On the late news last night, it was reported that police were at a serious crash in northern Baltimore County. Today we learn the details...

2 dead, 2 injured, 2 charged in Baltimore County crash | Baltimore County News - WBAL Home

With all the effort we have made as a society to reduce drunk-driving, it's outrageous that this sort of thing should happen. Here's an elderly couple, 85 and 84, married for 62 years, killed by a 22 year old jerk who didn't have the good sense to call somebody for a ride when he was too sloshed to drive.

I just want to scream...

I'm convinced that death or injury to others by DWI is a totally avoidable occurrence and should be a capital offense punishable by public hanging on the courthouse lawn.

__________________
- Change it back -

.. and I'd point out that this kind of news is repeated , twice a week in any suburban area. ( I think there have been three this week around me.) I'd argue that a majority of drunks on the road after midnight have come out of nightclubs and bars. Ever wonder why cops don't park outside these places at closing time and round up the DUI's before they get too far? Seems like that would be too effective.

__________________
Dave

I wholeheartedly agree with you. We had 5 young people killed several months ago in a highway accident north of town and the driver was twice the legal limit of alcohol with trace of drugs also. The shame of it was there was one of the guys that was well below the legal limit and he could have drove. Pulled out in front of an 18 wheeler and 1 of 6 in the car survived. Pretty hard to hang the driver as he was killed but my point here is such bad judgement was used. People just don't think.

__________________
James
On the Llano Estacado

When I worked as a substance abuse counselor I did a group for people that had gotten a DUI and sentenced to attend a treatment group. One thing I expressed was that drinking and driving should be a capital crime. If you drink and drive and cause a death you should be charged with permeated murder. You knowingly drank alcohol, you knowingly got behind the wheel of a vehicle and drove.

That point of view changed a few peoples view on drinking and driving. There is no excuse, none what so ever for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs; to include drugs prescribed by a doctor. driving high is a killer.

Now I'll put the soap box back under the porch.

__________________
Carpriver.

I grew up in a time when it was kind of acceptable to Drive drunk. Thankfully those days are gone. Unfortunately so are some of those I grew up with.

I believe that those who are picked up with above say a .12 should get 6 months for the first offense. Message is no screwing around. To bad about your job, your family and your bills. The people they might maim or kill don't get to keep anything at all.

I haven't had a drink for over thirty years, but to this day it terrifies me to think how many times I drove drunk. How I avoided killing or maiming someone else or myself I'll never know. I've lost so many friends to drunk drivers that I get really angry when I hear some idiot say, "Hell, I drive better after a few drinks!" No you don't, you deluded cretin, so don't let me hear you say that! I've pulled dead kids out of wrecked cars after someone who thought he was driving just fine wrapped his car around a telephone pole.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

Not been to Vegas lately, have you. I work with an older guy who has BIG issues with drink drive laws, and he is by no means the first I have met here. Getting the blodd/alcohol limit dropped to 0.08 took threats from Washington of no federal road money. Those that pay for the folk in our legislature would have happily let all the roads turn to mush rather than go willingly to 0.08.

Wee Hooker suggested the cops lurk near bars after midnight. Thing is then the business owners scream blue murder that their trade is affected and the cops are taken away. You may guess how I know this.

Sadly, that is a regular thing here in rural South Dakota. Guess the younger generation can't seam to find anything better to do than hit the bars and get sloshed. What really get's me is that instead of trying to curb drunk driving, they are putting a ton of effort into getting people to stop smoking.
Now I understand that smoking has it's own set of health risks, but i have never herd of someone being involved in an accident because of it.
The truly sad part is we have kids still in high school that are dieing because of alcohol related car accidents.
Maybe that is why I stay hope at night especially on weekends!

__________________
NRA Life member

One of the reasons the cops don't watch all the bars is there's more bars than there are cops....and they usually have a few other things going on also. We had a real problem bar in my county a couple of years ago. It was one of those county line joints far from the county seat where the SO is located. Most of the patrons were from other counties and they thought they could come here and get away with anything. We had complaints of fights, reckless driving, gunfire, property damage, and most anything a punk could do to irritate his fellow man. Over the past several years there were three shootings here. We road blocked each end of the road passing in front of the bar right at closing time. We had to call out reserves to do it because there weren't enough on duty regular deputies to do it. We wound up with over 30 arrests, misdemeanor and felony. It stayed quiet for about a month then it fired back up. We road blocked again with pretty much the same results and word got around forcing the bar to close. The bar owner sued for putting him out of business. We won the first round but the case is now on appeal.

