Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see it is an old thread but still...the OP says to "Impose large monitaty burdens on the average public", really!
The average public doesn't get a DUI and DUI's should be harshly punished as right now there are too many people who get in a car again with a suspended license after a DUI.
The amount of drunken, wrong way drivers is getting out of hand and I'm disgusted to see almost weekly an innocent other driver and in some cases more people, are killed by a drunken selfish person!
Adults drank too much and drove about 121 million times per year - over 300,000 incidents of drinking and driving a day.
An average drunk driver has driven drunk over 80 times before first arrest.
The rate of drunk driving is highest among 26 to 29 year olds (20.7 percent).
In 2013, 28.7 million people admitted to driving under the influence of alcohol - that’s more than the population of texas.
In fatal crashes in 2014, the highest percentage of drunk drivers was for drivers ages 21 to 24 (30 percent), followed by ages 25 to 34 (29 percent) and 35 to 44 (24 percent).
In 2014, three times as many males were arrested for drunk driving as females (401,904 v 130,480).
Each day, people drive drunk more than 300,000 times, but only about 3200 are arrested.
Most DUI offenders are blue collar male workers with an income of less than $25,000 annual income. They are largely white young males, though the median age is 30.
I dont know if this will add or assist you, but i have been convicted of a dwi and it was for first offense, i blew pretty high above .12 and got sentenced to having the interlock device installed ($117 a month for 6 months) court fines $500 and a surcharge from dmv for $1,000 with a one year license loss. Also having to attend intoxicated drivers ed for $275 plus lawyers fees.
My costs for my first-time offense in WA state were
* $500 to get my car back from the pound
* Ignition interlock for 12 months at ~$100/month plus ~$100 for both installation and removal
* 5 years probation, possibility of getting reduced to 3
* $2750 in court fees
* $3000 for attorney at a discounted rate (typically would be more like $5000)
* $400 for alcohol assessment and 4 treatment sessions
* $150 for 1 DUI victim panel
* $250 for 1 alcohol information school class
* Required to get high-risk auto insurance which increased my monthly payment from ~$125 to ~$225
* 1 day in jail, cost $150
The only "nice" thing was that they told me I wouldn't have to pay the fine for the thing I was originally pulled over for -- driving in the carpool lane without any passengers.
I have NO sympathy for anyone who intentionally drinks and drives... To the OP, if this is your situation you are complaining about (or if you are just bitching because you feel it is somehow unfair in general) and it has cost you or someone you know "dearly" - too bad, I could care less.
But you should care because increasing penalties, fines and harsher punishments continues to prohibit people from moving on after these incidents. And yes, we should want people to move on from these incidents and be productive members of society.
Its just the BS question on the FAFSA forms - have you ever been convicted for possession or sales of an illegal drug? Yes? Then you don't get financial aid. How does this jive with the idea that people serve their time and again become productive members of society? As I stated up thread, most DUIs happen to people in their 20s. Do you really want to impact all future earnings and a productive role in society by holding things over people for the better part of 50-70 years? At what point do we say - okay you ****ed up, here's your punishment, do it and lead a better life? Why is that never part of these conversations? And just so we are all clear...I'm talking about first time offenders who've not killed or hurt anyone. I have my opinions on that as well but this isn't what I'm talking about.
My costs for my first-time offense in WA state were
* $500 to get my car back from the pound
* Ignition interlock for 12 months at ~$100/month plus ~$100 for both installation and removal
* 5 years probation, possibility of getting reduced to 3
* $2750 in court fees
* $3000 for attorney at a discounted rate (typically would be more like $5000)
* $400 for alcohol assessment and 4 treatment sessions
* $150 for 1 DUI victim panel
* $250 for 1 alcohol information school class
* Required to get high-risk auto insurance which increased my monthly payment from ~$125 to ~$225
* 1 day in jail, cost $150
The only "nice" thing was that they told me I wouldn't have to pay the fine for the thing I was originally pulled over for -- driving in the carpool lane without any passengers.
Sounds reasonable to me.
Is it really so hard to not get in the car after drinking? Plan ahead a hot second? Load up Uber on your phone?
