Are the DUI laws a joke? (1 Viewer)

[Jackstraw]

I think they need an expert level license. If you can pound a six pack and maneuver a police designed obstacle course, your limit goes up to .15 or so.

But seriously. Most places in America have abysmal public transportation and are not walkable communities. Probably 90% of vehicles leaving any bar on a weekend night are DUI. The system sets people up to fail.

I wish it was like europe and there was a tavern on every corner. Some of you big city FBG's probably have it like that.

I've driven home over the limit thousands of times in my youth. That said nowadays I severly limit my intake when out unless the wife is going to drive. But it would sure be nice to have some drinks and be able to walk a block or two home but in the midwest that is pretty difficult.

yeah, we have a bar on every corner...

and we still have the highest rate of drunk driving in the country.

Please try again to make an excuse for it... Because that one absolutely does not work.

Well if I've given Larry an opportunity to be sanctimonious then the day isn't a total loss.

 

[kface]

I consider DUI to be a pretty serious offense because it continues to kill plenty of innocent people. I have noticed over the years, and made this comment more than a couple of times, that its the crime of the 'normal joe' and people seem to get off way easier than other crimes. It just doesn't seem to be treated seriously by the courts in most cases.

 

[KCitons]

I consider DUI to be a pretty serious offense because it continues to kill plenty of innocent people. I have noticed over the years, and made this comment more than a couple of times, that its the crime of the 'normal joe' and people seem to get off way easier than other crimes. It just doesn't seem to be treated seriously by the courts in most cases.

Agree. I guess the best we can hope for is that things will change as much over he next 50 years, as much as they did over the last 50.

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

I consider DUI to be a pretty serious offense because it continues to kill plenty of innocent people. I have noticed over the years, and made this comment more than a couple of times, that its the crime of the 'normal joe' and people seem to get off way easier than other crimes. It just doesn't seem to be treated seriously by the courts in most cases.

 Here where I'm from (Ft. Worth, TX), a standard 1st offense DUI is a big deal. I'm talking about the guy with no record who runs a stop sign and gets nabbed with a .10 BAC. I know a few folks that have gotten them, and there is a lot that goes along with it.1. You lose your license for 6 months; you can apply for a work permit, but that usually takes weeks or longer to process.2. Court and average lawyer fees run about 10K total.3. There is often significant community service.4. Your insurance company is notified and your rates go up.5. There is a lot of your time eaten up on court hearings, probation meetings...6. There is a no plead down statute on DUIs and it stays on your record (background checks for jobs...)In most cases, a 2nd offense usually won't land you in jail either; you'll face the same consequences as above, but everything will last longer and cost more. A third offense will get you some jail time (months, not years), and anything 4+ is in the years range for jail.All that is off the table though if you wreck, injure someone or are recklessly above the limit (.20+ BAC or something).You can't jail everyone that gets pulled over above a .08. Prisons need space for true criminals. The non-jail penalties for even a 1st offense here are harsh and the folks I know that have experienced it have described the process as miserable and life-changing.It sounds like the OP's FIL got really lucky however this last DUI was handled that he didn't end up in jail. I couldn't imagine that happening here.

 

[kface]

I consider DUI to be a pretty serious offense because it continues to kill plenty of innocent people. I have noticed over the years, and made this comment more than a couple of times, that its the crime of the 'normal joe' and people seem to get off way easier than other crimes. It just doesn't seem to be treated seriously by the courts in most cases.

 Here where I'm from (Ft. Worth, TX), a standard 1st offense DUI is a big deal. I'm talking about the guy with no record who runs a stop sign and gets nabbed with a .10 BAC. I know a few folks that have gotten them, and there is a lot that goes along with it.1. You lose your license for 6 months; you can apply for a work permit, but that usually takes weeks or longer to process.2. Court and average lawyer fees run about 10K total.3. There is often significant community service.4. Your insurance company is notified and your rates go up.5. There is a lot of your time eaten up on court hearings, probation meetings...6. There is a no plead down statute on DUIs and it stays on your record (background checks for jobs...)In most cases, a 2nd offense usually won't land you in jail either; you'll face the same consequences as above, but everything will last longer and cost more. A third offense will get you some jail time (months, not years), and anything 4+ is in the years range for jail.All that is off the table though if you wreck, injure someone or are recklessly above the limit (.20+ BAC or something).You can't jail everyone that gets pulled over above a .08. Prisons need space for true criminals. The non-jail penalties for even a 1st offense here are harsh and the folks I know that have experienced it have described the process as miserable and life-changing.It sounds like the OP's FIL got really lucky however this last DUI was handled that he didn't end up in jail. I couldn't imagine that happening here.