I had my last full beer in Jan 1988, 25 years ago. I don't miss it. To this day I don't understand why I drank alcohol and I don't understand what others see in it. It's expensive and you do stupid things when intoxicated.


I don't think this will help. While we'll have a hard time getting the public hangings instituted, there are other public things we can do that might work better.

Rather than put them in jail, put them to work. There's plenty of community work that needs to be done. Plenty of public toilets that need to be cleaned and plenty of ditches to be dug/cleaned.

Along with that, take their license for 5 years. Get caught driving after your license has been taken for drunk driving, you lose your license permanently. Get a second DUI, you can never buy/register a car.

That is how you get serious.

Alas, it will never happen because all the law makers are heavy drinkers.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Thanks for the thoughtful replies, folks.

In considering this issue, I think a big part of the problem is that many, maybe even most, Americans, just don't take driving seriously. Operating a motor vehicle, sober or drunk, is no big deal for them.

People here eat and drink, talk on the phone, text, read maps (or even newspapers!), fiddle with their radios or GPS receivers, chat with passengers, pay no attention to their surroundings, show no consideration for other motorists, etc., etc...so getting hammered and then climbing behind the wheel is no biggie for them. It's just an extension of the other thoughtless and risky things they do when they drive.

I visit Germany regularly, rent cars and drive there when I do. The culture really is different, with both cars and alcohol. Germans love their beer, but drunkenness is culturally unacceptable. And drinking-and-driving is unthinkable for most Germans...they simply will not do it. The drinking age for beer and wine is 16, but the minimum driving age is 18. Thus, young Germans learn to handle alcohol responsibly long before they learn to drive.

Learning to drive is expensive there, and not everyone has (or needs) a driver's license. And you can lose it easily if you flout the law. (Contrast that with the attitude here that every 16 year old has a divine right to drive, and that traffic laws are made to be broken.)

Bottom line: To reduce drunk-driving deaths, maybe we need to change our driving habits, not just our drinking habits.

This just sickens me. What boggles the mind is hearing on the
news or in the papers about a person who has been arrested 10, 15,
times or more for DUI and has been arrested yet again????
How does one person get 15-20 arrests for DUI ???
Everyone deserves a second chance but after number two don't
ya' think they go away for 5 years or so just for a deterrent?
I know, i know, the prisons are overflowing now and there is
no room for these non-violent offenders some will say.
How violent is a car traveling 65MPH hitting another head on ?
One chance i say, then impose seriously stiff mandatory
sentences.

Chuck

__________________
They hold no Quarter

When I was a kid, the drinking age was 18, and a lot of kids drank earlier than that. I didn't see the big deal drinking and driving, as long as I felt in control.

Then I became a state cop, and seen the results first hand of drinking and driving. And being a new guy, I was always the one who was sent to folks homes to inform them their loved one was not coming home, ever. It was a real attitude changer.

A couple years on the job, I heard a radio call for a serious MV accident the next town over. it was in another troops area, but I was close, so I responded.

When I got there, there was a late model sedan that had hit a Porsche 911 head on, riding up on the hood, and thru the windshield. I had a real bad feeling about that Porsche.

Yep, it was a local veterinarian I had worked a summer with during a high school work study program. He had been driving his beloved 911 when the two girls driving drunk had crossed the centerline, hitting him head on. He was dead.

The two girls were sitting on the curb, crying. I asked them if they were injured. They were not. I told the girl who was the driver, to try to calm down. Even felt kind of bad for her. Then she told me her father was going to kill her for wrecking the car - That was why she was upset. I took her by the arm, and walked her over to the wrecked 911, and had her bend down and look in the car at Dr. D's mangled body. Then she really lost it. Unfortunately there were quite a few people watching by then, and I almost lost my job over it, but I felt it needed doing.

I just cant believe the number of ignorant drivers on the roads who don't give a rats A about anyone else.

