Saw this blurb about the proposed reduction in blood alcohol level requirements (from .08 to .05) and it just looked like it called out for some purple word-smithing. I'm sure the statistics between the two issues don't match, but it sounds like a similar argument! Some of you can undoubtedly do much better than my feeble attempt at sarcasm. 
--------------------------------------------
More than 100 countries already have (disarmed their citizens) BAC limits at 0.05 or lower, according to the NTSB.
The NTSB is targeting the annual rate of 10,000 fatalities caused by drunk drivers (gun violence), but reducing the (citizens’ access to guns) blood alcohol level fails to impact the heavy drinkers (criminals) who drive above the 0.15 percent level and who are responsible for over 70 percent of drunk-driving (firearm-related) fatalities, according to American Beverage Institute numbers. “It will have a tremendous impact on the (law abiding citizen) moderate social drinker and almost no impact on the hard-core drinkers (felons),” Longwell told NBC News.
The Distilled Spirits Council (NRA, et. al) echoed that sentiment. “We join with other organizations, including those engaged in traffic safety (responsible gun ownership), in maintaining our strong support for the strict enforcement of the .08 BAC level (existing firearm laws) and continuing the fight against hardcore drunk drivers (criminals). Progress has been made in decreasing (gun violence) alcohol-related traffic fatalities. Reducing the BAC level (law-abiding citizens’ access to firearms) will not be an effective strategy,” the council said in a statement.
Even Mothers Against Drunk Driving said Tuesday it appreciates the NTSB’s attention to the issue, but will keep its own advocacy focused on its Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving, which backs the current .08 limit, calls for high-profile law enforcement and in-car breathalyzers for offenders.
--------------------------------------------
More than 100 countries already have (disarmed their citizens) BAC limits at 0.05 or lower, according to the NTSB.
The NTSB is targeting the annual rate of 10,000 fatalities caused by drunk drivers (gun violence), but reducing the (citizens’ access to guns) blood alcohol level fails to impact the heavy drinkers (criminals) who drive above the 0.15 percent level and who are responsible for over 70 percent of drunk-driving (firearm-related) fatalities, according to American Beverage Institute numbers. “It will have a tremendous impact on the (law abiding citizen) moderate social drinker and almost no impact on the hard-core drinkers (felons),” Longwell told NBC News.
The Distilled Spirits Council (NRA, et. al) echoed that sentiment. “We join with other organizations, including those engaged in traffic safety (responsible gun ownership), in maintaining our strong support for the strict enforcement of the .08 BAC level (existing firearm laws) and continuing the fight against hardcore drunk drivers (criminals). Progress has been made in decreasing (gun violence) alcohol-related traffic fatalities. Reducing the BAC level (law-abiding citizens’ access to firearms) will not be an effective strategy,” the council said in a statement.
Even Mothers Against Drunk Driving said Tuesday it appreciates the NTSB’s attention to the issue, but will keep its own advocacy focused on its Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving, which backs the current .08 limit, calls for high-profile law enforcement and in-car breathalyzers for offenders.
