moneymaven
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 10:05:04 GMT -5
Posts: 1,864
|
Post by moneymaven on Jun 21, 2015 22:29:20 GMT -5
If quitting drinking was so easy, don't you think he'd have done it by now? No one can force one to stop drinking, they have to want to do it on their own. And I pretty much guarantee you that if you think that testing is going to stop him from drinking, you are really delusional. Finally, don't you think that the increasing penalties (including $$) for his first 4 DUIs would have stopped him by now? It really is very simple, if you are going to drink, you do not get behind the wheel of a car. Period. Full stop. Your coworker's problem is that he has very likely gone through all the other punishments that lead up to jail time and this is a punishment of last resort. A few posters have said that but do not explain it. If you were told you would go to jail if you tested positive for alcohol and then tested positive for alcohol and went to jail, how would you be more of a threat for drunk driving then going directly to jail? He is out of jail now waiting for court date I guess. He could drink and drive now. What is the problem with giving him a chance and putting him in jail if he fails the chance? I do not think many here are addressing what I am asking other then to say 'no' and wanting to be tough on drunk drivers. I think most of his DUI's were unexpected. He did not think he would get caught. I think mandatory testing would change that. He's had 5 chances! Your co-worker makes stupid choices. Jail or not, his kids are already suffering the consequences. Probably far more than you'll ever know. Frankly, he's an idiot and a danger to society. Lock his ass up.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jun 21, 2015 22:32:24 GMT -5
It dawned on me that if this guy has kids at home who rely on him, then he isn't that old. And to have five DUI convictions, let alone one or two at a young age, is unacceptable. He could have many years before he hits what is rock bottom for him. That is not something society can or should allow. He needs to know society has put up long enough with his dangerous behavior. I think hickle said the guy is around 50. He's had more than enough time to figure this out.
|
|
souldoubt
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 11:57:14 GMT -5
Posts: 2,754
|
Post by souldoubt on Jun 21, 2015 22:33:45 GMT -5
My whole point, if I had one, was that maybe a better way to deal with drunk driving is to deal with the alcohol part of the equation. In CA you're required to go to alcohol school 1-2x a week where the length of the program depends on the circumstances of your case (minimum used to be 3 months) and you pay for the classes. You're also required to go to AA meetings and I believe now you have to go to a MADD meeting and they all know why you're there and tell you why you're an idiot. I can't speak for other states but there's plenty on the alcohol side of it in CA and yet it doesn't deter some people.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,425
|
DUI's
Jun 21, 2015 23:31:45 GMT -5
mmhmm likes this
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 21, 2015 23:31:45 GMT -5
It dawned on me that if this guy has kids at home who rely on him, then he isn't that old. And to have five DUI convictions, let alone one or two at a young age, is unacceptable. He could have many years before he hits what is rock bottom for him. That is not something society can or should allow. He needs to know society has put up long enough with his dangerous behavior. I think hickle said the guy is around 50. He's had more than enough time to figure this out. Ahhhh. I assumed this guy had kids at home because Hickle spoke about how kids would be financially hurt if their father west to jail. Hickle isn't even sure the guy has kids. And if he does have kids, the 'kids' may be already grown and out of the house. Maybe Hickle was just talking about drunk and multiple DUI dads in general.
|
|
bobosensei
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:32:49 GMT -5
Posts: 1,561
|
Post by bobosensei on Jun 22, 2015 0:08:35 GMT -5
I didn't read all the responses, but just wanted to point out if you are okay driving drunk you will be okay driving after your license is taken away.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 27, 2024 17:38:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
DUI's
Jun 22, 2015 5:07:27 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 5:07:27 GMT -5
My take away of this thread is that posters here are happy with the way things are and do not want to discuss any type of change. Drunk drivers are terrible people, so fuck them and their families. Is that a fair assessment?
I posted repeatedly that drunk driving is wrong. Any conversation that tries to help the drunk driver is seen as condoning drunk driving. The guy with 5 DUIs didnt change his behavior with the current system. So thats proof that he is a bad moron and nothing to do with the system as is not working for some criminal behavior.
All I did was want to talk about other ways to deal with DUIs. I said I wasn't even saying the idea was a good idea, just wanted thoughts on it and it gets drowned out by people who can't listen to anything but punishment. I asked about his family and people ignore the fact that jail could push them into poverty and all the consequences of that.