Larry

Having grown up in a different era, I have always
accepted the fact that impaired drivers are on the roads.
That said, there are a ton more drivers on the roads
nowadays; so there's no room for the impaired driver
in our society. Looking at replies from chud and
steelslaver, I'm thinking that the First offense should
be punished enough to make an impression.
After that, it's strictly jail-time and no license forever.
The idea that killing someone by drunkdriving should
be regarded as murder sounds right, as well. There's no
excuse for our friends/family should be paying in blood
for somebody to get a lesson in common sense. JMHO,
TACC1

BOYS, ya'll are preaching to the choir and everybody is saying amen and singing Amazing Grace.
Now the service is over and everybody gets in their cars and goes home.
Drinking is not a problem and it is legal.
Dying is not a problem and it will happen.
Bad things happen and good people are caught up.
What is the solution ? I said what is the solution!
I understand the frustrations---what is the solution ?
You are not going to stop it !
You cannot stop things from happening. I know you want to. You are a failure.
I appreciate the crying and wailing---what is the answer ?
Blessings

__________________
TEXAS, by GOD

God said it !
The Boy Scouts stole it.
I will repeat what God said.
Be Prepared.
Blessings

__________________
TEXAS, by GOD

Well, stuff happens, say your prays and hope for the best, is kind of a poor answer. If that is how you feel why should we even have any traffic laws at all? Enough people get sick of it and demand change, you can get it.

The solution is to make the punishment so sever that few will risk it. A drunk person typically makes poor decisions, but, seldom do they make totally moronic ones. How many drunks drive by the police dept. Back in the day I new a DUI would cost me $150 and a bit of a hassle. That didn't scare me. Now it is considerable more and I wouldn't risk it. True, I have also grown to know the rest of the possibilities other than monetary. I that if the penalties would have been more sever and applied more frequently I would have forgone some of the stupidities of my youth. Knowing you will spend 6 months in jail and lose your license for 5 years would cause a lot more to call a Taxi or what ever. No, they will not all stop. But, many would and those who got nailed would be safe for at least 6 months.

How come I have to get checked every time I buy a gun, yet anyone with 10 DUIs can walk into a car dealers and buy a new Corvette????
Might not have a license, but he can get the car and drive it off the lot without one. Call for background checks for car sales and see what happens. Penalties for straw sales, and transfers to those on an excluded list. Who is killing the most people, gun owners or drivers?

4AM.....blinking yellow light,I have the rt.of way.Black suv in left turning lane pulls in front of me causing 4 veh.crash!Woman driver....DRUNK...tells me she has to leave & see her boyfriend...tell her NOT to leave scene,LEO's come...she's gone....boyfriend brings her back!My truck is totaled...she gets ONE night in jail,no Insur.
felony convection,$1,000 IN FINE has to attend a class"AND"no licence for a yr!!
When the State Att.tolld me this ...I shook my head laughed in her face & said ...doesn't mean a thing...she will be driving as soon as she gets a vehicle!!
Jim

Alcohol abuse has been a serious problem since our country was founded. We had people riding horses and driving wagons while drunk in the 18th and 19th centuries. The main problem is "who are these drunk drivers"? They are our spouses, children, friends, co-workers, parents, employees and other relatives. People argue for severe punishment for DUI. I've heard this a thousand times, always from the victims of drunk drivers. What I hear from the people I just mentioned is something entirely different, a hundred reasons to excuse this behavior. "He has a family to support", "so he made one mistake", "he's really a nice guy", and on and on. THAT is why we will never solve this problem. The drunk drivers are not strangers but have friends and family who will excuse this behavior. It all depends on whose oxen is being gourd.

Sorry for the perps family. Jail time. I don't care if it is my brother, sister or son. Good people don't drive drunk.

I have lost a nephew, 2 cousins and one SON to car wrecks. None were at fault! Only one involved alcohol. But, ENOUGH. That is my ox.

The solution is exactly what people won't vote for, stiff and public correction. Embarrassment works better than jail time.

Hogwash! Good people drive drunk every day. This is just another reason we don't have stiff enough penalties. Let me demonstrate...

You drop by a friend's house on a Saturday afternoon. While admiring his new engine in the garage, he offers you a beer. You have one and then another. Well, you didn't intend to stay there all day and have an errand to run so, in the car and off you go. Are you drunk? I'll bet you're over the legal limit.