I suppose this is what I mean though...second offense should absolutely land you in prison. Or if you blow over a certain level then right to prison as well.

 

[The Duff Man]

Suppose they ran a public service campaign for a year.

"Zero tolerance. If you are caught over the limit, one year in prison. It escalates a lot on multiple infractions."

When the year is up, double RIDE programs and enforce it.

Only the truly stupid would do it, I have to believe most of the "everyone does it" crowd would stop and public perception would change immediately. I know people today that have been pulled over drunk by RIDE and the officer makes them call a cab and leave their car...but no penalty.

Great for them...but that kinda defeats the point. It is hard for the "system" to handle this properly when many judges, prosecutors, law makers and police share the common "i have done it too" attitude. Particularly for elder people in these roles, who grew up when it was more socially acceptable.

It really....REALLY sucks, but if I am out somewhere with no ride, I dont drink a drop. My job and my daughters depend on it.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

In my younger days, I drove drunk. I know most people have at one time or another. I also know this is less about the driving and more about what is causing him to drink. Maybe it's the fact that my three kids are starting to drive now, that I don't want people like this to get a 2nd or 3rd chance to kill someone.

turn yourself in to the police and request death penalty or gtfo

 

[FattyVM]

I consider DUI to be a pretty serious offense because it continues to kill plenty of innocent people. I have noticed over the years, and made this comment more than a couple of times, that its the crime of the 'normal joe' and people seem to get off way easier than other crimes. It just doesn't seem to be treated seriously by the courts in most cases.

 Here where I'm from (Ft. Worth, TX), a standard 1st offense DUI is a big deal. I'm talking about the guy with no record who runs a stop sign and gets nabbed with a .10 BAC. I know a few folks that have gotten them, and there is a lot that goes along with it.1. You lose your license for 6 months; you can apply for a work permit, but that usually takes weeks or longer to process.2. Court and average lawyer fees run about 10K total.3. There is often significant community service.4. Your insurance company is notified and your rates go up.5. There is a lot of your time eaten up on court hearings, probation meetings...6. There is a no plead down statute on DUIs and it stays on your record (background checks for jobs...)In most cases, a 2nd offense usually won't land you in jail either; you'll face the same consequences as above, but everything will last longer and cost more. A third offense will get you some jail time (months, not years), and anything 4+ is in the years range for jail.All that is off the table though if you wreck, injure someone or are recklessly above the limit (.20+ BAC or something).You can't jail everyone that gets pulled over above a .08. Prisons need space for true criminals. The non-jail penalties for even a 1st offense here are harsh and the folks I know that have experienced it have described the process as miserable and life-changing.It sounds like the OP's FIL got really lucky however this last DUI was handled that he didn't end up in jail. I couldn't imagine that happening here.

This is what I'm talking about here. These aren't your daddy's dui cases of the past. There is no "plead" down anymore, they took that off the table for all offenses, even in the mildest cases you are looking at a misdemeanor offense with these as MINIMUM penalties with some of the others in my previous post tacked on, the second is a felony offense with all of the weight that carries.

 

[FattyVM]

However, I do think NY just changed the statute that 1'st offense is full licence revocation (you need to go through the whole process after all of the above is handled, then get your permit and license exam all over again; 3rd + offense is a permanent revocation)

 

[Guest]

2. Court and average lawyer fees run about 10K total.

They are running billboards here now, "You just blew $10,000."

No big deal to the aver FBG, but that's a lot of money to a lot of people.

