What about a non-celeb doing time for DUI?

[Siouxzahn]

On another board, a member informed the board that he had been sentenced to 2 weeks in jail for driving 105 on an open highway at 3 in the morning, under the influence.

He's also confided that he's had 2 previous DUI's, but because his first DUI conviction was 4 years and 9 months ago, it's no longer on his record and so this 3rd violation is legally considered his 2nd at this time. He has also reported to us that on his very first DUI nearly 5 years ago he blew a .09, with .08 the legal limit.

So we were somewhat counting down the days, some with malice, some with ambivalence, some with empathy. So when the day arrived that he was to go in, possibly the next day, he posted that it turned out he didn't have to go to jail. No reason was supplied to the board.

No one knows him well on the board, just a slight acquaintance; we only know what he has told us of himself. He's pretty open about his vices if you will, that he drinks heavily and often, and he is admittedly a very coarse young guy. The board itself is pretty coarse as a rule, so it's not so unusual that he's a member, and it's a censorship free board.

So now here come all the responses. Some rejoice with him, or on their own as it turns out, as his post didn't really have any sound of rejoicing in it. Certainly no gloating or boasting. Just very matter of factly stated.

Some attack him for being a drunk driver and express that he deserved to go to jail for endangering the lives of others the way he does. Valid point, no question there.

Others question whether going to jail for 2 weeks would cure him of his alcoholism or cure him of driving drunk again.

Others say that anyone who isn't angry (that the court changed its mind about sending him to jail) is deserving of losing everyone and everything they love and should die horribly in an auto wreck with a drunk driver. You're also supposedly a person who doesn't believe people should ever receive punishment for crimes.

Personally I've always detested alcoholism and drunk driving, as well as those who drive drunk. And I absolutely believe that proper punishment should be endured for crimes committed. Yet somehow, when he said the court had changed its mind and he didn't have to go to jail, my knee-jerk reaction was to be glad for him. Maybe it was a form of coddling.

Odd, isn't it.

So how do you feel about this subject?

I'll tell you later why they decided not to send him to jail.

Edited May 14, 2007 by Siouxzahn

[mstar1]

3rd Time?

Its incredibly irresponsible

where I am from thats at least a year in jail and lose your license for at least 5 years and usually from 15 to forever(Habitual Offender Status) which may seem harsh but I think it is about right.

An automobile driven at 105 mph by someone under the influence is a weapon hoping to find a tragic frontpage story

First time here in Massachusetts is lose your license for 90 days and about a thousand dollars in fines, which should wake up anyone

2nd time is jail for two weeks, lose your license for 3 years and probably closer to $5000 in fines and fees

3rd time is very serious, this is no casual drinker making a mistake, but someone who is habitually risking the welfare of innocent people.

I know people like this and I like them, but for their own welfare as well as the welfare of others I still think they should do some serious time and possibly never be allowed to drive again. They've had plenty of warnings and only through luck(if they are so lucky) havent killed or maimed anyone.

Edited May 14, 2007 by mstar1

[dmiller]

First time here in Massachusetts is lose your license for 90 days and about a thousand dollars in fines,

which should wake up anyone

My first (and ONLY time 15 years ago) cost me about a grand,

but I was able to keep my driver's license because I drove for work then.

I WAS restricted to non-driving status when I was *off the clock*.

The judge made it very clear when I could and could not drive.

That *woke* me up, but obviously Nephilum hasn't learned his lesson.

While testing .09 with .08 as the limit is somewhat minor -- to me --

It's still the law. Cabs are cheaper than DWI's.

And to answer your question Siouxzahn -- No. Two weeks of jail time won't cure him.

But he should still serve (regardless of his medical condition).

I guess I don't understand how the jail would be responsible for his medical bills.

But you asked how I feel about this subject -- and there you have it.

:)

Edited May 14, 2007 by dmiller

[mstar1]

While testing .09 with .08 as the limit is somewhat minor -- to me --

It SEEMS minor, but these laws are put into effect for a purpose, Too many people think irrationally that their reaction and response time isnt effected, but even at an .08 the processes, whether they think so or not, are severely impaired.