I could list any number of scenarios like that above. The point is that no one intentionally gets drunk and then goes to drive. It always happens unintentionally. The trick is to get people to think far enough in advance to avoid being drunk when they get behind the wheel.

Why not just eliminate alcohol completely? This way drunk driving is never even a possibility.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

No, I don't have a few beer and drive. NO MATTER WHAT. You are not demonstrating MY behavior or any other RESPONSIBLE persons. They all have 2 choices. Don't drink or don't drive. PERIOD Once they drink and then drive IT IS INTENTIONAL. No BS excuses. They are not being "good people" when they behave this way. It IS that simple.

I respectfully refer you to my post above: I think the problem here is our culture, and how we view driving in America.

The scenario you describe above would not happen in Germany. Your friend showing you his new engine would not offer you that beer in the first place, because he knows you have to drive, and he also knows you wouldn't accept it if he did offer it.

We tried eliminating alcohol completely. I worked about as well as our current 'war on drugs'...

Most of the dumbass driving I see now is due to the rampant texting and driving. It is worse than drinking and driving, harder to catch and much more common.

Sexual abuse and murder of children just will happen, right? And we will inevitably fail to prevent it, yes?

Same with abuse of elderly or mentally disabled people--nothing we can do to prevent it? It's just going to happen, so what the hell, right?

That reasoning appalls me.

Wonder why we hear so much more about abuse of children these days? Because the public has been better educated about spotting and ending it case by case. Kids are finding it a little easier to report it. I used to work with kids like that.

Ever speculate about why the threshold for legal intoxication is now down to 0.08 in most states and jurisdictions? Because people are tired of having their property and their loved ones destroyed by drunk drivers. They see that a tougher standard is needed.

"Drinking isn't a problem"? For a startling percentage of the population of this country it is. It's called alcoholism. I have it. I haven't had a drink in over 32 years, but I've got it. I might, just might, have gotten help sooner if I had been arrested on one or more of the many times I drove drunk. Maybe not, a lot don't, but some do. I used to treat them.

Carried to its logical conclusion, what you're saying would seem to be that nothing can be improved by trying to find a solution, even if that solution is elusive.

I'm unwilling to live in a country in which we don't keep trying. And I do favor much stiffer penalties for driving drunk, with fewer exceptions.

We have actually made headway in some of these chronic problems. I think that will continue, but not if we just say there's no use pursuing progress.

Sorry for the rant. This struck a nerve with an old sober drunk and retired treatment professional.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

DWI is a very complex problem and there are no easy solutions. We know from experience that increasing the punishment will at best only have a minimal impact on deterring it. Also “being drunk” is such a vague and indefinable term.

There are some that can have one or two beers and have their driving skills dramatically decreased.
There are some that can drink a six pack and still drive better than most sober people on the road.
Using an arbitrary blood alcohol level to measure drunkenness is like making all clothes in one size fits all.

Any given Friday or Saturday night in the USA there are millions of legally drunk drivers on the road and only a few of them get into traffic accidents. So this idea that anyone that has a drink or two should not drive is not very realistic to say the least.

Angry, knee-jerk, and ill thought out solutions will not do much if anything to reduce deaths and injuries from drunk drivers involved in vehicular accidents. They will however erode out basic freedoms.

So while there is really know way to know exactly where the line of any individuals becoming drunk is, laws are reduced to trying to find a one size fits all blood alcohol level to use. The idea that someone just over the arbitrary alcohol blood level should face capital charges is too absurd to even contemplate. To equate this with premeditated murder is not close to rational.

Equally absurd is that we treat some one who in some states have a .08 the same as someone with a .28 is also absurd. Equally absurd is that someone with a .07 is home free while someone with a .08 goes to jail, since the person could not possibly know the difference without taking a breathalyzer or blood test.

This level is truly arbitrary since it used to be .10 in most states and is now lowered to .08 by act of congress. It is not unlike saying you can have 7 rounds in your magazine, but not 8 or you go to jail. Also understand it was political pressure not any scientific testing that arrived at the .08 blood level.

Additionally there is the presupposition that any accident in which someone who is “legally drunk” is involved that it is the result of the alcohol. There are too many non-alcohol related accidents to make such an assumption.