 

[KCitons]

In my younger days, I drove drunk. I know most people have at one time or another. I also know this is less about the driving and more about what is causing him to drink. Maybe it's the fact that my three kids are starting to drive now, that I don't want people like this to get a 2nd or 3rd chance to kill someone.

turn yourself in to the police and request death penalty or gtfo

Point was, I made a mistake and I learned from it. I now don't drink if I am going to drive. It just isn't worth it. On the other hand, people like my father in law hasn't matured enough in 70 years to understand what he is doing is a danger to society. He has also had a wake up call 3 times and still didn't learn from it. At what point does society start to make the decisions for him?

A lot of people his age also smoked when they were younger, they since have learned the dangers and quit.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

"Zero tolerance. If you are caught over the limit,

That's how it should be. No excuses.

 

[Christo]

"Zero tolerance. If you are caught over the limit,

That's how it should be. No excuses.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Just stay out of the ####### car Christo, pretty simple. Stop being so selfish.

Get a cab. Call a friend. Set up driving programs as a statute for bars and establishments that serve alcohol. Whatever.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I'm amazed that there are still people around who think that our first-offense DUI penalties are too light. If anything, they seem stupidly draconian when you think about what it takes to blow over 0.8. Yes, in the case of the OP's FIL, the government is not doing it's job. But some of the folks in this thread have got to be fishing.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

In my younger days, I drove drunk. I know most people have at one time or another. I also know this is less about the driving and more about what is causing him to drink. Maybe it's the fact that my three kids are starting to drive now, that I don't want people like this to get a 2nd or 3rd chance to kill someone.

turn yourself in to the police and request death penalty or gtfo

Point was, I made a mistake and I learned from it. I now don't drink if I am going to drive. It just isn't worth it. On the other hand, people like my father in law hasn't matured enough in 70 years to understand what he is doing is a danger to society. He has also had a wake up call 3 times and still didn't learn from it. At what point does society start to make the decisions for him?

A lot of people his age also smoked when they were younger, they since have learned the dangers and quit.

what should the penalty be for a first offense?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I'm amazed that there are still people around who think that our first-offense DUI penalties are too light. If anything, they seem stupidly draconian when you think about what it takes to blow over 0.8. Yes, in the case of the OP's FIL, the government is not doing it's job. But some of the folks in this thread have got to be fishing.

The Freakonomics blog just had an article suggesting that for the externalities of drunk driving to be fully internalized, the penalty should be around $10,500. Currently in California, it's around $2,000 in fines plus 10 days of community service (plus retribution for actual damages caused, which is often covered by insurance).

The author doesn't show his work, so I don't know how the $10,500 was arrived at. But if he's in the right ballpark, it seems that current penalites are too lenient.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I'm amazed that there are still people around who think that our first-offense DUI penalties are too light. If anything, they seem stupidly draconian when you think about what it takes to blow over 0.8. Yes, in the case of the OP's FIL, the government is not doing it's job. But some of the folks in this thread have got to be fishing.

The Freakonomics blog just had an article suggesting that for the externalities of drunk driving to be fully internalized, the penalty should be around $10,500. Currently in California, it's around $2,000 in fines plus 10 days of community service (plus retribution for actual damages caused, which is often covered by insurance).

The author doesn't show his work, so I don't know how the $10,500 was arrived at. But if he's in the right ballpark, it seems that current penalites are too lenient.

First time offenders for pot (not even while driving, which is the root problem -> performing something highly dangerous to other while impaired) can get that amount plus a six months to a year in jail in some states.

 

[Christo]

Just stay out of the ####### car Christo, pretty simple. Stop being so selfish.

Get a cab. Call a friend. Set up driving programs as a statute for bars and establishments that serve alcohol. Whatever.

Sorry, but I'm not willing to tell someone who blows a .079 he can go merrily on his way but tell someone who blows a .081 for the first time he has to sit in jail for a year. Zero tolerance policies suck. Anyone who's read anything about them knows this to be true.