It seems real minor, that is until a family with a bunch of kids gets killed

Edited May 14, 2007 by mstar1

[dmiller]

It SEEMS minor, but these laws are put into effect for a purpose, Too many people think irrationally that their reaction and response time isnt effected, but even at an .08 the processes, whether they thtink so or not, are severely impaired.

It seems real minor that is until a family with a bunch of kids gets killed

Exactly. As some of the ads up here say --

Buzzed driving, is Drunk driving.

Buzzed or drunk means you're impaired, and behind the wheel.

[mstar1]

around here its actually not called DUI "Driving Under the Influence"

but

DWI--Driving While Impaired

which covers al ot of things besides alcohol

......

y'know I advocate jail, not becuase Im heartless, but because for a lot of these habitual offender people it is the best thing for them. (never mind the community)

I know a handful of people that have had to do time for DWI, and although it is difficult and tough to rebuild afterward, it is usually the best thing for them, most often anyone who gets a 2nd or 3rd conviction is in the midst of a downward spiral and it is one way to halt that and turn it around.

Edited May 14, 2007 by mstar1

[Siouxzahn]

mstar1

I know people like this and I like them, but for their own welfare as well as the welfare of others I still think they should do some serious time and possibly never be allowed to drive again. They've had plenty of warnings and only through luck(if they are so lucky) havent killed or maimed anyone.

I agree 100%.

In too many places the jails are simply overfull, overburdened, and underfunded.

It shows that these types of social ills need to be addressed in other ways, before or even after it gets to the point of being sentenced to jail.

As in rehab, counseling, therapy, nutrition, community, etc.

LOVE, and money, properly directed, can be very powerful for good I think.

[dmiller]

While testing .09 with .08 as the limit is somewhat minor -- to me --

It's still the law. Cabs are cheaper than DWI's.

Not picking on you Mstar --

but the bolded in the original comment was what I was getting at.

:)

[Siouxzahn]

My first (and ONLY time 15 years ago) cost me about a grand,

but I was able to keep my driver's license because I drove for work then.

I WAS restricted to non-driving status when I was *off the clock*.

The judge made it very clear when I could and could not drive.

That *woke* me up, but obviously Nephilum hasn't learned his lesson.

While testing .09 with .08 as the limit is somewhat minor -- to me --

It's still the law. Cabs are cheaper than DWI's.

And to answer your question Siouxzahn -- No. Two weeks of jail time won't cure him.

But he should still serve (regardless of his medical condition).

I guess I don't understand how the jail would be responsible for his medical bills.

But you asked how I feel about this subject -- and there you have it.

:)

No problem at all dmiller. I agree, for people's own good when they're in dangerous destructive behavior, they need to be hit where they feel it the most, whatever will really sink in, and make them stop.

[mstar1]

I know , I just wanted to make that point, I know in my younger years I had some whacked and delusional notion at times that I could actually drive better when I was buzzed.

It can be part of the mental processes of why people end up driving at 105mph or like complete maniacs because they are under the illusion that they are under total control, when they arent,even after just a few drinks. I rarely drink anymore and never if im driving.

Too many people Ive known have been killed, starting when i was 8 and the entire family of 5 across the street was wiped out while going out for ice cream on a summer night, later schoolfriends, and still to this day once or twice a year townspeople that I know or their kids.

Im alittle sensitive to the subject, sorry if I overspoke

[dmiller]

I know , I just wanted to make that point, I know in my younger years I had some whacked and delusional notion at times that I could actually drive better when I was buzzed.

It can be part of the mental processes of why people end up driving at 105mph or like complete maniacs because they are under the illusion that they are under total control, when they arent,even after just a few drinks. I rarely drink anymore and never if im driving.

Too many people Ive known have been killed, starting when i was 8 and the entire family of 5 across the street was wiped out while going out for ice cream on a summer night, later schoolfriends, and still to this day once or twice a year townspeople that I know or their kids.

Im alittle sensitive to the subject, sorry if I overspoke

Overspoke????? Not at all.

You emphasized the other half of the quote quite eloquently.

Am sorry it has to come from personal experience. :(