I know, especially if the person looses a loved one, how satisfying it can be to point a finger and scream for blood. There is a natural tendency to want someone or something to blame for such a loss. Also probably much of the time it is due to alcohol consumption. However, I can promise you with a .08 level of alcohol I could drive better than most can drive when sober. I don’t drive and drink by the way. I only drink at home and only do that rarely these days. If I have two beers in a week it is a heavy drinking week for me these days.

I have always had a high tolerance for any drug including alcohol. I know others that have an exceptionally low tolerance for such drugs. Anyone that took basic math and understands even rudimentary statistics knows that all such natural phenomenon can be distributed on a standard bell curve. Drinking alcohol is no different. It effects each person differently. However it does have some effect on all people, just not at the same rate.

Also we know what happened to this nation when alcohol was made illegal. That is just not a solution, and would likely make the problem much worse.

So when advocating for laws against DWI, think about the complexities involved. I agree we need laws against driving while under the influence, but realize being under the influence dose not always equate to being drunk.

In fact I would venture that many if not most with a blood alcohol content of .08 are not what I would call drunk or even significantly impaired. However, no doubt some are.

We need to set a realistic way of determining when someone is impaired.

We need to make penalties greater for a .26 or .32 blood alcohol level than we do for a .08 level.
I mean is someone is speeding (the single largest cause of accidents other than just being a bad driver) we do fine someone the same thing for going 5 miles per hour over the limit as we do for going 30 miles per hour over the limit.

We have adequate laws to address accidental traffic accents that involve the death of someone. Changing the laws will do little to change behavior. All it will do is satisfy the blood lust of the survivors.

I don’t care for zero tolerance laws. They never allow for many of the very real exceptions to the rule. They are just insane. We have such a law in Texas where any alcohol at all in your blood system means you cannot legally conceal carry. That is even more absurd that some of the driving and drinking laws. I mean the idea that someone that has a beer with their dinner is somehow going to become some crazed gun man is beyond belief. It is simply a back door attack on our second amendment rights. Sadly many who property to support the second amendment quickly buy into such ****.

I remember when I was a volunteer fireman and EMT. We received a call of an accident on the freeway. We rolled up and it was obvious that it was bad. The county cops had chased this guy down a 4 lane freeway on the wrong side of the road. He had a flat rear tire and was going over 80mph. He hit a couple head on and killed the driver. His wife was really messed up but would recover. The guy that hit them was drunk. I believe almost 3 times the limit. I was one of the people working on him. All he got out of it was a broken leg and cuts. We were not real gentle with him! He tried to spit on us on the way to the hospital so we put a pillow case over his head.
My question after that was why. Why did he run? Why did the police chase him down the wrong side of the road?
The guy he killed was a rodeo bronc rider traveling to his next gig.

__________________
Tom
NRA Pistol Inst

Last week in Pontiac, Illinois a 29 year old city K9 officer AND his dog were killed by a drunk driver. They were on duty parked in a crossover on a highway. Rainy night. Drunk hit them and killed them both. Drunk is in jail. City lost a veteran and a good guy and his dog. He was well known and loved by people in town. Chief couldn't keep his composure when he spoke of his only K9 unit now lost.
45-50 years ago most everything except bars and liquor stores closed by 9pm and everything was closed on Sunday. If you drove drunk late at night chances are you would hit another drunk. We now live in a 7X24 society. Consequently there's no hiding from drunk drivers.

__________________
SOS USA

Stupidity does not improve with alcohol consumption. In fact it appears to get progressively worse.

With all due respect, if I had a dollar for every time I heard that in my professional capacity I could own all the wonderful Smith revolvers I want and afford to shoot them regularly. Not pointing a finger at you, but for me and virtually all the people I've treated it was a delusion, and sometimes proven to be so.

I'm glad you don't drink and drive. I wish more people didn't. But I gladly surrender my own freedom to drive with even mildly impaired reflexes and judgment, and have no trouble with laws that protect me and the people I love from others who insist on behaving stupidly in a car in ways they would not consider with a gun.

By the way, I believe the lowering of BAC standards has been passed not by act of Congress but by the states, where the legislators are probably somewhat more in touch with the will of their constituents.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

finesse_r,
That was an interesting dissertation in post #28. The main thing I got out of it was, "I want to drink and drive so, set the penalties to a point where I can do that and be able to pay the small penalty." Kind of like driving a little over the speed limit because you can afford the ticket.

