Dealing with drunk drivers

Traveler

Traveler

Senior Member
Location
San Diego County
Hardly a day goes by when I don't hear on the news of some drunk driver killing or maiming some innocent person (people).
While it is true that the states have made drunk driving an increasingly costly violation, the laws are IMO not having enough of an impact.

Tonight, I watched the TV news of a trial of a drunk driver who killed 2 post-graduate medical students. The 2 students, both young women, who were just beginning a career of helping others was cut short by the drunken scum. It was testified in court that the drunk driver had a BAC of twice the legal limit. If convicted the drunk driver could face 30 years to life in prison.

Unfortunately, that does not lessen the heart-ache that the relatives of the 2 young women must surely feel.

So, what can be done ? IMO the laws need to be changed in every state. As a first step, I advocate that taking classes in the dangers of drunk driving be required for EVERY SINGLE STUDENT. I would pull no punches in those classes. I would show color film of the wreckage, AND the bloody mangled bodies of the victims and yes, even those of infants. These classes should, IMO, be required during every year for all high-school students.

2nd, I advocate that the VERY 1ST TIME, anyone is convicted of drunk driving, the following measures be taken.

A.) Permanent confiscation of the vehicle, and the drunk driver would still be required to pay the monthly car payments. AND

B.) A mandatory minimum of jail time. IMO, 6 months would not be extreme. AND

C.) Loss of the drivers license for 10 years. If the person was caught driving during those 10 years, a second penalty should
apply. I advocate a mandatory minimum of 1 year in state prison. AND

D.) Upon release from jail or prison, weekly counseling by a person specifically trained in alcohol abuse, which the offender
would be required to pay for.

E.) In the event that the convicted drunk driver be found guilty of a 2nd offense, a much more lengthy prison sentence
should be imposed. And, loss of driving license for life.

F.) If there is a 3rd conviction of drunk driving, then 20 years in prison, without any possible early release.

What say, you ?
 

Having lost a sister to a drunk driver the night of her college graduation, I fully agree.

Problem is, these people seem to have a way of skirting the laws. Too many times I've heard of cases where someone is arrested for DUI, only to discover that they have a dozen previous convictions for the same thing. Too many courts are soft on these offenders.

I say implant a little gizmo in them that will stall out any car they try to start.
 
SifuPhil said:
Having lost a sister to a drunk driver the night of her college graduation, I fully agree.

Problem is, these people seem to have a way of skirting the laws. Too many times I've heard of cases where someone is arrested for DUI, only to discover that they have a dozen previous convictions for the same thing. Too many courts are soft on these offenders.

I say implant a little gizmo in them that will stall out any car they try to start.
Click to expand...


What a wonderful idea ! I wish there was such a technology.
 
I agree with you regarding the seriousness of drunk driving but your list of punishments are ridiculous and idiotic!

1st time, 6 months in jail.

2nd time, Loss of license for TEN years.

3rd time, 20 years in prison !

You get caught and punished and your poor family (wife and kids) would go on welfare (or worse)

Loss of drivers license FOR LIFE !!??

C'mon guy; Give me a drag on that thing before you butt it out.
 
SifuPhil said:
Having lost a sister to a drunk driver the night of her college graduation, I fully agree.

Problem is, these people seem to have a way of skirting the laws. Too many times I've heard of cases where someone is arrested for DUI, only to discover that they have a dozen previous convictions for the same thing. Too many courts are soft on these offenders.

I say implant a little gizmo in them that will stall out any car they try to start.
Click to expand...
So sorry about your sister sifuphil.
I think 1st offense you spend one week in a separate jail for detox and intensive alcohol rehabilitation. After that you have a choice of specific jail time or rehab. Not AA, not anonymous. Accountable and expected to spend many hours of community service counseling young people.
If that doesn't stop it then let the severe punishment begin because now we know the offender just doesn't care.
 
Falcon said:
I agree with you regarding the seriousness of drunk driving but your list of punishments are ridiculous and idiotic!

1st time, 6 months in jail.

2nd time, Loss of license for TEN years.

3rd time, 20 years in prison !

You get caught and punished and your poor family (wife and kids) would go on welfare (or worse)

Loss of drivers license FOR LIFE !!??