It was just an idea, but people have to prove how much they oppose drunk driving so they posture as hard asses and are closed off to debating anything else.
so sad.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 27, 2024 17:38:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 5:13:10 GMT -5
My take away is that you have some reading comprehension issues.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 26,192
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
DUI's
Jun 22, 2015 6:39:25 GMT -5
Post by NoNamePerson on Jun 22, 2015 6:39:25 GMT -5
I offered up another solution for the drunk but guess it didn't meet your requirements so therefore not another solution in your eyes. So list your alternative ways to deal with the drunk or do you have any alternative ways in mind or just asking everyone else for since you can't come up with any yourself ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 27, 2024 17:38:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 7:23:24 GMT -5
My take away of this thread is that posters here are happy with the way things are and do not want to discuss any type of change. Drunk drivers are terrible people, so fuck them and their families. Is that a fair assessment? I posted repeatedly that drunk driving is wrong. Any conversation that tries to help the drunk driver is seen as condoning drunk driving. The guy with 5 DUIs didnt change his behavior with the current system. So thats proof that he is a bad moron and nothing to do with the system as is not working for some criminal behavior. All I did was want to talk about other ways to deal with DUIs. I said I wasn't even saying the idea was a good idea, just wanted thoughts on it and it gets drowned out by people who can't listen to anything but punishment. I asked about his family and people ignore the fact that jail could push them into poverty and all the consequences of that. It was just an idea, but people have to prove how much they oppose drunk driving so they posture as hard asses and are closed off to debating anything else. so sad. I think the people that are going to change due to the consequences of a DUI do it after the first one, maybe it takes a 2nd one for a few. They probably decide that driving while under the influence is not worth the humiliation of getting arrested, the hassle of getting their driver's license straightened out and the expense. Or maybe they didn't think they were really that drunk until they got arrested and the experience showed them that their tolerance level isn't what they thought it was and realize they could have seriously hurt themselves and/or somebody else. So it serves as a wake-up call and they change their habits. When they keep going after maybe 2 DUI's, clearly they aren't reasonable people. Then they need to be off the streets period until they stop drinking or at least stop drinking and driving. It's not even really about punishing them unless they've hurt or killed someone with their drunkenness. It's more about trying to keep other people safe from their drunk driving. Just my opinion. As far as their families, the other parent should probably look into AlAnon or some similar resource when it becomes obvious that there's a problem that's not going away. If the family is intact, the other parent has the responsibility to do what's within their control to try to mitigate the damage done to the family unit. If the parents aren't together, the other parent still has the responsibility of making sure his/her children are safe. And together or not, they may need to figure out how to step up their income because the alchoholic is on the road to losing his or hers.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 27, 2024 17:38:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 7:39:31 GMT -5
Well hickle, since we're on just helping criminals instead of punishing them, how do you suggest we help murderers to keep them from killing people instead of locking them up? I mean, murderers have kids and family that need them on the outside, it doesn't seem fair to them to just lock their parent up. How will that effect their lives?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,906
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 22, 2015 7:39:56 GMT -5
The way you defend this guy actually makes me wonder if you're this guy? Or he's somehow related to you. Well, when a habitual drunk driver permanently cripples one of your friends and he gets off AGAIN with a slap on the wrist while she has to walk with a cane in constant pain, loses her job and has to fight to get disability, let's see how you feel then. Btw, the drunks are usually judgment proof because they've lost job after job for being a drunk. Amazingly, this guy had insurance. 100k, the bare minimum. Doesn't own a home, of course. Nothing to even go after while her life, at age 48, is permanently altered.
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,379
Member is Online
|
Post by ArchietheDragon on Jun 22, 2015 7:42:05 GMT -5
In 40 years when self driving cars are the norm, we are going to wonder how the fuck we used to let so many people drive drunk.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 27, 2024 17:38:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 7:51:18 GMT -5
I think you should have held someone else up as an example. Someone who has 5 priors is NOT going to get any sympathy, nor are they going to evoke much effort from people to think of alternative punishments or rehabilitation for this person.
What about the first time OUI offender, or maybe the second time offender? Do you think that something different should be done in these cases to try to change behavior? Maybe there is hope there.
I think the future is going to diminish this problem anyway. There will be self driving cars, and from what some prognosticators are saying they may even become the norm. That would be cool- just in time for when I get too old to drive! But they would also keep drunks from driving- as long as they could input the destination.