So, I'll ask the same question I ask lots of people, why drink alcohol at all? There are plenty of other beverages that taste good, cost less and have zero possibility of getting you in trouble. Why not drink those?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Until not very many years ago, it was possible to compile unlimited DUI convictions in Wyo and never face a felony. Thus, people with a dozen or more prior convictions would never serve more than 6 mos. in the county jail. I've seen people with as many as 17 prior convictions! Then the Legislature made a 4th conviction in 5 years a felony with a max sentence of 2 yrs in the state pen. With credit for time served pending trial and good time, few actually served more than 4-6 mos. Last year they increased the lookback period to 10 yrs and the max sentence to 7 yrs. i have seen enough serial drunk drivers to know that they will not stop as long as they are on the street. They will drive without licenses or insurance, they will steal a car if need be, they will have their "friends" bypass their interlock devices and, sooner or later, they will likely kill someone, maybe a whole family. So when those people show up in my courtroom, they get the full 7. They might be rehabilitated in prison, they might not. I don't care. I sleep better at night knowing that, at least for a while, that individual won't be on the street and those among us who just want to raise our families in peace won't be subject to the random, senseless death such people deal out every day on our highways. I can't solve the drunk driving problem, but I'll settle for that.

If that is all you got out of it, then you might want to read it again. That is certainly not what it says or implies in any fashion. In fact I clearly support the existing laws against DWI. I just am not a fanatic about it and I do try and understand it is not as simple as some would have us believe.

Actually as I stated I don't drink much at all and I never drive and drink. So your suggestion that this is something I want to do is just wrong. Still I do like a cold beer every once in a while, which is why I drink one every once in a while. I drink it because I like it. And the way I drink there is zero chance of me getting in trouble from it.

Any one with a IQ higher than a monkey that doesn't have a problem with alcohol would have to think very hard about drinking and driving if the penalties where high enough. Those that have a problem will always deny they have a problem. I didn't mean to drink so many beers at my buddy's shop is a pretty lame excuse for a grown man. I had an errand to run. Is also the song of the irresponsible. Responsible people don't drink when they have something they must do. Grow up and either control your drinking or put the taxi company phone number on your cell phone. I occasionally go downtown, shot some pool and down some rum and cokes. No taxi in our little town so, I WALK HOME. 2 miles. So what. Better than a fine, a night in jail, big insurance bill, etc etc. Worse, how would I feel if I hurt some one.

A lot more would think about it if they knew they would get 6 months and no license for 5 years. Only a moron wouldn't.

PS. In our hunting camps NO BOOZE till after the guns are put away and they stay away. 1 beer=no gun. Do I think I am drunk after 1 beer? No, do I need a beer before or during the hunt? NO.

Some interesting thoughts and rationalizations above.
I'm a fanatic-I have been since my 16 year old daughter was run down by a drunk 17 year old. My daughter was roller blading on a bike path, and she was killed instantly.
Here's what I think-
A single drink of any alcohol means no driving. Period. Never mind about body weight, tolerance, blood alcohol level- a single drink starts the impairment process and starts to impede anyone's ability to judge their own level of impairment. Nobody drives better with a BAL of .08.
Some countries have all but eliminated drunk driving. Their society refuses to tolerate it. When I speak at the monthly Victims Impact Panel to the latest crop of DUI offenders I talk about how when I was a kid, people smoked everywhere. They don't anymore, not just because its illegal-people won't tolerate it. Many of you sound like the kind of person who would tell someone they can't drive, or even take steps to prevent them from driving after drinking. That's what will help this scourge that kills someone every 48 minutes in this country. People who hear me speak say "if you save even one life it's worth it" but that's not what I think. I want it to stop. It is preventable, drunk driving could be all but eliminated, if we all refused to put up with it.
There is no safe way to drink and drive. The average DUI first time offender has driven impaired 80 plus times before being apprehended.
A single drink should mean no driving-period.
Just my painfully expensive 2 cents.
Regards,
turnerriver

__________________
turnerriver

I am sorry for your loss. I too have had a innocent family member fatally run down by a drunk driver.

Could not agree more.

__________________
- Change it back -

I love beer.

That said, If I drink one I'm likely to have another.

I will not drive even after one.