C'mon guy; Give me a drag on that thing before you butt it out.
Click to expand...


I am much more concerned about the 10,265 innocent people who lost their lives to drunk drivers, in 2015 alone. That figure includes 1,183 children. If some people have to go on welfare, then so be it. At lest they are ALIVE.

If you disagree with me, ok fine. But please do not make personal attacks.
 
hearlady said:
So sorry about your sister sifuphil.
I think 1st offense you spend one week in a separate jail for detox and intensive alcohol rehabilitation. After that you have a choice of specific jail time or rehab. Not AA, not anonymous. Accountable and expected to spend many hours of community service counseling young people.
If that doesn't stop it then let the severe punishment begin because now we know the offender just doesn't care.
Click to expand...


Dear HearLady,
I don't believe that your suggestion about 1 week in detox followed by rehab works. My own younger brother has had 4 DUI convictions and each time he has gotten off without any truly serious consequences. I just pray that he does not end up killing some mini-van full of little kids.
I have attempted to do everything I can think of to intervene, acting as a "friend of the court" but alas, to no avail.

I do, however, thank you for your input.
 
Traveler that's why I said if intensive rehab doesn't work then let the severe punishment begin. There has to be serious consequences but at the same time trying to rehabilitate.
I think the further someone goes down the rabbit hole the less they care about the consequences.
It must be frustrating dealing with your brother. Was he a decent person until he met Jack Daniels?
 
I think drunk driving (including driving while using drugs), and "distracted" driving (while playing with a cell phone) should All be penalized far more strongly than they are today. It's not unusual to see a report on the news about someone who has caused a severe accident, and having been arrested multiple times for drunken driving. IMO, if a person causes an accident while "impaired" or "distracted", and causes an injury, they should be charged with Assault. If such an accident results in a death, the charge should be upgraded to Manslaughter.

The biggest hurdle to getting stronger laws is the fact that so many of the politicians are, themselves, borderline drunks...and they are loathe to pass any laws that might come back to bite them.
 
hearlady said:
Traveler that's why I said if intensive rehab doesn't work then let the severe punishment begin. There has to be serious consequences but at the same time trying to rehabilitate.
I think the further someone goes down the rabbit hole the less they care about the consequences.
It must be frustrating dealing with your brother. Was he a decent person until he met Jack Daniels?
Click to expand...

My younger brother was always "not quite right". He always seemed to be FAR more concerned with HIS needs and desires than anyone else's.
 
Don M. said:
I think drunk driving (including driving while using drugs), and "distracted" driving (while playing with a cell phone) should All be penalized far more strongly than they are today. It's not unusual to see a report on the news about someone who has caused a severe accident, and having been arrested multiple times for drunken driving. IMO, if a person causes an accident while "impaired" or "distracted", and causes an injury, they should be charged with Assault. If such an accident results in a death, the charge should be upgraded to Manslaughter.
The biggest hurdle to getting stronger laws is the fact that so many of the politicians are, themselves, borderline drunks...and they are loathe to pass any laws that might come back to bite them.
Click to expand...

Exactly so ! Just like Senator Ted Kennedy when he caused the death of Mary Jo Kopechne in 1969. His millions of dollars got him off Scot-Free.
 
IMO jail is not a solution for most drunk driving convictions.

Jail does not do much to change a persons behavior, deprives the persons family of financial support, does nothing to help the victims and costs the taxpayers a fortune.

I would prefer a plan that helps the individual stop drinking or using drugs, court ordered monitoring, suspension of a license and a form of restitution to victims that would be similar to alimony or child support.

I feel bad for the victims of any crime but I can't see the value of continuing to warehouse convicted criminals. We have been using prison time as the main form of punishment for hundreds of years and it seems to be a waste of time and money. I agree that some people commit crimes so horrific that they should never be free but the majority of criminals return to society in worse shape than they were when they went to prison. We end up supporting them and their families in one form or another until they die.
 
Well, Aunt Bea, all I can say is that if a convicted drunk driver is behind bars he/she can not possibly kill anyone.
In my long life, I have known a number of drunks. I have worked to help them to the best of my ability.
Overwhelmingly, I have found that they don't want any help. For whatever reason, they seemed determined to destroy themselves and if they take other people with them, they just don't care.