 

[KCitons]

In my younger days, I drove drunk. I know most people have at one time or another. I also know this is less about the driving and more about what is causing him to drink. Maybe it's the fact that my three kids are starting to drive now, that I don't want people like this to get a 2nd or 3rd chance to kill someone.

turn yourself in to the police and request death penalty or gtfo

Point was, I made a mistake and I learned from it. I now don't drink if I am going to drive. It just isn't worth it. On the other hand, people like my father in law hasn't matured enough in 70 years to understand what he is doing is a danger to society. He has also had a wake up call 3 times and still didn't learn from it. At what point does society start to make the decisions for him?

A lot of people his age also smoked when they were younger, they since have learned the dangers and quit.

what should the penalty be for a first offense?

If you read the original post, and the post of mine you highlighted, you will see that I am mostly concerned about the 2nd and 3rd offense drivers. But here are my thoughts

When a driver gets caught on his first offense, one of two things are happening. Either they got busted for having a couple of beers with dinner and didn't realize they were over the legal limit, or they have an alcohol abuse problem and need serious help.

If you are the former, it should be a wake up call, to never drink if you have to drive home. I would say a minimum of 5 year loss of license. If you choose not to police yourself and get caught again, then you don't need to drive ever again.

If you are the latter, and you have an BA level that is double the limit, you obviously have a problem. This isn't a case of two beers with dinner, you probably have an alcohol abuse problem and need to lose your license forever on your first offense. You should be forced to attend meetings and be required to weekly or bi weekly checks for alcohol in order to keep yourself out of jail. I would suggest 8AM Saturday and Sunday mornings.

Keep in mind, many of these offenders could be kept under house arrest, instead of locked up in a taxpayer funded prison.

It's strange that so many states have seatbelt laws in order to force us to protect ourselves. But, we allow someone that has proven to be a danger to others drive.

 

[johnnycakes]

Luckily for me, I did most of my drunk driving while it was still considered a "nuisance" type of bust and the cop would just as soon give you a ride home as a ride to the station. In MA, now, the DUI law is definitely NOT a joke. A DUI bust is not only very expensive, even for a first offense, but it can also be career-threatening if any employer finds out about it. It's almost as bad as being a smoker in MA.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

When a driver gets caught on his first offense, one of two things are happening. Either they got busted for having a couple of beers with dinner and didn't realize they were over the legal limit, or they have an alcohol abuse problem and need serious help. If you are the former, it should be a wake up call, to never drink if you have to drive home. I would say a minimum of 5 year loss of license.

That is insane. You're seriously advocating ruining someone's life over what you concede is a couple of beers over dinner.

 

[KCitons]

When a driver gets caught on his first offense, one of two things are happening. Either they got busted for having a couple of beers with dinner and didn't realize they were over the legal limit, or they have an alcohol abuse problem and need serious help. If you are the former, it should be a wake up call, to never drink if you have to drive home. I would say a minimum of 5 year loss of license.

That is insane. You're seriously advocating ruining someone's life over what you concede is a couple of beers over dinner.

Yes.

And I'm not insane, my Mom had me tested

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

In my younger days, I drove drunk. I know most people have at one time or another. I also know this is less about the driving and more about what is causing him to drink. Maybe it's the fact that my three kids are starting to drive now, that I don't want people like this to get a 2nd or 3rd chance to kill someone.

turn yourself in to the police and request death penalty or gtfo

Point was, I made a mistake and I learned from it. I now don't drink if I am going to drive. It just isn't worth it. On the other hand, people like my father in law hasn't matured enough in 70 years to understand what he is doing is a danger to society. He has also had a wake up call 3 times and still didn't learn from it. At what point does society start to make the decisions for him?

A lot of people his age also smoked when they were younger, they since have learned the dangers and quit.

what should the penalty be for a first offense?

If you read the original post, and the post of mine you highlighted, you will see that I am mostly concerned about the 2nd and 3rd offense drivers. But here are my thoughts

When a driver gets caught on his first offense, one of two things are happening. Either they got busted for having a couple of beers with dinner and didn't realize they were over the legal limit, or they have an alcohol abuse problem and need serious help.

If you are the former, it should be a wake up call, to never drink if you have to drive home. I would say a minimum of 5 year loss of license. If you choose not to police yourself and get caught again, then you don't need to drive ever again.