I drove drunk as a young adult and am lucky no one got hurt. Really lucky.

Simple, If you drink don't drive.

God bless those that have lost their loved ones because people are stupid. The stories are endless and I don't want my name in one.

If I killed someone while driving drunk I wouldn't be able to live with myself.

__________________
Dum vivo cano

If it doesn't imply that, why are you opposed to stiff fines for the first offense?

Yes, I'm fanatical about it. Why be lenient for the first offense? You cannot drink and drive on accident. It has to be done on purpose.

This doesn't mean we have to put people in prison. Take their license. The DMV can easily prevent them from registering a car. There will always be those who try to skirt the law, but this will slow things down considerably.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

This is what I've seen my German friends do.

I'm a member of a German-American firefighters' society. My German brothers fly over here, and I fly over there, and we do what all firefighters do when they get together: We drink beer and spin tall tales.

My brother Andreas is a firefighter/paramedic in a small town (pop. 3000) in far western Germany, not far from the border with Luxembourg. He lives about 3/4 of a mile from the café in the center of town where he and his friends love to socialize. If he drives there, and if he has more than one beer, or is leaving within an hour of having that one beer, he leaves his car there and walks home. On many nights he simply leaves the car at home and walks to the café.

As I mentioned earlier, it's a cultural thing. They take driving seriously over there, and one does not drive a vehicle in less than full control of one's faculties. (They also don't text, talk on the phone, or eat while driving. They keep both hands on the wheel, at 9 and 3 o'clock, they drive in the right lane unless passing a slower vehicle, and they scrupulously obey speed limits. It truly is a wonder to behold!)

The ultra-liberal lawyers have argued that parking outside a bar, waiting for a drunk to emerge and drive off is profiling.

That's a big no-no

__________________
Slim, U.S. Army, Ret.

I'd bet that every LEO here, current or former, can cite numerous times when they've arrested a DWI driver, even one that was way, way over .100 and falling down sloppy, who had with him a perfectly sober passenger.

Drunks will knowingly drive right into a well marked DWI checkpoint as if to say "I can fool 'em". Of course, they can't. You can't run busses fast enough back and forth to jail with all the drunks you pickup at a checkpoint. You can put up all the giant, flashing signs you want. They'll still drive right in.

The false courage that ETOH imparts in humans, particularly those with both X and Y chromosomes, is incredible.


Sgt Lumpy

Who says those are "ultra-liberal" lawyers? Any lawyer will try any defense he thinks will work to get a client at least a reduced charge. It's legal pragmatism, not ideology, and it's what their clients pay them to do.

Sure, it's a bogus defense in my opinion--and by the way, I've never heard the "profiling" issue raised, and I used to run a court referral program to get drunks into treatment--but if it's an arrow in an attorney's quiver it's quite possible he'll try it.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

Maybe, maybe not. Have you ever done a breathalizer test? Everyone processes alcohol different. For some people its a beer for others it's a liter of vodka. Me and my friends did this about 10 years ago. Bought several high dollar breathalizers and tried to see what it took to get to .08 or further. For what I found is that if I drink casually I can do a 6 pack and still reach .07. Another few beers and I hit .08 -. 09.

" Why not just eliminate alcohol completely? This way drunk driving is never even a possibility".....Um mm NO! I like alcohol. It is part of my heritage and I LIKE THE TASTE! Go eliminate guns so you won't have any killings!!! ....unbelievable!

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Illegal alien DUIs are pure Teflon. Absolutely zero accountability.

Got a story about that but I try to keep it in a box as much as I can.

Why does it seem that drunk drivers cause irreparable damage to others, killing other drivers, insane property damage, & yet manage to survive relatively unscathed? Of course not every time, but more often than not? I've wondered about that for years.

__________________
Lounge Lizard Extraordinaire

Many beverages taste wonderful. Many do not impair brain function, slow reflexes or kill brain cells (yes, alcohol does). But if I tried to market something that tasted exactly like Maker's Mark, Johnny Walker Red, or the premium beer of your choice and it had no effect except taste, I'd go broke.

In all the history of deliberate fermentation of grains, grapes or potatoes, alcoholic beverages have never been drunk solely for their flavors.

I'm not a prohibition guy--we tried that, and look how well it worked. I'm not opposed to people drinking, though I can no longer do it myself. But I'm strongly in favor of tough enforcement of DUI laws. Sure, drink for relaxation and to celebrate your culture if that's what you like to do. Just don't drive while or after doing it.

Speaking of the Prohibition era, do we really think people would have gotten obscenely rich and left trails of corrupted officials and bullet-shattered bodies because guys were bootlegging tomato juice or Dr. Pepper?

As for guns, carrying one doesn't usually cloud judgment. In fact, it may enhance it, since it makes mature gun-toters more circumspect about staying out of situations where they might have to use their weapons. But I carry every day, and it doesn't slow my driving reflexes or impair my decision making about when it's safe for me to drive. And carrying a gun has never caused me to experience the dreaded "coyote ugly" phenomenon.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

First and foremost, I am an advocate of strong DUI/DWI enforcement, prosecution, and penalties. That said, I act responsibly. But those who insist no one should drive after consuming any alcohol are, in my opinion, simply sanctimonious.

Here is a synopsis of my activities yesterday whilst on a weekend trip. Checked out of my hotel at noon and stopped at Chipotle for a burrito. Drank one (1) Bud Light whilst eating the burrito. Got in my car and drove forty (40) miles to a very cool town to meet friends. Parked, checked into the hotel, and walked about a mile to the bar where I met up with them. Watched the Ravens' game and then headed to another beerroom and had a few more beers. Walked back to my hotel and freshened up before meeting pals for dinner at the hotel. Had a few more beers and hit the sack circa 2200.

The beer I had at Chipotle did not result in any harm whatsover. Frankly, none of the others did either.

And, anticipating the next question, I was carrying a 642 all the while. At one point I was standing next to a uniformed police officer and chatting with the officer whilst watching the games. I did not advise the officer I was CCW nor did the officer "make" me.

Be safe.

IMHO, the legal penalties are high enough for DUI and related offenses. Whether they are enforced enough is another discussion. I feel if you drastically increase the penalty for simple DUI, you increase the risk that drivers who have been drinking will try and outrun the police. As it is now, the hit and run crime is increasing as the penalty for causing an accident while drunk is very close to the penalty for leaving the scene. If you leave the scene and are later apprehended it is hard to prove you were drunk when you had the crash, so in effect you get a pass. I think the penalty for leaving the scene should be made more severe.

Here in NC it is illegal to carry concealed with any alcohol in your system whatsoever. We finally got restaurant carry, but if you have any detectable alcohol in your system your permit will not cover you.

If we wanted to reduce DUI in this country we need to make it a thing that people do not want to do. Increasing the budget for public service announcements is a possibility.

Here in NC you need to have insurance to get a registration plate. You cannot get insurance if you have no license. Many chronic drunk drivers have a family member that will register a car for them. I am inclined to raise the penalties for this and for driving while revoked.

Here in NC due to the Baptist influence we have a below average alcohol consumption. I lived 10 years in Carroll, Iowa where the alcohol consumption was twice the national average. Young people were killed every year and the newspaper didn't mention the wreck was alcohol related (didn't really need to). When my daughter got her license she would complain of bogus stops by town police. I told her that the Police wanted to "smell her breath" and that I was happy with that and would not issue complaints. I told her to "live with it".

I am concerned that texting while driving is getting to be a bigger problem than driving drunk.

__________________
Luke 22:36

The answer is simple; relaxation. When intoxicated you are very relaxed. So, in a crash, the drunk just goes with the flow so to speak. By not tensing up they rebound better. Thus they survive the accident better.

You misunderstand my meaning. I don't want prohibition or any other attempt to make alcohol illegal. It's a choice. I choose not to drink alcohol. I'm only suggesting that others can make that same choice, not that they have to.

Way back in the mid 80's I was stationed in Holland. I had never liked beer until I got over there. Much better flavor. When I returned to the US, I realized that all US beers were watery garbage. I went on a quest to find a decent beer. I found one, but it cost more than $8/6 pack. I came to the realization that alcohol was expensive and affected me in ways I didn't like so, what was the point? I like other drinks so, I drink them now.

Please understand, if you want to drink alcohol, that's fine with me. Do whatever you want as long as it doesn't interfere with other people's freedoms.

All I was saying before is that I don't understand the prevailing thought in this country that you have to drink alcohol.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.