Damn... I hate double posts!!!

 

I understand your point and it's a good one. But how many people die from Heart related illnesses from eating too much McDonalds? Often times that costs tax payers money and people's lives from hospitals being overbooked due to poor health. Becuase while the 60year old who weighs 300lbs is back in the hospital again because he has chest pain(Again). Some young guy kicks it in thewaiting roombecause his headache was actually a brain aneurysm. Or while waiting for an ambulance because another fat guy has hurting chest.

My argument agianst DUI is more from a legallity stand point. In the 5th ammendment you can't be forced to admit to a crime. But by being forced to submit a blood test to prove you were drunk I do see a problem with that. And what about people geeked up on Caffeine? How much road rage can be attributed to people having a 80gallon cup of coffee in the morning?

 

I understand that you can get a DUI if you are ****faced and rafting down the river...I thought that was what rafting and tubing was all about...

 

Great point, however, in most states the paperwork you submit in order to get a license includes a statute indicating that by having a license in that state, and operating a motor vehicle you are agreeing to submit to a breathalizer test if pulled over and the officer suspects you are under the influence.

You can opt not to have the mandatory breathalizer agreement by not getting a driver's license and not operating a motor vehicle.

Driving is, after all, a privilege, not a right; contrary to popular belief.

Not trying to sound like a *****, just stating that people do have an option, just not the one they might want to hear

 

In Washington State you do not have to give a B.A.C. But the State will suspend your License for a year(Because of what WhiteDealer said). Or until you finish court.Alot of people get DUI's reduced by doing that because the court does not have scientific proof.

 

It's cool. The DUI laws are often sketchy. Usually a good lawyer can work the system around enough to get you off.

And even though you have to sign a clause stating you can get your license if you agree to a test. What's to stop the government from stating a clause that they can search your car whenever they want to for no reason at all. And if you don't agree you don't get your license. They can make it a law but it doesn't make it right.

I'd be more interested in laws that might address DUI issues without giving an actual DUI where you have to give a test. What I don't know. We'd have to let lawyers hack that one away.

But giving DUIs on private property I am completely against 100%