I've Always Wondered

Something I have wondered about ever since I was a kid is the whole logic that goes behind the drunk driving laws. While it is accepted fact that someone who has consumed alcohol experiences an impairment in their judgement and their reflexes, our laws have determined that anyone with a blood alcohol ratio of less than 80 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood is not legally impaired. So if I am over the limit and am impaired, is it really reasonable for society to expect me to show solid judgement and not get behind the wheel? If on one hand we are saying someone is impaired enough that they can’t drive, shouldn’t we also be saying they are impaired enough that they can’t make a solid, accurate judgement as to what their blood alcohol level is?

Anyway, just something I have been thinking about for a couple of decades. I’m not sure why we are so outraged by drunk drivers while at the same time we justify other stupidity as being due to the influence of alcohol. With this type of logic we are never going to see the end of suffering of those affected by the impaired judgement of a drunk driver.

"If four or five guys tell you that you're drunk, even though you know you haven't had a thing to drink, the least you can do is to lie down a little while."
- Joseph Schenck (1878 -1961)