I wish that you were right. I truly do. But I have found that unless a drunk wants to change, it will never happen. A court can order counseling but it rarely works.

One of my best friends was a recovering alcoholic (20 years clean and sober) and he taught me much of what I know. One of the things he said was that unless a person hits bottom he/she will never change. And he said,some people have no bottom, witness the drunks sleeping in doorways in the middle of winter.

What society is to do with such people is a true enigma.
 
hearlady said:
No, you don't have to hit bottom. Many people have stopped drinking before a DUI or such.
Click to expand...

I think we have a different definition of "bottom". One person's "bottom" can be very much different from the next person's "bottom". But that's ok. No problem. I sure don't wish to argue about it.
 
Having known some who have had duis part of the problem is the drunk driver is treated or made to think of themselves as a victim of sorts. First the lawyers tell how they were probably wronged by the police. Then the drug rehab and/or government drunk driver program industries let the drunk driver think-it's ok, poor little you has a problem but counseling(billable) will take care of that.

When I heard someone describe their drunk driver program 'experience' you would think they were all victims. They said one lady complained she only had 3 glasses of wine when she blew a stop sign and smashed into a car testing over the limit. It sounded more like legal coaching to escape getting caught again with anything from instructing people to always eat when drinking, how to calculate their limits and how police are supposed to conduct themselves at a dui stop. Apparently many of the drunk driver programs are churn and burn money makers with alot of staff simply working 'a' job rather than helping those with issues. One guy boasted how he got out of additional time/counseling by using steroids to make themselves appear healthy and fool program staff into thinking it was a one off with no ongoing issues.(but they had gotten popped for dui in the past)

It's one thing if someone gets popped at a dui checkpoint(which I oppose) and another if they are involved in an accident and/or their driving showed the signs of drunk driving. I think resources need to be used with additional patrols looking for signs of drunk driving compared to setting up at one location. Every year the county sets up at the same locations at different times a year, so much so that local bars complain about the loss of business especially when they do 2-3 a year. Even with those check points when dui involved crashed occurs they frequently involve a history/record of duis.
 
Third offense in Wyoming is a felony: five years. Lushes still drive drunk.

Wyoming's crime rate is very low, but the percentage of the population in prison is about average. That means prison sentences are long—very long. An eighteen year old criminal decided to commit armed robbery—twenty-five years. He'll probably do it again when he gets out, but in the meantime he's out of circulation. Convicts try to be good boys so that they can go to the honor farm and train mustangs. They know that they better treat the horses well.
 
Do your states have random roadside breath testing?

Failing one of these at the high range level is a felony in my state.
Do it twice and you risk a custodial sentence.
 
I don't think any laws will 'solve' the drunk driving problem until they also address the reason people drink to excess so often.
Just as some people through history were drawn to adventure and discover, a certain percentage are drawn to altering their conscience. Alcohol is currently the socially accepted (and mostly legal) way to do that.
 
HipGnosis said:
I don't think any laws will 'solve' the drunk driving problem until they also address the reason people drink to excess so often.
Just as some people through history were drawn to adventure and discover, a certain percentage are drawn to altering their conscience. Alcohol is currently the socially accepted (and mostly legal) way to do that.
Click to expand...

One can alter their conscience all they want except while behind the wheel of a car or operating heavy machinery. Alcohol/drinking is acceptable by itself. Not while operating a motor vehicle.

And yes excessive drinking needs to addressed. But it is not in more ways than one. Lawyers and drunk drivers try to write off or rationalize a dui as a onetime thing. The people I know who got popped for dui had known or obvious alcohol issues yet the legal system didn't treat them for it. Nor did they want to be labeled an alcoholic or someone with a problem. Many of those 'programs' are generic along with money makers for the state and people running them.

As Don M pointed out dui laws can get politicized. AND like many other traffic and/or criminal offenses politics is used to get someone off or keep them out of jail. I know people who keep 'political' friends just for that purpose-a favor. As matter of fact they got upset when their police buddy wouldn't/couldn't intervene on their last dui.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top