I also think tech could prevent someone who has been drinking from turning the key, as mentioned above.
I think people who are problem drinkers are going to have problems with drinking regardless of how the driving issues are handled. I think it is a separate and over reaching problem that can't be controlled by driving laws. I also think that someone with five previous OUI's has a serious alcohol problem. I have known many drunks, but I've never met anyone who had close to that many OUI's! I don't have any statistics handy, but from what I know personally, the vast majority of people that get a DUI don't ever re-offend. I know quite a few with one. A couple with 2 and none beyond that. My state has a lot of programs you need to go through with a DUI and I think just the experience of going through one must scare most people into being more responsible.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,444
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Jun 22, 2015 9:44:54 GMT -5
The guy with 5 DUIs has a serious substance abuse problem. I don't think it should be the place of the criminal justice system to be responsible to rehabbing drug addicts, at least not once its gotten to habitual offenses.
I don't know what state this guy is in, but it is pretty standard that they have to attend some type of drug counseling. Here's the thing about that - if the addict doesn't want to change, they aren't going to. At some point that is totally on him, and not a result of a "broken system".
I read a few different articles and the consensus seems to be that recidivism for DUI is somewhere in the 25% range. So for the majority, the current system IS working. Also, we aren't talking one more DUI, but five. FIVE.
One DUI may be a stupid mistake. Five is a clear indication that this guy needs serious help, but yes, that IS on him at this point. If he isn't willing to change his behavior, and realize that he needs to stop drinking entirely, than no amount of intervention from the state is going to change a thing.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jun 22, 2015 9:51:33 GMT -5
My take away of this thread is that posters here are happy with the way things are and do not want to discuss any type of change. Drunk drivers are terrible people, so fuck them and their families. Is that a fair assessment?
You are not reading very carefully. No one is happy, but the methods you claim that will work do NOT work.
Chances are, the person who has 5 DUIs have had probation, drug testing, counseling, AA, etc. and has managed to weasel out of them. MPL has had experience first hand with how well a person can circumvent most of your suggestions.
And another thing you can't seem to grasp is that most people who have 5 DUIs have a problem with alcohol and they are going to need to hit bottom before they are willing to help themselves. None of the other punishments (do you actually KNOW what the punishments were for the past 4 DUIs your 'coworker' had?) have apparently caught his attention.
You can't force someone not to drink, that person has to be willing to not drink FIRST, and then you help him stay on the wagon. But until a person is willing to make the effort first, then no amount of testing is going to do a damn bit of good other than waste precious resources for those who want the help.
And finally, if this yahoo is in jail for 2 years, he's not going to be on the road and endangering other people. He's also (hopefully) going to have to dry out. Whether or not he uses this to his advantage has yet to be seen.
But nothing has worked up to now. Jail is usually a punishment of LAST resort, not first.
|
|
Abby Normal
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 12:31:49 GMT -5
Posts: 3,501
|
Post by Abby Normal on Jun 22, 2015 10:23:32 GMT -5
I have very little sympathy for those who choose to drink and drive. If you plan on drinking- you make plans before you start as to how to get home- even if you don't plan on drinking to excess.
There are those who learn not to drink and drive after getting caught once. There are those who will not learn until they seriously injure or kill someone.
We have a friend who was first on scene at a horrific D&d accident. Happened right outside his house. Druck hit a family-head on. Dad died. Mom (who was in back seat) sustained major injuries and nearly died is paralyzed for life. 6 week old baby- survived. The car was so mangled that rescuers didn't even realize mom and baby were in the back seat until they heard the baby crying.
The driver already had two DUI's. But who knows how many times he did it and didn't get caught.
It's horribly sad- but I hope he's finally learned.
|
|
cronewitch
Junior Associate
I identify as a post-menopausal childless cat lady and I vote.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:44:20 GMT -5
Posts: 5,979
|
Post by cronewitch on Jun 22, 2015 10:45:05 GMT -5
Only 3 things can stop a person from driving drunk 1. Respect for other people and your own right to live. 2. Not being able to get to a vehicle and/or alcohol 3. Death or disability Fear of getting caught seems to just make them more careful not to get caught. Some might stop if they find the cost of jail or treatment and attorney fees is too high so having it cost 10-15K might work on some.
