How far should drunk driving punishment go?

[reverend_kyle]

I just got out of driver's ed and well, they are already pretty strict... I'd actually loosen em a bit.

[rocksolid]

Actual limits in most places in North America are at .08 - and I may be mistaken, but I think .08 means .08% alcohol/blood volume - so for each litre of blood, no more than 8/10 of a millilitre of alcohol. I think there are still a couple of rogue states in the U.S. where the limit is .10.

In Canada, I believe impaired driving is a distinct crime from driving over the limit, so the prosecution doesn't have to show evidence your driving was messed up to convict you, they just have to show the results of your breathalyzer test, though of course the sentences attached to impaired driving are higher. And refusing to take a breathalyzer test is its own crime.

As for the U.S., I think it differs from state to state, as criminal law is state law, not federal like in Canada.

Hope this helps...

[TitusFinn]

death penalty

The christian jokes.

[jay_a2j]

death penalty

The christian jokes.

Yeah it was a joke. But come on with the "easing up" on the D & D penalties! I drove ONCE under the influance(and only about 1/2 mile) and didn't like the feeling. So I never did it again. Put yourself in the shoes of the family members who lost a relative cause some drunk ran a red light. Tell them the laws are too harsh.

[wcaclimbing]

i think there should be a big fine and whoever was cought would be put in one of those centers that make them not addicted to alcohol.

that would solve the problems

[jay_a2j]

i think there should be a big fine and whoever was cought would be put in one of those centers that make them not addicted to alcohol.

that would solve the problems

once addicted, you can't be "not addicted". You can however be in recovery.

[2dimes]

once addicted, you can't be "not addicted". You can however be in recovery.

I disagree, however you are correct in thinking a program cannot fix it.

[Aladriel]

I really hate zero-tolerance policies when it comes to anything. I also hate the "one-size fits all" punishments as well. Everyone and every situation is unique.

Should someone who was drunk, decided to get in a car, drive, and then plow into a minivan and kill everyone get off with just a fine? Heck no. I'm pretty sure he shouldn't ever be able to drive again. Or that there be some serious barriers that he has to overcome first (rehab, community service, therapy, and I mean all three of those, at least.)

But, what about the person who got in his car drunk and just hit a pole, only injuring himself? And then puts himself into rehab, goes back to school (also on his own) and then gets his own place? Does he deserve the fine, one week in jail, and then two months of home detention? Which of course, then messes up his schooling and puts him behind?

I hate drunk drivers. It's a stupidly selfish thing for anyone to do. It's not that difficult to call a cab, people.

[elebdae]

I seriously think the person that gets caugh drunk-driving should lose his licence and have to redoe it all over from the begining (the 8 months that you have to drive with a person who has his full licence and the 2 years with 0 tolerance and only 4 points)
If you only injure yourself, it should be enough (with a program to make shure you are not addicted to alcohol or does not recidivate)
But if you injure other people, it should be a non-premidited attack sentence combine with a drunken "bonus penalty" that you spend time in jail or cummunity service etc...



(sorry for my english, it's not my first language)

[2dimes]

Ok I'm going to break down and be serious for part of a post.

I think there should be a fine. $2000 or more.

Knowing that it will cost a couple thousand dollars suddenly deters people possibly even if they are loaded.

The reason people do it is usually a combination of not wanting to leave their car at the bar and not wanting to pay for a taxi. If it was way cheaper to take a cab most people would respond to that.

[Caleb the Cruel]

if the driver is sorry and says they will never get drunk again, then leave him alone, but if the drunk is not sorry and will not promise not to do it again, then deport them

[max is gr8]

I agree blood rules

NO AUTO CENSOR

blood-Control

[qeee1]

Laws are immoral.

That aside:

It's horribly irresponsible from the start. In Ireland anti drink driving campaigns are heavily publicised so there really is no excuse.

I say take their liscence for a certain period of time maybe 6 months, and fine 'em heavily, maybe €1000. Repeat offenders should be banned from driving for at least 5 years. These should be backed up by publically funded anti-drink driving campaigns.

If there's an actual accident other things need to be taken into account.

[jay_a2j]

once addicted, you can't be "not addicted". You can however be in recovery.

I disagree, however you are correct in thinking a program cannot fix it.

I work at a drug/alcohol treatment facility. You can disagree (we call that denial). Programs are not intended to "fix" a problem. A desire to change is needed for any type of recovery to happen.

[2dimes]

once addicted, you can't be "not addicted". You can however be in recovery.

I disagree, however you are correct in thinking a program cannot fix it.

I work at a drug/alcohol treatment facility. You can disagree (we call that denial). Programs are not intended to "fix" a problem. A desire to change is needed for any type of recovery to happen.

Again a drug/alcohol treatment facility cannot fix it. You should know what can but maybe you don't.