Physical harm from a threat has not yet occurred. Sticking a gun in someone's face is a crime; you don't have to wait for the trigger to be pulled. Likewise for reckless driving. It should not be condoned through sanctioning the psycho fears of those who can't tell the difference between physical force and anything else.

What standard would determine irresponsible driving without some actual physical damage being done? I could see anything that made leftists uncomfortable would qualify as irresponsible driving. To leftists, emotional damage is essentially equivalent to physical damage. If I scare you, that’s actionsble

Physical threats, including irresponsible driving, are criminal, not psycho "microaggressions".

I dont recognize a "threat" as a real crime. Its too loose a definition to be reasonable.

What if it never materializes, or is defined as the snowflakes current define things as "micro aggressions" ? Its a slippery slope leading to almost anything being considered a threat to someone. Simple words could be a "threat" and be used as a way to get rid of free speech.

The crime before the accident is the threat.

I think that the drunk driving laws now on the books should be abolished immediately, and replaced by normal laws which reflect actual damage done and how liable one is for driving stupidly or drunk. NO DAMAGE DONE should mean NO PENALTY. Othersise, its a slippery slope as to how tired you were before driving, how upset you were over something but still drove, etc.

Bada-Bing!

Remember the WKRP in Cincinnati episode where Doc on air performs repeated tests for reaction time and accuracy by some State cop while increasingly getting drunk? And the results where he got better and faster with increasing alcohol intake. I can attest, this is true, but up to a level that will differ by the individual, and within a range of content. After that range limit, performance for anybody will drop rapidly and there can be the many known serious consequences.

Think Chappaquidick.....

Marijuana should be legal provided that there are mandatory life sentences for those caught driving or voting while under the influence. Could solve a lot of problems.

Including not caring about the effects of drinking before they do whatever they will be doing, no longer able to pay attention.

Me dino has a good one of those.
Mike Hale decreased the cost of my pistol permit and send a reminder to left me renew in the mail.
Beats driving the the sheriff's office on an annual basis like I used to have to.
https://jeffcosheriff.net/

The 0.08 and 0.10 standards are mostly aimed at casual drinkers, too. A more reasonable probability-based BAC limit would be much higher. Then again, any standard amount is problematic anyway, because some people can simply function well on more alcohol than others.

Federal statistics do not illuminate this problem, because USDOT directs the states to collect the data in a way that obfuscates it; any accident where somebody was present who had had a drink gets lumped in as "alcohol related," regardless of his BAC or even if the drinker was a passenger or pedestrian.

But for the sake of argument let's accept the Federal propaganda as accurate: any drinking at all increases your chance of being involved in an injury accident that night by a factor of 100. Even then you're talking about the chance of an injury accident on your trip home going up from 1 in 20 million to 1 in 200,000. I can't especially blame drivers who believe that 1 in 200,000 is still pretty good odds.

So if it were up to me, I would not have a "per se" limit at all, but simply direct officers to capture video of a driver's behavior (weaving, difficulty standing upright, etc.), play it in court, and let a jury decide the result. I fail to see that this puts an undue burden on law enforcement.

All of the above applies to marijuana, too.

It’s going to anyway with obamacare

Southern sheriffs are notorious

Then they will accomplish their goal of killing off 60% of the population that absolutely NEEDS good clean red meat to stay healthy.

The cost of health care will triple.

Alabama ain't Utah, but I have seen some sorry excuses for cops.
I could talk about underhanded speed traps. Perhaps the following is the wors eye witnessed example~
I was seeing a redhead for a couple of months around 1983 a year after starting my state corrections officer career.
Was sitting behind the counter with her where she worked at a convenience food store.
She hissed and fussed as a seedy Bessemer City Cop she knew by name helped himself to shoplifting some pocketed snacks.
It was like the cop was saying, "Hey, I protect you from robbers. So just you sit back and watch my protection racket go to work."
Cop did not even come to the counter. Out the door he went perhaps thinking of his next stop to pull another two-bit heist.

We have a rsh of stupid drivers in the Midwest. They cn't even properly handle a McD drive thru. Pickup trucks seem to regularly run stop signs. Idiots turn left off one way streets from the RIGHT land, in front of cars in that lane. Texting while driving is a MAJOR issue. Now, add alcohol impairment in combination with any of the above, and you have dad people. Of course, our satte requires insurance, but does not verify it, so many of those accidents cost the driver nothing! Of course there our morons, like the one who floored his new Corvette and took out a utility pole, or the speeder who too his Camaro through a stop sign into the path of a semi. I don't really care what they do to them, as they both killed great cars, lock them up!

Red meat requires a LOT of feed to be grown and digested which involves a lot of carbon footprint, therefore contributes to global warming. Also, the whole process is very inefficient. Might not be that far off.

If they were REALLY interested in stopping 'drunk driving' the easy answer is to execute the criminal the third time they get caught driving drunk. Or on pot, or...
How about texting? I keep seeing that 4,000 kids are killed while driving and texting. How many people are killed by those texting? How many accidents? Third time - throw them in the pokey for 5 or more years.
Can we get the cops to target the legislators? Where I used to live, the greatest offenders were the law-makers...

It is just the regulatory state happy to do the bidding of the do-gooders as it gives them more ability to ruin individuals. Be assured that...unless it becomes a known event, the well connected...the "Boys", will always get away with it where you and I wont. The system has so much discretion in it.

Laughing...if they outlawed Red meat...I'd be up in Arms!

People ask me if I want to visit Europe. I have told them for awhile now, DEFINITELY not.

If one wants to just take it right up to the line, but dont cross it, one must KNOW exactly where the line is. Given the financial cost of drinking, one should just not drive even after any booze. Its too easy to get an overambitious cop to write you up and you still have to fight it.

One can buy a LOT of rides using Uber !!!! Doesnt pay to drink and drive at all. In fact, giving the price of tickets these days, I am not sure it pays to even drive at all.