Thankfully I haven't had to deal with this but it is not because I am some angel. Driving is so pervasive in the US and in many cities they don't even try to give one alternatives. I would suggest that the vast majority of people in the US have driven when they shouldn't have. It's just that they weren't unlucky enough to get caught. That is the biggest thing that bothers me about the whole thing. It is basically all about luck or lack-there-of.
In some cities like Phoenix (I used to live there) probably close to 100% of the people you see out at a bar on Friday or Saturday are going to be driving after drinking. It is simply part of the "culture" there. I am not condoning it but there really isn't any other option. Public transit stinks and the cab service is terrible. If the DUI fines were used to build transit, I would probably agree with the increased fines. That would actually do something to reduce the number of people drunk driving. Instead, in most places, the funds are simply thrown in the general fund (i.e. it is a general money maker).
Where I live now this isn't a problem; I don't even have a car anymore. I can walk pretty much anywhere I want and, if need be, take transit or a cab. Much better than having to look over your shoulder or worry about how you are going to get home.
I agree with using the fines to fund better public transportation.
I don't agree with giving drunk drivers any excuses. Sorry, but if you don't live within walking/public transportation distance, then you don't get to go out drinking at all, ever, unless you have a designated driver in your group of friends. Tough luck. Them's the breaks if you choose to live in the middle of nowhere and/or choose to vote against improving public transportation.
Drink at home. Your desire for a wild night out at the pub isn't worth someone else's life.
If I had my way, drunk drivers would be permanently barred from driving, and be sentenced to community service working at a morgue that handles victims of drunk drivers. Handling the mangled corpses directly and everything.
I think I'm being pretty reasonable too, considering BOTH my husband and I have lost close relatives to drunk drivers.
But you should care because increasing penalties, fines and harsher punishments continues to prohibit people from moving on after these incidents. And yes, we should want people to move on from these incidents and be productive members of society.
Its just the BS question on the FAFSA forms - have you ever been convicted for possession or sales of an illegal drug? Yes? Then you don't get financial aid. How does this jive with the idea that people serve their time and again become productive members of society? As I stated up thread, most DUIs happen to people in their 20s. Do you really want to impact all future earnings and a productive role in society by holding things over people for the better part of 50-70 years? At what point do we say - okay you ****ed up, here's your punishment, do it and lead a better life? Why is that never part of these conversations? And just so we are all clear...I'm talking about first time offenders who've not killed or hurt anyone. I have my opinions on that as well but this isn't what I'm talking about.
No, I don't have to be concerned about their difficulty getting back into society. If DUI laws were new law and was just recently sprung on people last year, then maybe I'd have some sympathy.
Louisiana drive-through bars aside, we all know the cost and penalties of drinking and driving - at best it may get you thrown into jail - at worst, you may kill someone. These are things that no one can claim they didn't know because they were under a rock for the past 30 years.
So, there are consequences - known consequences.
Is it any more acceptable for people to do other crimes - say rape, first-degree murder - and then complain about the difficulty of getting back to being a productive member of society?
The chances of "accidentally" blowing high after having just one too many make it seem that this is an unfair law and that perps who are just barely over should have some sympathy. But to me, the chances of accidentally going slightly over translates to - if you are drinking don't drive - then you don't have to worry about the penalties.
How many people know they are going to a picnic, a party, a neighborhood grill, or just going to sit around and drink and then decide to drive anyway. Some going to a party and taking the booze with them. How many of those people plan from the very beginning to take a cab back home? How many set hard limits to the number they will have and then cut themselves off immediately?
From my experience most people in these situations "reason with themselves" that they can handle it, that they will be fine, they know that though they are slightly impaired they are sill capable of getting home safely. Being a "little tipsy" they are still better drivers than most who have not had a drop. How many plan a route home that they think will lower the chances of encountering cops? For the most part, people CHOOSE to drink and then take a chance on driving. If they take that gamble and lose, that is on them.
And yes. I am a drinker. I drink very rarely, but when I do drink, I plan to be stationary for a long time. The last time I went out to a bar to drink with friends, I knew after that the drinking had hit me harder than I expected it would. I thought about driving the 5 minutes back to my apartment, and then I DECIDED to just sit in the lounge and watch TV for half an hour or so before I considered driving again.
No, I have no sympathy for someone who chooses to drink, knows the potential consequences of the outcome, and still drives - then gets nailed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
