The Cabinet on Thursday approved a proposal to set a blood alcohol content (BAC) limit for drivers of 0.11 percent, which is equal to a breath alcohol level of 0.55 grams of alcohol per liter. The proposal also stiffens the penalties for driving drunk, including those for drivers who cause a death. There is widespread support for tougher penalties against drunk driving in the wake of some horrific accidents in the past year, but does the Cabinet’s proposal go far enough?
Drunk driving was criminalized more than a decade ago, there are massive police campaigns with roadside stops every few months, and yet the problem not only persists, it is growing. According to the Ministry of the Interior, more than 31 percent of drunk driving cases involve repeat offenders.
In June, Minister of the Interior Lee Hong-yuan (李鴻源) told lawmakers that “zero tolerance” for drunk driving was a goal. No timeline for future reductions in the BAC was given. It should have been.
A BAC of 0.11 percent is still far higher than in many nations. In the US, Canada and 14 other countries, according to the International Center for Alcohol Policies, the BAC threshold is 0.08 percent. An article in Time magazine two years ago noted that most European countries have a limit of 0.05 or lower — Sweden’s is 0.02 — while the Czech Republic and some other countries have an absolute zero tolerance policy.
The article noted that countries that have made a substantial reduction in the BAC limit have seen a corresponding drastic cut in drunk driving-related road fatalities.
So why is the Cabinet ready to settle for 0.11 percent? If it really wants to make a significant reduction in the number of drunk driving cases and drunk driving-related fatalities, it should reduce the limit to 0.08 percent now and set a timeline for going down to 0.05 percent, 0.02 percent and then zero tolerance.
Stepping up deterrence policies would also help reduce drunk driving and road fatalities. At present, convicted drunk drivers (with no fatalities or injuries involved) are usually given detention of less than 60 days and a fine. The Cabinet’s proposal stipulates that anyone arrested for drunk driving must serve at least two months in prison, not detention, and could receive a maximum sentence of two years and a fine of NT$200,000. Right now vehicular homicide while driving under the influence is considered “involuntary homicide” and carries a maximum sentence of seven years. The Cabinet’s proposal would raise the penalty to between three and 10 years.
Another way to help deter drunk driving is a “friends don’t let friends drive drunk campaign.” The Ministry of Transportation and Communications has suggested taking this one step further by holding car passengers equally responsible if the driver is drunk. They could be fined NT$3,000 for not stopping the driver, the ministry suggests.
The Cabinet is hoping to get its proposals through the legislature quickly, so there could be a promotional period before the amendments take effect next year. Given the popular support for a tougher stand on drunk driving, lawmakers should have no trouble casting aside blue-green divisions to pass the amendments. However, legislators should be thinking ahead as well and be willing to mandate a timeline in the drive toward zero tolerance.
They should also consider whether other options might help deter drunk drivers, such as a breath alcohol ignition interlock device (BAIID). These block a car engine from starting if the driver fails a breath test. Many US states require drivers with a drunk-driving record to install a BAIID in their car and have seen resounding drops in drunk driving as a result.
Getting drunk drivers off the road is a priority. The Cabinet’s amendments are a good first step, but no one should be willing to let the job rest there. Lives depend on it.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry