What was the context?
Again, I posted the stats of how many are, in fact, in said wrecks. And you even started "extrapolating" from the stats. Really, how do you think those drivers between 0.05 and 0.08 died if they weren't in wrecks?
Driving ban for life after DUI? Drunk driving - from it is OK to execution, ect....
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Again, I posted the stats of how many are, in fact, in said wrecks. And you even started "extrapolating" from the stats. Really, how do you think those drivers between 0.05 and 0.08 died if they weren't in wrecks?
Don't despair Les, one of the downsides of being a twit, is they don't have enough f**Kin' brains to recognize their situation. Out of kindness someone should medicate him so he doesn't try to do strenuous exercise like thinking! -
Again, I posted the stats of how many are, in fact, in said wrecks. And you even started "extrapolating" from the stats. Really, how do you think those drivers between 0.05 and 0.08 died if they weren't in wrecks? Just because you haven't seen any of those wrecks, does not mean there weren't any. Jeez
Told you, I understand that that is what you are saying. I don't blieve you are not biased, though. I think you think that anything under 0.01 is too expensive regardless of the costs.
I think this thread has pretty well run its course and even one death resulting from impaired driving is too many and whatever is necessary to prevent it should be done. End of discussion (as far as I'm concerned)
I've said repeatedly that I do not know the costs nor the extent of the problem. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
For sure and for a guy who claims he doesn't know he seems to think he knows enough to put everyone else down! -
Enough with the back and forth bickering! It's very annoying. Stick to the topic WITHOUT attacking other forum members.
So outlining the issue:
I posted the stats the gov't has that says about 5% of drunk drivers that die in crashes are between 0.05 and 0.08. The gov't says around 30 to 35% of impaired drivers die in crashes (2000 to 2006 stats). The last year of gov't assesment I could find (2009), there were about 85,000 cases of impaired driving in the books. About 1/3 of those are caused by teens and 20+.
Cannuck calculates that about 35 or 40 drivers who drive with BAC of between 0.05 and 0.08 die in crashes. The stat leaves out those drivers that are merely injured as well as passengers and pedestrians and their deaths and injuries, property damage, and whatever else may be pertinent. The government thinks crashes caused by drunk drivers alone costs about $10.6 billion per year. (Smashed: A Sober Look at Drinking and Driving - Transport Canada ). Can't find anything saying how much is attributable to those drivers that are only mildly drunk (below say 0.10 ). I'm also thinking that some drunk drivers were not drunk the same night they'd been drinking but had slept off some of their impairment and still blew over in the morning.
IMO, 0.05 (when driving abilities, like judgement and motor skills, become impaired) is a reasonable limit and I get the impression that the money spent catching and convicting those under 0.01 is a small fraction of the total costs and well worth that small fraction considering the amount of deaths, possibles injuries and the amount of damage done.
Relative likelihood of dying in a crash relative to age and BAC:
I posted the stats the gov't has that says about 5% of drunk drivers that die in crashes are between 0.05 and 0.08. The gov't says around 30 to 35% of impaired drivers die in crashes (2000 to 2006 stats). The last year of gov't assesment I could find (2009), there were about 85,000 cases of impaired driving in the books. About 1/3 of those are caused by teens and 20+.
Cannuck calculates that about 35 or 40 drivers who drive with BAC of between 0.05 and 0.08 die in crashes. The stat leaves out those drivers that are merely injured as well as passengers and pedestrians and their deaths and injuries, property damage, and whatever else may be pertinent. The government thinks crashes caused by drunk drivers alone costs about $10.6 billion per year. (Smashed: A Sober Look at Drinking and Driving - Transport Canada ). Can't find anything saying how much is attributable to those drivers that are only mildly drunk (below say 0.10 ). I'm also thinking that some drunk drivers were not drunk the same night they'd been drinking but had slept off some of their impairment and still blew over in the morning.
IMO, 0.05 (when driving abilities, like judgement and motor skills, become impaired) is a reasonable limit and I get the impression that the money spent catching and convicting those under 0.01 is a small fraction of the total costs and well worth that small fraction considering the amount of deaths, possibles injuries and the amount of damage done.
Relative likelihood of dying in a crash relative to age and BAC: