DUIs and the system

[Roadking2003]

Originally Posted by Mircea

I made 134 DWI arrests of which 131 were BATs over 0.15, one is a DUI, one was Impaired Driving and one unfounded.

I conducted field sobriety tests on all persons suspected of DWI and never violated their civil rights. The first part of the test was to hand over the driver's license. If someone handed me a credit card, Student ID, Library Card, military ID, photo of their children, money or couldn't get their license out of their wallet or purse without taking 30 minutes the failed that part of the test. Of course, professional drunks always have their driver's license readily accessible. At which point I would ask them to step out of the vehicle. Some fell down, some had to lean on the vehicle to support themselves, and other did fairly well (especially the professional drunks). Then we would walk to the rear of the vehicle at which point I would go to hand them their license and intentional drop it on the ground. Many fell on their face trying to get it or spent 5-6 minutes stumbling all over the place trying to pick it up. At that point they would get a breathalyzer test.

I could have arrested quite a few people who blew approaching 0.15 but didn't because they weren't drunk.

That's an important point.

Alcohol is a drug, and like every single drug on the market, it affects people in different ways. It's ludicrous to insist that everyone who has a BAT of 0.08 is drunk when science disputes that.

Conditions that can affect someone drinking alcohol are the amount of sleep in the last 24 hours; the amount and quality of sleep over the last 3-5 days, the amount of food eaten over the last 12 hours (if you're going to drink you need to eat breakfast, lunch and dinner); the quantity and type of food eaten (carbohydrates delay alcohol absorption while proteins speed it up); prescription medication; OTC medication; height/weight/body mass; other conditions like diabetes; attitude; stress and state of mind (happy, sad, angry, ambivalent etc); the type of alcoholic beverages; genetics; and of course, tolerance to alcohol.

As I said, it's more than absurd to make a blanket statement like a BAT of 0.8 means you're drunk.

If drugs affected everyone in the same way, then there would only be Prozac, but they don't and Prozac doesn't work for everyone so they have to use Paxil, and then that doesn't work for everyone so some have to use Cymbalta (I guess because the music in the commercial is really good) and then some are stuck with Sertraline HCL or Elavil or Seroquel.

I'm certain the MADD gangsters are probably livid by now, but I've both participated in and observed their scam "tests" they conduct. In the only one I participated in, one of the MADD people kept telling me I was ****-faced. I said dude I've only had two swallows and it's been less than 15 minutes it isn't even in my bloodstream yet. But that's how the run their little "studies." You've got people constantly telling you that you're falling down drunk even before you take your first drink, yeah, the power of suggestion is very powerful. People will start playing the role they've been given and act drunk even though the aren't.

I don't believe in jail time for drunks. If you really want to do something, then start confiscating their vehicles and levying heavy fines on them. Some say that punishes the family, well, it's obviously a family problem and if that motivates the family to get involved and do something, then so be it.

Another option which I have tried to get the Ohio legislature to act on (and whose time may have come especially if I repackage the idea) is Privilege Cards.

Basically, you pay a fee to the state, say, $100 annually for a Privilege Card that lets you gamble, buy lotto tickets, buy tobacco and buy alcohol.

If someone is driving "drunk" or even if someone is involved in an alcohol related incident like an assault, or public intox the state can suspend their alcohol privileges (and of course for people on welfare you can suspend their gambling and tobacco privileges in addition to alcohol).

In spite of what Deputy Dawg says, if you're arrested more than once for DWI, you're an alcoholic. Ain't no one that unlucky (that would most likely fall under the category of weekend binge drinker -- a form of alcoholism).

I will say this, I have a greater fear of being struck by a vehicle driven by someone who is texting, sexting, surfing or chatting on their cell-phone than I do of an encounter with someone under the influence.

Very interesting and informative post.

I don't have the stats, but I have observed that almost all of the fatal accidents caused by a drunk driver are when they are really really drunk. Like .20 or .25. These are the guys who enter a freeway on the exit ramp, etc.

That leads me to believe we have been hoodwinked by MADD. Most people can drive quite well at .08 or even .10 if they are paying attention.

And I suspect a driver talking on the phone is more dangerous than someone at .10

So I think lowering the limit is actually a bad thing. We certainly stopped going out for dinner as much when that happened here.

[Annie53]

The officer blew .207.

[jc76]

I think the 1st time, if the offender has no prior record, the sentence should be counseling, rehab classes, and community service. Also education on the dangers of d&d. Show them videos/photos of innocent lives taken by drunk drivers. Make them meet with a parent or relative of a victim of drunk driving and feel the hell they are going through. I think this would be a good 1st time punishment because everyone screws up once with something in their life.
If they are stupid enough to do it again...do whatever you want to them because they had their chance at rehabilitation. If you dont learn the 1st time you probably never will. But to lock em up and throw away the key on 1st offense is not going to get my vote.