Feds want to lower BAC to .05 for drunk driving

[guno]

State's rights issue

lower the alcohol limit?

look like you are in big trouble

 

[SassyIrishLass]

State's rights issue

lower the alcohol limit?

look like you are in big trouble

Grow up Guano, just grow up. Maybe go start another thread in the Flame Zone, clueless old geezer

 

[guno]

all this is about it more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for these Governments and more controls over YOU. GAWD WAKE UP

so you don't think its a good idea to lower the limit and get rid of drunken trailer trash?

 

[Skylar]

State's rights issue

How does an NTSB recommendation violate any 'right' by any state?

Specifically.

States determine legal BAC limits. I never said the "recommendation" violated any rights. Work on your reading comprehension before responding to me in the future

And where does the NTSB recommendations say otherwise? Remember, these are merely *advisements* and *recommendations* based on their research.

It doesn't actually raise any BAC limit.....anywhere.

So what 'right' of a State is being violated by a transportation advisory board advising on transportation safety? And if there is none....how could this possibly be a 'State's Rights' issue?

You asked I answered, stop tying to cover your dumbass asking again

You just told me that the NTSB recommendations don't violate the right of any State.

So how is this a 'State's rights' issue? Everyone agrees that NO state right has been violated by these recommendations. So what are you complaining about?

Your argument is a self contradictory mess.

 

[guno]

State's rights issue

lower the alcohol limit?

look like you are in big trouble

Grow up Guano, just grow up. Maybe go start another thread in the Flame Zone, clueless old geezer

Interesting that you would oppose it

 

[SassyIrishLass]

State's rights issue

How does an NTSB recommendation violate any 'right' by any state?

Specifically.

States determine legal BAC limits. I never said the "recommendation" violated any rights. Work on your reading comprehension before responding to me in the future

And where does the NTSB recommendations say otherwise? Remember, these are merely *advisements* and *recommendations* based on their research.

It doesn't actually raise any BAC limit.....anywhere.

So what 'right' of a State is being violated by a transportation advisory board advising on transportation safety? And if there is none....how could this possibly be a 'State's Rights' issue?

You asked I answered, stop tying to cover your dumbass asking again

You just told me that the NTSB recommendations don't violate the right of any State.

So how is this a 'State's rights' issue? Everyone agrees that NO state right has been violated by these recommendations. So what are you complaining about?

Your argument is a self contradictory mess.

I never told you any such thing you stupid phucker, learn to read

 

[SassyIrishLass]

State's rights issue

lower the alcohol limit?

look like you are in big trouble

Grow up Guano, just grow up. Maybe go start another thread in the Flame Zone, clueless old geezer

Interesting that you would oppose it

I don't oppose it or support it. Once again you have failed. All I said is it's a state's right issue and it is. Is that too hard for you and your gay friend the Panda to grasp? See Guano this is why you are viewed as ignorant....because you are

 

[Skylar]

How does an NTSB recommendation violate any 'right' by any state?

Specifically.

States determine legal BAC limits. I never said the "recommendation" violated any rights. Work on your reading comprehension before responding to me in the future

And where does the NTSB recommendations say otherwise? Remember, these are merely *advisements* and *recommendations* based on their research.

It doesn't actually raise any BAC limit.....anywhere.

So what 'right' of a State is being violated by a transportation advisory board advising on transportation safety? And if there is none....how could this possibly be a 'State's Rights' issue?

You asked I answered, stop tying to cover your dumbass asking again

You just told me that the NTSB recommendations don't violate the right of any State.

So how is this a 'State's rights' issue? Everyone agrees that NO state right has been violated by these recommendations. So what are you complaining about?

Your argument is a self contradictory mess.

I never told you any such thing you stupid phucker, learn to read

Except when you did:

I never said the "recommendation" violated any rights.

So if the NTSB recommendations create no 'States Rights' violation....how can these recommendations be a 'states rights issue?

You've painted yourself into a corner, Sassy.

 

[Dot Com]

all this is about it more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for these Governments and more controls over YOU. GAWD WAKE UP

Or.....you're hysterically overreacting to an advisory board doing exactly what congress recommended it do: research and advise on transportation safety.