If you are the latter, and you have an BA level that is double the limit, you obviously have a problem. This isn't a case of two beers with dinner, you probably have an alcohol abuse problem and need to lose your license forever on your first offense. You should be forced to attend meetings and be required to weekly or bi weekly checks for alcohol in order to keep yourself out of jail. I would suggest 8AM Saturday and Sunday mornings.

Keep in mind, many of these offenders could be kept under house arrest, instead of locked up in a taxpayer funded prison.

It's strange that so many states have seatbelt laws in order to force us to protect ourselves. But, we allow someone that has proven to be a danger to others drive.

no offense, but you sound like an idiot.

btw, when you were driving drunk, were you the former or the latter, and how many times did you drive drunk?

 

[KCitons]

In my younger days, I drove drunk. I know most people have at one time or another. I also know this is less about the driving and more about what is causing him to drink. Maybe it's the fact that my three kids are starting to drive now, that I don't want people like this to get a 2nd or 3rd chance to kill someone.

turn yourself in to the police and request death penalty or gtfo

Point was, I made a mistake and I learned from it. I now don't drink if I am going to drive. It just isn't worth it. On the other hand, people like my father in law hasn't matured enough in 70 years to understand what he is doing is a danger to society. He has also had a wake up call 3 times and still didn't learn from it. At what point does society start to make the decisions for him?

A lot of people his age also smoked when they were younger, they since have learned the dangers and quit.

what should the penalty be for a first offense?

If you read the original post, and the post of mine you highlighted, you will see that I am mostly concerned about the 2nd and 3rd offense drivers. But here are my thoughts

When a driver gets caught on his first offense, one of two things are happening. Either they got busted for having a couple of beers with dinner and didn't realize they were over the legal limit, or they have an alcohol abuse problem and need serious help.

If you are the former, it should be a wake up call, to never drink if you have to drive home. I would say a minimum of 5 year loss of license. If you choose not to police yourself and get caught again, then you don't need to drive ever again.

If you are the latter, and you have an BA level that is double the limit, you obviously have a problem. This isn't a case of two beers with dinner, you probably have an alcohol abuse problem and need to lose your license forever on your first offense. You should be forced to attend meetings and be required to weekly or bi weekly checks for alcohol in order to keep yourself out of jail. I would suggest 8AM Saturday and Sunday mornings.

Keep in mind, many of these offenders could be kept under house arrest, instead of locked up in a taxpayer funded prison.

It's strange that so many states have seatbelt laws in order to force us to protect ourselves. But, we allow someone that has proven to be a danger to others drive.

no offense, but you sound like an idiot.

btw, when you were driving drunk, were you the former or the latter, and how many times did you drive drunk?

Thanks.

To be honest, I fell into the category of the latter. When I went out to drink, I drank more than enough to put myself over the limit and then some. I wouldn't have considered myself an alcoholic, because I didn't drink every day. Sometimes, I would go weeks without ever drinking. But, when I did go out, I had enough to know that I was over the limit. But, I chose to get behind the wheel, no one forced me.

Looking back, I'm glad nothing ever happened. I just realized that the consequences were too great to continue rolling the dice. Not just for my own financial and physical well being, but for other drivers as well. I didn't go to AA, or have to have someone point out the obvious.

If I want to drink a beer (or 10). Do it at home. (or my wife and I take turns driving) I don't expect anyone to make the same choice based on my comments. It's just the path I choose to take.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

you are like one of these ####### smokers who want a medal when they quit smoking, then spend the rest of their lif #####ing about how much secondhand smoke stinks.

 

[KCitons]

you are like one of these ####### smokers who want a medal when they quit smoking, then spend the rest of their lif #####ing about how much secondhand smoke stinks.

No, not really. You are the one that brought this to a personal level. Again, read the original post. I don't think anyone disagrees that my father in law is a threat to hurt someone.

I can't change what you do. So why should I try?

But, since you asked me a question, let me ask you. Do you drink and drive? What do you think the penalty should be after the first offense? Second? Third? What if your BA is double the limit and it's obvious you didn't just have a beer with dinner?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Texas State laws of Boating under influence...

o First conviction carries a fine up to $2,000 and/or jail time up to 180 dayso Second conviction carries a fine up to $4,000 and/or jail time up to one yearo Third conviction carries a fine up to $10,000 and/or jail time of 2-10 years.

 

[Ilov80s]

What's worse a person with 3 DUIs at 0.08 or someone with 1 DUI at 0.16

 

[Guest]

What's worse a person with 3 DUIs at 0.08 or someone with 1 DUI at 0.16

First. After 1 you are just a #######.

 

[KCitons]

What's worse a person with 3 DUIs at 0.08 or someone with 1 DUI at 0.16

They are two different beasts.

The 3 DUI's at a lower level shows a person that can't learn from his/her mistakes. With it being so close to the limit, one less beer or one less shot may have kept them legal. But they still shouldn't be drinking and driving.

The DUI with a double BA, shows the person didn't hover near the grey line. They knowingly drank an amount that took them past the point of doubt. They were also much more impaired and likely to cause an accident. Because of this, I think it is worse.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

AZ has very serious consequences for 1st timers. In which state is the OP's FIL?

 

[Ilov80s]

What's worse a person with 3 DUIs at 0.08 or someone with 1 DUI at 0.16

First. After 1 you are just a #######.

Even though the second example was much more likely to cause a serious accident?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

What's worse a person with 3 DUIs at 0.08 or someone with 1 DUI at 0.16

First. After 1 you are just a #######.

Even though the second example was much more likely to cause a serious accident?

Yep, no excuses for the multiple offender, he should be off the road or off the sauce.

If you actually cause someone else damage, thats a whole new world of hurt regardless of the above scenarios.

 

[KCitons]

AZ has very serious consequences for 1st timers. In which state is the OP's FIL?

Nebraska. On the surface it appears we have tough laws. But, I don't know how often they follow through. If my father in law ever drives again, I will be ticked off.

As recently as last yesterday, he fell down drunk and cut his head. In front of my three kids. Thankfully, he doesn't have a license, otherwise who knows.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

AZ has very serious consequences for 1st timers. In which state is the OP's FIL?

Nebraska. On the surface it appears we have tough laws. But, I don't know how often they follow through. If my father in law ever drives again, I will be ticked off.

As recently as last yesterday, he fell down drunk and cut his head. In front of my three kids. Thankfully, he doesn't have a license, otherwise who knows.

They enforce them pretty seriously in AZ; it seems like they have the system down pat, and the system includes everyone from front end officers to back end court officials. And since everyone along the line is in on it, from the cops to the lawyers to the judges to the vehicle interlock manufacturers, there really isn't any leniency built in. As someone mentioned upthread, it seems like the days of our father's DUI where the cops give you a ride home is over with. That's why I play no games here, zero drinks 99.99% of the time. If I have one glass of wine with dinner, I'll wait 90 minutes or let my wife drive. I never drink more drinks than that out of the house here just in case.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

you are like one of these ####### smokers who want a medal when they quit smoking, then spend the rest of their lif #####ing about how much secondhand smoke stinks.

No, not really. You are the one that brought this to a personal level. Again, read the original post. I don't think anyone disagrees that my father in law is a threat to hurt someone.

I can't change what you do. So why should I try?

But, since you asked me a question, let me ask you. Do you drink and drive? What do you think the penalty should be after the first offense? Second? Third? What if your BA is double the limit and it's obvious you didn't just have a beer with dinner?

no

 

[Homer J Simpson]

I think we should have personalized legal limits. Go through a test where you get progressively drunker while going through obstacle courses.

I could land a fighter jet on an aircraft carrier at .13.

At .08 I could perform brain surgery...while landing the f###ing jet.

 

[KCitons]

you are like one of these ####### smokers who want a medal when they quit smoking, then spend the rest of their lif #####ing about how much secondhand smoke stinks.

No, not really. You are the one that brought this to a personal level. Again, read the original post. I don't think anyone disagrees that my father in law is a threat to hurt someone.

I can't change what you do. So why should I try?

But, since you asked me a question, let me ask you. Do you drink and drive? What do you think the penalty should be after the first offense? Second? Third? What if your BA is double the limit and it's obvious you didn't just have a beer with dinner?

no

Never have?