I suggest a weekend jail term like work release. First offense every Friday and Saturday maybe 7PM Friday to 9AM Sunday in lockup. It would be separate from other jails so low security but away from bars, parties, family and friends with no alcohol or drugs and they would pay for the room and board and Saturday would be a work day like an honor farm and or classes on why they shouldn't drink and drive. I would give them maybe 10 weekends first offense, a year second offense and 5 year third offense. Nobody drinks and drives by accident, they choose before heading to a party or bar, they know how they will get home before accepting a single drink. There is no excuse for even the first offense.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jun 22, 2015 10:51:24 GMT -5
I suggest a weekend jail term like work release. First offense every Friday and Saturday maybe 7PM Friday to 9AM Sunday in lockup. It would be separate from other jails so low security but away from bars, parties, family and friends with no alcohol or drugs and they would pay for the room and board and Saturday would be a work day like an honor farm and or classes on why they shouldn't drink and drive. I would give them maybe 10 weekends first offense, a year second offense and 5 year third offense. Nobody drinks and drives by accident, they choose before heading to a party or bar, they know how they will get home before accepting a single drink. There is no excuse for even the first offense.Many hard core drinkers do not only drink during weekends. You've taken away their 'play' time, but you still haven't stopped their likelihood of getting on the road while drunk. They double during the weekend, but still drink during the week.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 22, 2015 11:11:37 GMT -5
My take away of this thread is that posters here are happy with the way things are and do not want to discuss any type of change. Drunk drivers are terrible people, so fuck them and their families. Is that a fair assessment? I posted repeatedly that drunk driving is wrong. Any conversation that tries to help the drunk driver is seen as condoning drunk driving. The guy with 5 DUIs didnt change his behavior with the current system. So thats proof that he is a bad moron and nothing to do with the system as is not working for some criminal behavior. All I did was want to talk about other ways to deal with DUIs. I said I wasn't even saying the idea was a good idea, just wanted thoughts on it and it gets drowned out by people who can't listen to anything but punishment. I asked about his family and people ignore the fact that jail could push them into poverty and all the consequences of that. It was just an idea, but people have to prove how much they oppose drunk driving so they posture as hard asses and are closed off to debating anything else. so sad. Which part of HE'S ALREADY HAD FIVE DUIs seems to be eluding you? He's had multiple opportunities to change. He just doesn't want to, and continues to be a menace on the roads and dangerous to innocent people. You seem to have more concern for his family than folks ending up dead, paralyzed or maimed. His clueless wife, who should have left him a long time ago, and her children won't starve to death. She can go to work, and then there's welfare and food stamps. You seem to have no concern for people who could end up dead. What of the families of an innocent man who he kills while driving drunk? You seem to want to blame the system, but he's had chance after chance after chance after chance. As far as I'm concerned, jail is where he belongs.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,906
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 22, 2015 11:26:49 GMT -5
Hell yes. My neighbors and I polished off two bottles of wine yesterday. All they had to do is walk across the driveway to their home. I had to walk in off my patio. We all said what difference did it make, we weren't driving. Once mj becomes legal in this state, we will prepare for the munchies but stay home!!
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jun 22, 2015 12:04:37 GMT -5
Only 3 things can stop a person from driving drunk 1. Respect for other people and your own right to live. 2. Not being able to get to a vehicle and/or alcohol 3. Death or disability Fear of getting caught seems to just make them more careful not to get caught. Some might stop if they find the cost of jail or treatment and attorney fees is too high so having it cost 10-15K might work on some. I suggest a weekend jail term like work release. First offense every Friday and Saturday maybe 7PM Friday to 9AM Sunday in lockup. It would be separate from other jails so low security but away from bars, parties, family and friends with no alcohol or drugs and they would pay for the room and board and Saturday would be a work day like an honor farm and or classes on why they shouldn't drink and drive. I would give them maybe 10 weekends first offense, a year second offense and 5 year third offense. Nobody drinks and drives by accident, they choose before heading to a party or bar, they know how they will get home before accepting a single drink. There is no excuse for even the first offense. This confuses me a little, I'll admit. Your closing sentence states there's no excuse for even the first offense. Yet, you're willing to use escalating punishments covering close to six years. If there's no excuse for the first offense, what does that say about the second and third offense. I tend to agree there's no excuse for ever driving drunk. We all know when we apply for our first driver's license that drunk driving is not acceptable. Many of those who get DUIs may be newly licensed drivers still in their teens. Teens are notorious for pushing the edge so I can almost understand them messing up. Giving them another chance doesn't bother me much, provided there is some effort to get it through their heads that unacceptable means exactly that - it's not going to be tolerated. If, by then, they still don't get it I can't see the value in doing the same thing over and over for lengthening periods of time. That just puts them back out there and on the roads - traveling menaces to the population as a whole.