So....what's the issue, exactly?

Im also interested in why OP started this hysterical non-issue thread.

Sent from my VS415PP using Tapatalk

 

[Dot Com]

all this is about it more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for these Governments and more controls over YOU. GAWD WAKE UP

so you don't think its a good idea to lower the limit and get rid of drunken trailer trash?

yeah I wonder why rw lunch lady would be against that?

Sent from my VS415PP using Tapatalk

 

[Dot Com]

NTSB is carrying-out their mandate given to them by Congress. Who is the majority in Congress right now I wonder?

Sent from my VS415PP using Tapatalk

 

[bucs90]

I'm fine with this. Drunk drivers kill 10K a year. Same amount as guns murder but libs only focus on the gun murders.

 

[Skylar]

all this is about it more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for these Governments and more controls over YOU. GAWD WAKE UP

Or.....you're hysterically overreacting to an advisory board doing exactly what congress recommended it do: research and advise on transportation safety.

So....what's the issue, exactly?

Im also interested in why OP started this hysterical non-issue thread.

Sent from my VS415PP using Tapatalk

Why 'Freebeacon' fed them another manufactured outrage, of course. And if a WordPress blog tells them to shit their collective panties, they let the hysteric rhetorical feces fly.

No thoughts. No questions. And certainly no fact checking.

 

[Mad Scientist]

More money for the Prison Industrial Complex.

No dummies, I'm not saying people should be allowed to Drive With Drinking Indicated either.

 

[Fueri]

Acting as if the federal government has no mechanism to coerce, or that they will not coerce, states that don't comply with things they'd like to have done is kinda, sorta ignoring the fact that they've done it before, with traffic laws specifically.

They withhold federal funds for highways. Done it before, no reason they won't do it again if they decide to push this 'recommendation'

We're also rolling up on an election year. Creating some low hanging fruit for themselves so they can deflect from what a shitty job they're doing is very congressional indeed...

 

[mdk]

The NTSB has made this recommendation for the last several years in a row. I don't believe a single state has followed that recommendation either, I could be wrong though.

 

[Dot Com]

Trying to get rid of Hillary

she doesn't have worry about it. she hasn't drove her fat butt around since her hounddog hubby left office

"fat"? Thats rich coming from the rw lady that stands in a lunch line 5days/week

guno !!! Where is that pic of Steph?

 

[guno]

Trying to get rid of Hillary

she doesn't have worry about it. she hasn't drove her fat butt around since her hounddog hubby left office

"fat"? Thats rich coming from the rw lady that stands in a lunch line 5days/week

guno !!! Where is that pic of Steph?

 

[Muhammed]

I'm all for this but the constitution says DUI is a state issue. Of course 99% of what the feds do should be handled by the states if we follow the constitution; in particular the 10th amendment.

Feds Want to Lower LegalDriving Limit to One Drink

jan 15 2016 The National Transportation Safety Board wants to decrease the legal driving limit to one drink, lowering the legal limit on blood-alcohol content to 0.05 “or even lower.”

The agency released its “most wanted list” on Wednesday, a laundry list of policies it would like implemented nationally. The list includes recommendations to reduce the current 0.08 blood alcohol content limit and outlaw all cell phone use while driving, even hands-free technology.

“When it comes to alcohol use, we know that impairment begins before a person’s BAC reaches 0.08 percent, the current legal limit in the United States,” the agency said. “In fact, by the time it reaches that level, the risk of a fatal crash has more than doubled. That is why states should lower BAC levels to 0.05— or even lower.”

What exactly is your issue? These are NTSB recommendations. The NTSB is an advisory and investigatory board. Making recommendations is what they do.

How does that violate the constitution?

The NTSB was hijacked a long time ago by people who have a religious belief that consuming alcohol is contrary to their religion. Abolitionists.

They have no right to force their silly religious beliefs on everyone else.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

They've been slowly trying to get the BAC level down to 0 for years now. It used to be 1.5%, then 1.25%, then 1%, and now .08%. This is just the next incremental step.