Another example of a someone that expects answers to their own questions, but fails to return the same courtesy when asked.

 

[phrozen]

First offense people should be sent to GitMo IMO

 

[Slapdash]

I think we should have personalized legal limits. Go through a test where you get progressively drunker while going through obstacle courses.

I could land a fighter jet on an aircraft carrier at .13.

At .08 I could perform brain surgery...while landing the f###ing jet.

Posts like this make me favor even strickter penalties.

 

[KCitons]

Agreed. This is part of the problem with people drinking and driving. A lot of people may not realize they are over the legal limit after a couple of beers and then there are others that think they are just fine driving after downing a 5th of Jack.

I've heard a few people make the statement "I drive better when I'm drunk" or "being drunk forces me to concentrate more on my driving"

 

[kface]

When a driver gets caught on his first offense, one of two things are happening. Either they got busted for having a couple of beers with dinner and didn't realize they were over the legal limit, or they have an alcohol abuse problem and need serious help. If you are the former, it should be a wake up call, to never drink if you have to drive home. I would say a minimum of 5 year loss of license.

That is insane. You're seriously advocating ruining someone's life over what you concede is a couple of beers over dinner.

This sums it up exactly...so many people feel like its a law that is meant to be broken because the average joe deserves it. Its a weird relationship considering its a law and drinking and driving kills 1000s of people per year. As someone mentioned before getting caught with pot on your feet can lead to much harsher sentences.

 

[Jackstraw]

I think its a generational thing. When I grew up every Saturday night me, my mom and my grandpa would head to church. He would make a scotch and have it while on the way to church. It rested on the dash in clear view. Had that bad boy timed out to where he was draining it as we pulled into church parking lot. Yes by the way we are catholic.

But it was harmless in my eyes at the time. I've had to progress from that attitude to adjust to many people's attittudes now to where its the equivalent of waving a loaded gun around. I think once the 40 somethings and older die out you will see a way different attitude.

Of course my attitude never had to deal with the loss of a loved one or other tragedy. And I was clearly out of control behind the wheel at times in my teens and early twenties.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

you are like one of these ####### smokers who want a medal when they quit smoking, then spend the rest of their lif #####ing about how much secondhand smoke stinks.

No, not really. You are the one that brought this to a personal level. Again, read the original post. I don't think anyone disagrees that my father in law is a threat to hurt someone.

I can't change what you do. So why should I try?

But, since you asked me a question, let me ask you. Do you drink and drive? What do you think the penalty should be after the first offense? Second? Third? What if your BA is double the limit and it's obvious you didn't just have a beer with dinner?

no

Never have?

Another example of a someone that expects answers to their own questions, but fails to return the same courtesy when asked.

before you get all whiny about it, I thought that was pretty courteous for 2 am.

I don't think there was ever a time in my life I've driven substantially over .08, although there have been a handful of times I've possibly been around the limit -- drove after a couple beers, drank a bottle of wine and drove 2-3 hours later, etc.

there was one time I was definitely drunk and got behind the wheel to drive 1 mile through the city so one of my drunk friends didn't have to drive their car, but they ended up deciding to drive.

when I got my license nobody said #### about drinking and driving, outside the usual drivers ed stuff they put you through--- there wasn't all this bandwagon outrage like you get today with the seatbelts and the drinking and driving.

it just seemed pretty obvious to me as a teenager that drinking while driving was kind of stupid, and not worth the risks, so I really have had no problems separating the 2 things throughout my life.

as for your other questions, what I think the penalties should be is fairly of pointless.

I'm not one of those kind of people that thinks the world should revolve around them.

I have absolutely no idea what the penalties are here in illinois, but I'd imagine they're quite a bit harsher than the 50 buck seatbelt ticket I got a couple years ago.

