My problem with increased punishment it ignores the problem. Most offenders who have an ability to control their drinking learn their lesson after the first offense and in rare cases two convictions.

 

But for the most part people with multiple DUI offenses are addicts , alcoholics , abusers of the substance. Just like in the war on drugs I find increasing penalties on people with an addiction or a disease to be ineffective and also immoral. Jailing people for long periods of time, who could be productive members of society if not for a disease seems cruel.

 

The better question should be why has rehabilitation failed. How can we improve it. Research it and root out the corruption.

 

Jail isn't the answer , education and helping out people who need our help is.

For the record I'm not against the breath analyzers in cars. It's why I brought it up. Atleast then the government would be honest in their intentions.

 

:thumb:

My problem with increased punishment it ignores the problem. Most offenders who have an ability to control their drinking learn their lesson after the first offense and in rare cases two convictions.

 

But for the most part people with multiple DUI offenses are addicts , alcoholics , abusers of the substance. Just like in the war on drugs I find increasing penalties on people with an addiction or a disease to be ineffective and also immoral. Jailing people for long periods of time, who could be productive members of society if not for a disease seems cruel.

 

The better question should be why has rehabilitation failed. How can we improve it. Research it and root out the corruption.

 

Jail isn't the answer , education and helping out people who need our help is.

 

I agree that jail isn't the answer (in most cases) but education hasn't worked worth a crap on illegal drugs, I don't see it working any better on legal alcohol.

 

About 1/3 of all wrecks, crashes, fatalities and injuries come from repeat offenders.

 

There are over 24,000 DUI arrest each year in Kentucky

 

I just see everyone having such a nonchalant attitude about DUI these days and was wondering what if anything could be done and started by questioning if the laws were strong enough?

I agree that jail isn't the answer (in most cases) but education hasn't worked worth a crap on illegal drugs, I don't see it working any better on legal alcohol.

 

About 1/3 of all wrecks, crashes, fatalities and injuries come from repeat offenders.

 

There are over 24,000 DUI arrest each year in Kentucky

 

I just see everyone having such a nonchalant attitude about DUI these days and was wondering what if anything could be done and started by questioning if the laws were strong enough?

 

Non-chalant would be people of Grandpas Generation where everyone drank and drove , then if they were to bad off parked on the side of the road.

 

I think enforcement has now gone to extreme in the other direction. You can now get a DUI if you do the responsible thing and just sleep it off in the car in the parking lot .

 

Rehab hasn't been to successful as it's done right now with DUI's but that's because the system in place now is a joke. It's time we take that area more serious and quit thinking of new ways to punish people who have a disease.

I agree on the sleeping it off, if that's what's going on. But I wouldn't want it to get to the point that a drunk just parks anywhere and says they were "Sleeping it off" to get out of DUI.

 

I've not seen the "Lawyer Classes" on DUI you were talking about in an earlier thread...that would seem to be counter productive IMO.

Dui's are one of the only laws on the book where some people want to punish for what could happen instead of what did happen. I'm just not comfortable with that.

 

Wrong. It did happen, they drove drunk. With your reasoning I can stand out in the parking lot at Kroger and shoot at people with my 9mm, but as long as I dont shoot someone then whats the harm. Driving drunk is not taken nearly seriously enough in this country. Its quite simple really...if you have had an adult beverage to drink, dont drive. If you have to drive, dont drink. Problem solved.

Wrong. It did happen, they drove drunk. With your reasoning I can stand out in the parking lot at Kroger and shoot at people with my 9mm, but as long as I dont shoot someone then whats the harm. Driving drunk is not taken nearly seriously enough in this country. Its quite simple really...if you have had an adult beverage to drink, dont drive. If you have to drive, dont drink. Problem solved.

 

It's not even close to the same. Hyperbole at it's finest. Drunk driving is taken very seriously in this country it's why we have so many laws and punishments on the books already. I'm sorry if I don't feel more jail time or even crazier penalties is a solution.

 

Like I said people with multiple DUI'S have a disease and aren't getting behind the wheel with an intent to do harm we as society need to find better solutions. A person firing a gun randomly in a parking lot has an intent to do harm.

 

Again if the government wanted to stop DUI's they have a tool that would cripple the numbers and it's to require car companies to put breathalyzer into every new car.

 

Your last line sounds great , have one drink and don't drive. But being a realist the government knows that would do major damage to a certain industry.

What disease is that besides selfishness? Some may be alcoholics but many and I'd say most aren't alcoholics...they just don't think or care about others when it comes to getting their buzz on.

What disease is that besides selfishness? Some may be alcoholics but many and I'd say most aren't alcoholics...they just don't think or care about others when it comes to getting their buzz on.

 

I agree people who are caught the first or maybe even second time aren't necessarily alcoholics. But someone who continues and can't control it is by definition an alcoholic.

 

Once someone is that far gone they don't have control over their actions.

 

Society could do a lot more with forms of public transportation , breathalyzers in cars, reformed rehab . Why is it the solution is always punishment ? If the real goal is to reduce drunk driving those things I listed would be much better for society as a whole rather than higher costs in prosecution and jails.

