A New Idea to Stop Drunk Drivers
http://www.lawsays.net/articles/2016/1/A-New-Idea-to-Stop-Drunk-Drivers/Page1.html
Alex Weidmann
Find more great DUI tips at Colorado DUI By Alex Weidmann
Published on 03/3/2009
It's obvious that drunk driving is a serious crime, and it's just plain stupid. You can kill somebody or you can kill yourself.
It's obvious that drunk driving is a serious crime, and it's just plain stupid. You can kill somebody or you can kill yourself. While this is a tragedy, taking care of the root of the problem often doesn't happen because of our emotional outrage. But many of our drunk driving laws aren't based in reality and it might be time to re-think them.
First of all, alcohol accidents and death rates are exaggerated all the time. There have been cases where the person responsible for the accident was not drunk, but used mouthwash shortly before the accident and therefore alcohol was on his breath. Also, if the person who is NOT responsible for the accident has alcohol in their system, that also counts towards these statistics. They also lump things like prescription drugs, illegal drugs, heart attacks, strokes and seizures in the same category, and call it all "drunk driving".
The result is law makers passing tougher bills and punishments for people who are caught driving under the influence. But this approach hasn't worked so far. People know a DUI can cost them $10,000 and time in jail, yet the occurances of drunk drivers on the roads is not going down. So if tough laws and punishments don't work, maybe we have to re-think the solution to this problem.
There are some people who can have two beers, and they have no problem driving anywhere (like my father). Then there are people who drink 6 beers and think they can drive anywhere, they get into a crash and they are charged with a DUI. Most people who are convinced of driving under the influence will be a repeat offender in their lifetime. So instead of setting up illegal and unconstitutional DUI checkpoints around the country, we should focus on hardcore drinkers and repeat offenders.
Groups like MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) push for more laws and harder punishment all the time. They've been successful in reducing our constitutional rights as far as illegal search and seizures go. Forcing drivers to take a breath test with no probable cause is simply illegal, and we shouldn't be focusing on the population at large. We should be using those police officer's time to go after the known drunk drivers.
Emotions are very powerful, and when you hear about a drunk driver who killed a family or a child, it affects everybody. But if we could have done more to prevent somebody from drinking so much and driving, we would be a lot better off. Like I said, most drunk drivers are repeat offenders, so maybe it's time to take away their drivers license for 5-10 years for a first offense. This would deter most people who have a job and a family from ever driving drunk. And it would stop those who do drive drunk from repeating their mistake by revoking their license for a long period of time.
First of all, alcohol accidents and death rates are exaggerated all the time. There have been cases where the person responsible for the accident was not drunk, but used mouthwash shortly before the accident and therefore alcohol was on his breath. Also, if the person who is NOT responsible for the accident has alcohol in their system, that also counts towards these statistics. They also lump things like prescription drugs, illegal drugs, heart attacks, strokes and seizures in the same category, and call it all "drunk driving".
The result is law makers passing tougher bills and punishments for people who are caught driving under the influence. But this approach hasn't worked so far. People know a DUI can cost them $10,000 and time in jail, yet the occurances of drunk drivers on the roads is not going down. So if tough laws and punishments don't work, maybe we have to re-think the solution to this problem.
There are some people who can have two beers, and they have no problem driving anywhere (like my father). Then there are people who drink 6 beers and think they can drive anywhere, they get into a crash and they are charged with a DUI. Most people who are convinced of driving under the influence will be a repeat offender in their lifetime. So instead of setting up illegal and unconstitutional DUI checkpoints around the country, we should focus on hardcore drinkers and repeat offenders.
Groups like MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) push for more laws and harder punishment all the time. They've been successful in reducing our constitutional rights as far as illegal search and seizures go. Forcing drivers to take a breath test with no probable cause is simply illegal, and we shouldn't be focusing on the population at large. We should be using those police officer's time to go after the known drunk drivers.
Emotions are very powerful, and when you hear about a drunk driver who killed a family or a child, it affects everybody. But if we could have done more to prevent somebody from drinking so much and driving, we would be a lot better off. Like I said, most drunk drivers are repeat offenders, so maybe it's time to take away their drivers license for 5-10 years for a first offense. This would deter most people who have a job and a family from ever driving drunk. And it would stop those who do drive drunk from repeating their mistake by revoking their license for a long period of time.