 

[KCitons]

1st Illinois DUI Offense First Drunk Driving Conviction

• Jail – Up to 1 Year Possible
• Jail – Add Up to 6 Months - (If Child under 16 in Vehicle)
• Fine – Up to $2,500
• Fine – Add $500 Minimum (BAC above .16)
• Fine – Add $1,000 Minimum - (If Child under 16 in Vehicle)
• License Suspension – Minimum 1 Year
• Breath Alcohol Ignition Interlock Device (BAIID) Possible
• Vehicle Registration Suspension
• Community Service – 100 Hours Minimum - (BAC above .16)
• Community Service – 25 Days - (If Child under 16 in Vehicle)

More Information: First Offense DUI in Illinois

2nd Illinois DUI Offense Second Drunk Driving Conviction

• Jail – Up to 1 Year Possible, 5 Days Mandatory or 240 Hours of Community Service
• Jail – Add 2 Days - (BAC above .16)
• Jail – Up to 1-3 Years – Child under 16 in Vehicle (Felony Aggravated DUI)
• Fine – Up to $2,500
• Fine – Add $1,250 Minimum (BAC above .16)
• Fine – Add Up to $25,000 - Child under 16 in Vehicle (Felony Aggravated DUI)
• License Suspension – Minimum 5 Years (If Within 20 Years of Previous)
• Vehicle Registration Suspension
• Community Service: Minimum 25 Days if Child under 16 in Vehicle

3rd Illinois DUI Offense Third Drunk Driving Conviction

• Jail – From 3-7 Years Possible (Class 2 Felony)
• Jail – Add 90 Days Mandatory - (BAC above .16)
• Jail – Up to 1-3 Years – Child under 16 in Vehicle (Felony Aggravated DUI)
• Fine – Up to $2,500
• Fine – Add $2,500 Minimum (BAC above .16)
• Fine – Mandatory $25,000 - Child under 16 in Vehicle (Felony Aggravated DUI)
• License Suspension – Minimum 10 Years
• Community Service – Minimum 25 Days if Child under 16 in Vehicle
• Vehicle Registration Suspension

Of course, take this with a grain of salt, but a quick search turned up this.

Looks like the penalty for getting caught in the Land of Lincoln the second time will cost you a mandatory 5 days in jail. If you are double the legal limit........ 2 more DAYS! If you have a decent job, you certainly could schedule a vacation around that penalty.

BTW, you obviously were more mature than most during your younger years (including myself)

 

[Dexter]

I don't think DD laws are joke I think they are obseen with the penalties especially for a first time conviction.. Michigan penalties below. This doesn't even include court and lawyer cost, Licence renewal cost, lost income from work,, time lost doing CS, etc... at the end of the day you're looking at well over 10k. And that's hoping you don't lose your job. Hard core criminals get off easier than someone who blew .08

Costs and Consequences of a Drunk Driving Conviction

If BAC is below .17 and this is a first offense:

• Up to $500 fine
• Up to 93 days in jail
• Up to 360 hours of community service
• Up to 180 days license suspension
• 6 points on a driver's license
  

If BAC is .17 or higher and this is a first offense:

• Up to $700 fine
• Up to 180 days in jail
• Up to 360 hours of community service
• Up to one year license suspension
• 6 points on a driver's license
• Mandatory completion of an alcohol treatment program
• Ignition interlock use and compliance after 45 days license suspension is required to receive a restricted driver's license. Convicted drunk drivers have limited driving privileges, are prohibited from operating a vehicle without an approved and properly installed ignition interlock device, and are responsible for all installation and upkeep costs for the device.
  

 

[DA RAIDERS]

the laws are a joke, because they will never accomplish what you want them to.

people that want to drink and drive are going to do so, no matter what. people don't look at driving as a privilege, they view it as a right. and there is no way to stop someone from driving drunk if they want to. there are deterrents, but that's all they are.

 

[Slapdash]

Agreed. This is part of the problem with people drinking and driving. A lot of people may not realize they are over the legal limit after a couple of beers and then there are others that think they are just fine driving after downing a 5th of Jack.

I've heard a few people make the statement "I drive better when I'm drunk" or "being drunk forces me to concentrate more on my driving"

I think the root problem is that alcohol is the only drug that it is socially acceptable to abuse. All of these rationalizations just stem from that.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

BTW, you obviously were more mature than most during your younger years (including myself)

it's really less about maturity than it is about common sense.

also, I've been fortunate to not fall prey to alcoholism.