REMEMBER THE ILLEGAL/RECAPTURE ATV RIDE???

[elkassassin]

Looks Like Phil Lyman Is Getting In To More Politics?

I Also Think The NEWS Media Spoutin BS That Ain't True?

I Don't Think Phil Himself Was Riding An ATV In To Closed Territory?

I'd Still Like To Know How They Singled 5 Guys Out On That Deal?

State Rep. Phil Lyman announces run for governor

State Rep. Phil Lyman, R-Blanding, a hard-line conservative known for a protest ATV ride through federally protected lands, is running for governor of Utah.

www.ksl.com

 

[SS!]

Put this chit in the political forum.

 

[elkassassin]

You're Gonna Be Fine SS!

But Ya!

I Should Have!

Put this chit in the political forum.

 

[shotgunjim]

Another DB running for governor, sweet!

elkass, it's like the blm riots, they can't catch all the looting arsonist but they can catch a few of the high profile dipchits, like Lyman and make examples out of them.

 

[roadrunner]

Phil's right about one thing UT being #1 in...

Study: Utah ranks first in increased DUI drivers

A new study ranks Utah as the No. 1 state seeing a rise in impaired driving in the last few years.

www.ksl.com

 

[grizzly]

Phil's right about one thing UT being #1 in...

Study: Utah ranks first in increased DUI drivers

A new study ranks Utah as the No. 1 state seeing a rise in impaired driving in the last few years.

www.ksl.com

Right at the same time they lowered the limit for DUI. It's almost like if you make the rules more strict, you'll catch more people ?

 

[Tikka]

Phil's right about one thing UT being #1 in...

Study: Utah ranks first in increased DUI drivers

A new study ranks Utah as the No. 1 state seeing a rise in impaired driving in the last few years.

www.ksl.com

Anyone pay attention to the out of state license plates in utah for the past 10+ years?

 

[roadrunner]

Anyone pay attention to the out of state license plates in utah for the past 10+ years?

About like anywhere else???

 

[Tikka]

About like anywhere else???

Probably….

 

[Vanilla]

Right at the same time they lowered the limit for DUI. It's almost like if you make the rules more strict, you'll catch more people ?

DUI rates have absolutely not increased since Utah (rightfully) went to .05 as the per se level for DUI.

But that’s a cool story.

 

[grizzly]

DUI rates have absolutely not increased since Utah (rightfully) went to .05 as the per se level for DUI.

But that’s a cool story.

Absolutely, huh? You're smarter than to speak in definitives.

Are you referring to the rates of people physically driving under the influence or the rates at which citations have been given or even convictions won?

Did people drive less with alcohol levels between .06 - .08, or was there simply not an increase in citations after the law was changed?

If a police department doesn't issue a single DUI ticket in a given year, does that mean there was no DUI?

There are far too many ways to measure this data; whether it's arrests, convictions, fatalities, MVAs, etc... I'd love to hear your methodology for accounting for COVID variability in this data and how driving habits changed during the years immediately following the .05 switch, for example.

I don't think anybody has clear data on exactly what driving habits were affected by the law change verse other factors such as COVID and the availability of services such as ride-sharing that could've contributed to better choices.

From the article...

 

[Vanilla]

Absolutely, huh? You're smarter than to speak in definitives.

And you’re smart enough to know what “DUI rates” means for statistics. DUI rates (IE- arrests/citations) have not risen since the implementation of the .05 threshold. I know this because I have the numbers. It’s not a guess.

The sad part is with the same number of arrests we saw a large spike in fatalities, but even that number is a little misleading. The article itself explains one major contributor for the spike. It only compares the current state to 2019. 2019 was a historically low year for alcohol related fatalities on our roadways. And even just returning back to 2017 and 2018 levels creates a very large spike. So the “study” is a good example of lies, damnn lies, and statistics. All that said, it’s terrible that we could not continue the downward trend for DUI related fatalities (at least for alcohol…drugs is a whole other story). Every single one of these deaths is preventable. That is the real tragedy in all this. There is not such thing as a “DUI accident.”

Don’t drink and drive folks. It’s really simple.

