalty is extremely stiff. There would be an outcry in Utah if the penalty for cell phone use while driving was equivalent.

    There should be a different penalty for driving with a BAL between .05 and .079.

  • NoNamesAccepted St. George, UT
    March 12, 2017 3:02 p.m.

    This law sends a clear message, Don't drink and drive actually means, don't drive after drinking. Period.

    Much of libertine, secular Europe has long had a BAC limit of 0.05%. They drink much more than we do in the USA, but have managed to drink far more responsibly it seems.

    Utah's rate of alcohol related auto crashes is about one-half the nation average. But between active LDS and large numbers of children, we have less than half of population imbibes.

    This means our residents who do drink are less responsible in their drug use than are drinkers in other States. We need to change that.

    Lack of convenient mass transit at midnight and not putting bars in neighborhoods are not excuses for driving impaired. Dislike for the dominant culture or majority religion is not reason to endanger the public.

    If you drink, don't drive.

    And don't try to divert attention away from DUI by focusing on texting, senior citizens, or illegal aliens. Those problems need to be addressed.

    DUI also needs to,be addressed.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    March 12, 2017 10:37 a.m.

    No, it won't save lives but it will kill tourism business. It makes our political leaders feel morally superior and that's what's important in Utah.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    March 12, 2017 9:50 a.m.

    You're right, this was a feel good exercise. The difference between 05 and 08 only affects law abiding citizens. The problem is at the top of the scale.

  • 1aggie SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    March 12, 2017 9:35 a.m.

    In Utah, more fatal accidents involve people over the age of 65 than drunk drivers.

    This new law seems like a "solution" seeking a problem.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    March 12, 2017 7:39 a.m.

    The duty of the Legislature is to represent the people and the counties of Utah.

    We all know that a driver, when impaired, has slower reflexes than he does when he is not impaired. We all know that alcohol dulls the senses, which is just another way of saying "impaired". What we don't need to argue is how much impairment is good for Utah when we already know that the answer is zero impairment.

    The Legislature performed its duty. It represented the people and the counties of Utah.