|
|
Abby Normal
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 12:31:49 GMT -5
Posts: 3,501
|
DUI's
Jun 22, 2015 12:25:08 GMT -5
Post by Abby Normal on Jun 22, 2015 12:25:08 GMT -5
I do think there needs to be some leeway for the first offense. Only because of how the system works (at least here). There was a case a few years back where a guy went to pick up some friends from a bar. As he arrived, they sent him a text that they had moved to other bar down the street. He moved his car. Officer pulled him over and arrested him because his activity was suspicious and he was glassy eyed. He had a cold. Even though he blew a 0.00 and follow up tests showed he had nothing in his system, that arrest stays on his record.
So I do think there is something wrong with a system that punishes those trying to be responsible, and fails to stop those who are truly guilty.
But I don't have the solution either.
|
|
HoneyBBQ
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 10:36:09 GMT -5
Posts: 5,395
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"3b444e"}
|
Post by HoneyBBQ on Jun 22, 2015 12:35:45 GMT -5
My take away of this thread is that posters here are happy with the way things are and do not want to discuss any type of change. Drunk drivers are terrible people, so fuck them and their families. Is that a fair assessment? Yeah, pretty much. There are options out there to deal with addiction. Your coworker isn't doing them. There are required breathalizers on cars, they can just drive another car. There is no way to keep your coworker in society SAFELY. That's why he has to be removed from SOCIETY. He is the burden. There is NO BURDEN on us to find a way to keep him in society. That is HIS problem. If there were an easy magic solution out there, don't you think it would already be implemented? I feel 0 sympathy for your coworker or his family. I feel sorry for people who's children are taken from them by selfish, unrelenting, clueless assholes like your coworker.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
DUI's
Jun 22, 2015 12:57:36 GMT -5
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 22, 2015 12:57:36 GMT -5
No, I'm not happy with the way things are. I think the penalties should be much more severe. This guy has 5 DUIs and still has his licence? I find that reprehensible.
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,379
Member is Online
|
Post by ArchietheDragon on Jun 22, 2015 12:59:35 GMT -5
I took an uber home from a friend's house the other night. I felt so responsible.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,614
|
Post by swamp on Jun 22, 2015 13:21:50 GMT -5
My take away of this thread is that posters here are happy with the way things are and do not want to discuss any type of change. Drunk drivers are terrible people, so fuck them and their families. Is that a fair assessment? I posted repeatedly that drunk driving is wrong. Any conversation that tries to help the drunk driver is seen as condoning drunk driving. The guy with 5 DUIs didnt change his behavior with the current system. So thats proof that he is a bad moron and nothing to do with the system as is not working for some criminal behavior. All I did was want to talk about other ways to deal with DUIs. I said I wasn't even saying the idea was a good idea, just wanted thoughts on it and it gets drowned out by people who can't listen to anything but punishment. I asked about his family and people ignore the fact that jail could push them into poverty and all the consequences of that. It was just an idea, but people have to prove how much they oppose drunk driving so they posture as hard asses and are closed off to debating anything else. so sad. I often represent people with 5+ DWI's.
If they've gotten to 5, they already have been through the mandatory testing, restricted use license, no license, mandated counseling, etc. etc. The person is an alcoholic and will stop drinking only if they are committed to it, change their social environment, and find a supportive environment.
At a certain point, they only option is chuck them in jail for the safety of the community.