 

I just can't by into the fact that a majority don't care about other . I don't believe they set out with the intent to harm others. Heck a large portion of them are just younger idiots who don't grasp the severity. I don't want to ruin young adults live with stricter punishments for mistakes made while maturing.

I agree people who are caught the first or maybe even second time aren't necessarily alcoholics. But someone who continues and can't control it is by definition an alcoholic.

 

Once someone is that far gone they don't have control over their actions.

 

Society could do a lot more with forms of public transportation , breathalyzers in cars, reformed rehab . Why is it the solution is always punishment ? If the real goal is to reduce drunk driving those things I listed would be much better for society as a whole rather than higher costs in prosecution and jails.

 

I just can't by into the fact that a majority don't care about other . I don't believe they set out with the intent to harm others. Heck a large portion of them are just younger idiots who don't grasp the severity. I don't want to ruin young adults live with stricter punishments for mistakes made while maturing.

 

You can rehab and teach people it is wrong until you are blue in the face and people will continue to do it. Look at cities with available public transportation, rehab facilities and every other advantage...you still have tons of DUI's. You can't always talk people out of bad behavior.

 

Breathalyzers on cars is a good idea, but expensive, because if passed we'd have to buy and install one on our cars. Then pay 5-10 times what they should cost because they would then be mandatory.

 

Rehab is a great idea, but I think most DUI's are from people that don't think they have a problem. I don't how much it would help, but it would be worth a try.

 

Problem is most people drinking that I've ever been associated with didn't drink because of a disease they drank themselves silly because they wanted to. They might do it only a few times a year, not every night like your run of the mill alcoholic. Alcohol didn't control their life, but that didn't stop them from drinking to excess from time to time.

 

If Rehab, Breathalyzers and public transit don't work...what then? At some point people need to be held accountable for their actions. Or should the disease of Alcoholism be a defense for DUI-Murder, just as being insane is?

 

I didn't say 170 lives was Ok. But there isn't some sort of rising epidemic. That calls for massive change.

 

If there isn't a rising epidemic I normally rule on the side of not giving the government more power to put citizens in jail longer.

 

The "alcohol counselers" comment is dealing with these law firms that give the "alcohol classes" to the offenders. The classes are a joke and the whole system revolved around it smells shady.

 

No I don't think .08 is drunk. I can already see from your stat you are putting .05 in there. So now I'm guessing you want to go lower.

 

The whole DUI enforcement is a joke. If we wanted to eliminate DUI's we could tomorrow. Make every car come with a breath analyzer and boom no driving drunk .

 

Every bar and restaurant on a Friday and Saturday parking lot is full and if you come back at 4am they are empty I'm sure most of those drivers didn't drink.

 

I know this is going to anger some but it's true. When it comes to laws follow the money. This so called problem could be eliminated tomorrow but we choose to keep punishing citizens harsher and harsher.

 

You don't think .08 is drunk based on what experience?

 

Alcohol effects everyone differently based on size, experience drinking, what you've ate, etc

I agree people who are caught the first or maybe even second time aren't necessarily alcoholics. But someone who continues and can't control it is by definition an alcoholic.

 

Once someone is that far gone they don't have control over their actions.

 

Society could do a lot more with forms of public transportation , breathalyzers in cars, reformed rehab . Why is it the solution is always punishment ? If the real goal is to reduce drunk driving those things I listed would be much better for society as a whole rather than higher costs in prosecution and jails.

 

I just can't by into the fact that a majority don't care about other . I don't believe they set out with the intent to harm others. Heck a large portion of them are just younger idiots who don't grasp the severity. I don't want to ruin young adults live with stricter punishments for mistakes made while maturing.

 

If that young person's decision to drive drunk results in an innocent death, do you think that the punishment should be harsher than if it doesn't?

If that young person's decision to drive drunk results in an innocent death, do you think that the punishment should be harsher than if it doesn't?

 

Yes and that's how it already works. It's called aggravated circumstances. It's goes to the comment from HB20 made about alcohol affecting people differently.

You don't think .08 is drunk based on what experience?

 

Alcohol effects everyone differently based on size, experience drinking, what you've ate, etc

 

I know it affects people in different ways. That's why I don't like the law of a hard .08 meaning DUI.

 

There are a lot of good cops out there and I'd like to give them more discretion on this. I know plenty of cops who wish they did have more discretion because they know not all .08 is the same.

 

Even with the hard number a decade or so a cop could handle it with more discretion. But with all the motoring they recieve now they don't want to walk that grey line.

 

Another problem I do have that needs to be updated are some of the soberity tests. The alphabet questions is meant to be failed.

 

I know it affects people in different ways. That's why I don't like the law of a hard .08 meaning DUI.

 

There are a lot of good cops out there and I'd like to give them more discretion on this. I know plenty of cops who wish they did have more discretion because they know not all .08 is the same.

 

Even with the hard number a decade or so a cop could handle it with more discretion. But with all the motoring they recieve now they don't want to walk that grey line.

 

Another problem I do have that needs to be updated are some of the soberity tests. The alphabet questions is meant to be failed.

 

I don't think the alphabet test is actually used.

 

Here are the standardized field sobriety tests used.

 

http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/alcohol/sfst/appendix_a.htm