 

[grizzly]

And you’re smart enough to know what “DUI rates” means for statistics. DUI rates (IE- arrests/citations) have not risen since the implementation of the .05 threshold. I know this because I have the numbers. It’s not a guess.

The sad part is with the same number of arrests we saw a large spike in fatalities, but even that number is a little misleading. The article itself explains one major contributor for the spike. It only compares the current state to 2019. 2019 was a historically low year for alcohol related fatalities on our roadways. And even just returning back to 2017 and 2018 levels creates a very large spike. So the “study” is a good example of lies, damnn lies, and statistics. All that said, it’s terrible that we could not continue the downward trend for DUI related fatalities (at least for alcohol…drugs is a whole other story). Every single one of these deaths is preventable. That is the real tragedy in all this. There is not such thing as a “DUI accident.”

Don’t drink and drive folks. It’s really simple.

You're missing my point. There's a difference in DUIs and drunk driving. Did lowering the limit to .05 actually affect people's choices regarding drunk driving? Or did lifestyle choices and variables account for any change, or non-change? Or was enforcement focus or discretion somehow part of the equation?

I don't believe we have the information to answer those questions. For all we know DUI rates would've plummeted if the limit had remained .08 due to outside influences.

You can keep paddling the "nothing changed" canoe if you'd like. The bottom line is that by decreasing the limit from .08 to .05, the law inherently made more people in violation... everybody that tested .06 and .07 for easy example. Before the change, they went home; after the change, they went to jail.

Everything beyond the .05 legislation could be any of the variables I mentioned above to other variables such as weather events on major drinking holidays affecting road travel, etc... There are a million factors that could affect people's drunk driving choices, not the least of which is fear of less lenient limits.

For the record, I'd support MUCH stricter punishments for drunk driving. Nothing gets me more upset than an innocent person losing their life on some loser's 7th DUI.

If you can get a bill before the Legislature with 5-yr minimum prison sentences for a 1st DUI conviction and 15-yr minimum prison sentences for each subsequent DUI, you have my full support.

 

[elkassassin]

You're missing my point. There's a difference in DUIs and drunk driving. Did lowering the limit to .05 actually affect people's choices regarding drunk driving? Or did lifestyle choices and variables account for any change, or non-change? Or was enforcement focus or discretion somehow part of the equation?

I don't believe we have the information to answer those questions. For all we know DUI rates would've plummeted if the limit had remained .08 due to outside influences.

You can keep paddling the "nothing changed" canoe if you'd like. The bottom line is that by decreasing the limit from .08 to .05, the law inherently made more people in violation... everybody that tested .06 and .07 for easy example. Before the change, they went home; after the change, they went to jail.

Everything beyond the .05 legislation could be any of the variables I mentioned above to other variables such as weather events on major drinking holidays affecting road travel, etc... There are a million factors that could affect people's drunk driving choices, not the least of which is fear of less lenient limits.

For the record, I'd support MUCH stricter punishments for drunk driving. Nothing gets me more upset than an innocent person losing their life on some loser's 7th DUI.

I Won't Argue With What You Posted Below!

But That's Kinda Like Getting HELL-RIGHT Put Into Place!

If you can get a bill before the Legislature with 5-yr minimum prison sentences for a 1st DUI conviction and 15-yr minimum prison sentences for each subsequent DUI, you have my full support.

 

[Vanilla]

You can keep paddling the "nothing changed" canoe if you'd like. The bottom line is that by decreasing the limit from .08 to .05, the law inherently made more people in violation... everybody that tested .06 and .07 for easy example. Before the change, they went home; after the change, they went to jail.

Also not true. Look at Utah’s DUI law. You’ve never had to be over any specific level to get a DUI. Being over that level only made you per se DUI. We’ve always had a prong that allows for arrests under that level (whether it was .10 prior to 1983 or .08 prior to December 30, 2018), and we did arrest and convict people under that prong. We still do. I could tell you how those stats have changed after the law change too if you’d like???

I don't believe we have the information to answer those questions. For all we know DUI rates would've plummeted if the limit had remained .08 due to outside influences.

You’re probably right. Doing nothing different generally results in massive changes. That’s Bessy’s entire strategy for the deer herd!