ETA: I feel for the guy. I feel for his family. Alcoholism is a horrible disease. I would argue that he needs supervision. And my argument would probably be ignored.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
DUI's
Jun 22, 2015 13:32:38 GMT -5
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 22, 2015 13:32:38 GMT -5
My take away of this thread is that posters here are happy with the way things are and do not want to discuss any type of change. Drunk drivers are terrible people, so fuck them and their families. Is that a fair assessment? I posted repeatedly that drunk driving is wrong. Any conversation that tries to help the drunk driver is seen as condoning drunk driving. The guy with 5 DUIs didnt change his behavior with the current system. So thats proof that he is a bad moron and nothing to do with the system as is not working for some criminal behavior. All I did was want to talk about other ways to deal with DUIs. I said I wasn't even saying the idea was a good idea, just wanted thoughts on it and it gets drowned out by people who can't listen to anything but punishment. I asked about his family and people ignore the fact that jail could push them into poverty and all the consequences of that. It was just an idea, but people have to prove how much they oppose drunk driving so they posture as hard asses and are closed off to debating anything else. so sad. I often represent people with 5+ DWI's.
If they've gotten to 5, they already have been through the mandatory testing, restricted use license, no license, mandated counseling, etc. etc. The person is an alcoholic and will stop drinking only if they are committed to it, change their social environment, and find a supportive environment.
At a certain point, they only option is chuck them in jail for the safety of the community.
ETA: I feel for the guy. I feel for his family. Alcoholism is a horrible disease. I would argue that he needs supervision. And my argument would probably be ignored.
Yes, it's a disease, but there are many diseases that preclude one from driving. Loss of vision from retinitis pigmentosa. Uncontrolled epilepsy. How about the "disease" of old age? A couple of weeks ago, an 89 yr old driver thought he was in reverse, but wasn't...plowed into a coworker and crushed his legs so badly, they had to be amputated. Kid was 23 years old. These people shouldn't be behind the wheel of a car and neither should drunks.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,614
|
DUI's
Jun 22, 2015 13:34:06 GMT -5
Post by swamp on Jun 22, 2015 13:34:06 GMT -5
I often represent people with 5+ DWI's.
If they've gotten to 5, they already have been through the mandatory testing, restricted use license, no license, mandated counseling, etc. etc. The person is an alcoholic and will stop drinking only if they are committed to it, change their social environment, and find a supportive environment.
At a certain point, they only option is chuck them in jail for the safety of the community.
ETA: I feel for the guy. I feel for his family. Alcoholism is a horrible disease. I would argue that he needs supervision. And my argument would probably be ignored.
Yes, it's a disease, but there are many diseases that preclude one from driving. Loss of vision from retinitis pigmentosa. Uncontrolled epilepsy. These people shouldn't be behind the wheel of a car and neither should drunks.
I don't disagree with you. Drink yourself silly for all I care. But do it at home.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Jun 22, 2015 13:34:29 GMT -5
Get drunk. Drive. Get large ticket. Go to court. Told DO NOT DRINK AND DRIVE. IT'S ILLEGAL. Wash and repeat 4 times? I don't think so. He knows it's wrong. He wants to drink until he's sodden and then drive home. His wants should not take precedence over the lives of innocent people on the roads. He belongs in jail. As far as I'm concerned, he belonged in jail the second time he did it. As to what the attorney does/did for his money, I don't know. I don't really care. There would have been no need to pay the attorney if the guy hadn't decided to drive drunk and, subsequently, gotten caught doing so 5 times. Well, the more money he pays to an attorney, the less money he has to drink with. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe, the fines for a second DUI charge should be like $50K. Not dischargeable in bankruptcy. The third charge? Not less than $200K? Can't pay the fines? We have this nice residential program that will allow you to work off your fines.
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,379
Member is Online
|
DUI's
Jun 22, 2015 13:35:34 GMT -5
swamp likes this
Post by ArchietheDragon on Jun 22, 2015 13:35:34 GMT -5
Get drunk. Drive. Get large ticket. Go to court. Told DO NOT DRINK AND DRIVE. IT'S ILLEGAL. Wash and repeat 4 times? I don't think so. He knows it's wrong. He wants to drink until he's sodden and then drive home. His wants should not take precedence over the lives of innocent people on the roads. He belongs in jail. As far as I'm concerned, he belonged in jail the second time he did it. As to what the attorney does/did for his money, I don't know. I don't really care. There would have been no need to pay the attorney if the guy hadn't decided to drive drunk and, subsequently, gotten caught doing so 5 times. Well, the more money he pays to an attorney, the less money he has to drink with. Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe, the fines for a second DUI charge should be like $50K. Not dischargeable in bankruptcy. The third charge? Not less than $200K? Can't pay the fines? We have this nice residential program that will allow you to work off your fines. When a friend of mine got addicted to pain killers he spent the mortgage money on pills...
|
|