Archive for January, 2018

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180125135606.htm

Well, yes and no.  Instead of qualifying and quantifying the intoxicant, if any, why do we even care?  Is a sober, naturally-incompetent driver better than a competent, but intoxicated driver?  While neither would give me that warm and fuzzy feeling if I knew, I think I would choose the intoxicated but competent driver.  After all, isn’t driving competence what we are really concerned with, and not whether the driver had three tokes two hours ago or their blood alcohol content is .11?

Would not a field coordination, reaction time, and judgment test really focus on the heart of the issue?  A decent programmer could cook one up in a few days and make millions selling it to law enforcement everywhere.  Such a test would do more for public safety than the correlative tests down nowadays, which are only statistically significant and do not do justice to individuals.  A laptop provided by the officer can administer a coordination, reaction time, and judgment (CRJ) test in  three to five minutes and accurately assess that individual’s driving impairment, whether it is due to age, eyesight, incompetence, or intoxication.  This would force sober, but incompetent drivers to either refresh their abilities or get off the road, making the rest of us safer.  And those that are buzzed, it really doesn’t matter what the intoxicant is, but whether or not they are competently driving, getting them off the roads to make us safer if not, and letting the competent ones go.

This may not be perfect, but it would save society a lot of money, spare some marginally intoxicated drivers, and primarily get people who should not be driving, off the roads.  Isn’t this what we really want?

AuntieBS

Advertisements