Are DUI Laws Excessive in your state ... ?

[jgrreed]

Yes I'll bite.

Did your state have DUI laws on the books at the time of these incidents? If yes, then your evidence appears to prove they don't stop drunk driving.

Just like the death penalty does not stop murder.

Please tell me then, what will stop them?? Talk therapy?? Hand holding??

These pictures do not prove anything. Until such time that a formal, properly controlled, fully powered, comparison study of two populations, one with laws and one without, is done with all confounders removed and all baises accounted for, nothing is proven. These pictures are anecdotes, not proof.

Can we please go back to arguing about Kubota vs. JD??? This is stupid......

-Jer.

 

[scott_vt]

So as an alternative let's give her a 100$ fine and let her back on the road with her Blackberry, portable curling iron, makeup, screaming Johnny, and a movie playing in her indash DVD player. That way not only will Little Johnny not have a Mommy, but little Katie and Joey in the oncoming lane can be orphans too.

I don't know a quantifiable way to measure this offense. Please let me know when the "stupidity meter" is invented and I will personally fund the purchase of one for every squad car, trooper car, and RCMP car, in North America. Before someone else says it, IQ is not a measure of this index.

IT'S NOT THE LAWS FAULT FOR RUINING A BAD DRIVERS LIFE, OR A DRUNK DRIVER'S LIFE. THE FAULT LIES WITH THE BAD DRIVER, OR THE DRUNK DRIVER. Get my point???

Can we please stop this thread and start arguing about Kubota vs. John Deere???

-Jer.

Good Evenin Jer,
I was merely trying to make a point that being impaired whether by alcohol consumption or by inattentive driving practices, that result in accidents should be looked at in the same light ! Fines and punishment should be equal.....

Would it matter to you if a family member was harmed by the multitasking mother or by a drunk driver ? The bottom line is the same, your family member is injured or worse, dead !

I dont know how to make a quantitative measurement on this type of a problem, other than the arresting officer interviewing all people involved at the accident or scene. Or maybe the officer saw the multitasking lady just before she caused a pileup on the freeway !

But why wait till little Johnnys' mother causes a catastrophy on the roadway before making an arrest. If an officer witnesses this behavior on the roadway, then an arrest should be made ! Plain and simple !


IT'S NOT THE LAWS FAULT FOR RUINING A BAD DRIVERS LIFE, OR A DRUNK DRIVER'S LIFE. THE FAULT LIES WITH THE BAD DRIVER, OR THE DRUNK DRIVER. Get my point???

Yes I get your point ! I dont look at as the law ruining a bad drivers life, I look at it as the BAD DRIVER ruined his own life !

Can we please stop this thread and start arguing about Kubota vs. John Deere???

Ive been on the forum awhile and I doubt that you will stop that debate !

 

[tallyho8]

Victims don't think so.

There are no victims in a simple DUI. It is a victimless crime. It is completely unreasonable to state that a person who has hurt no one and nothing and gets a ticket for DUI should serve the same sentence as an armed robber who shoots a person while robbing him.

 

[ray66v]

Please tell me then, what will stop them?? Talk therapy?? Hand holding??

NOTHING WILL STOP THEM, THAT'S MY POINT. Enforcement is the only real defense. Law officers have all the tools they need to charge an impaired driver, right now. A driver can be charged with being impaired EVEN if he blows under the legal limit.

These pictures do not prove anything. Until such time that a formal, properly controlled, fully powered, comparison study of two populations, one with laws and one without, is done with all confounders removed and all baises accounted for, nothing is proven. These pictures are anecdotes, not proof.

They may not meet your standards for proof, but if that is you house with the truck in it, its proof. Bottom line: Drunk driving is illegal, they still did it.

Can we please go back to arguing about Kubota vs. JD??? This is stupid......-Jer.

Fine with me, but then why did you choose to debate me?

BTW: Who cares about JD Vs. Kubota? When you can buy a Massey?

 

[scott_vt]

BTW: Who cares about JD Vs. Kubota? When you can buy a Massey?

Good Evenin Ray,
Agreed !

 

[Scooby074]

Studies have been done that point out that a person on a cell phone, hands free or not, is a greater risk on the highways than a legally drunk (within reason) driver. While drunk drivers drive more aggressively and brakes harder,the cell phone driver has slower reaction times and brakes later. I know this goes against the popular opinion though. Any distraction, from cells to sat navs to alcohol causes accidents. Why do we punish alcohol offenses so much harsher if a person is just over the line for being legally drunk, yet allow all these devices to be used in cars? Is it because cell phones dont have the same stigma as alcohol?

Heres a quote from one of those studies:
Taken together, we found that both intoxicated drivers and cell phone drivers performed
differently from baseline, and that the driving profiles of these two conditions differed. Drivers
in the cell phone condition exhibited a sluggish behavior (i.e., slower reactions), which they
attempted to compensate for by increasing their following distance. Drivers in the alcohol
condition exhibited a more aggressive driving style, in which they followed closer, necessitating
braking with greater force. With respect to traffic safety, our data are consistent with Redelmeier
and Tibshiraniç—´ (1997) earlier estimates. In fact, when controlling for driving difficulty and time
on task, cell phone drivers may actually exhibit greater impairments (i.e., more accidents and
less responsive driving behavior) than legally intoxicated drivers. These data also call into
question driving regulations that prohibit hand-held cell phones and permit hands-free cell
phones, because no significant differences were found in the impairments to driving caused by
these two modes of cellular communication.

http://ppc.uiowa.edu/driving-assessment/2003/Summaries/Downloads/Final_Papers/PDF/5_Strayerformat.pdf

 

[smfcpacfp]

Good Evenin Guys,
Im just sitting in the kitchen with Kathleen this evening discussing the DWI laws in our state, and of course the group that spearheaded much of todays legislation, MADD. We both have some very mixed emotions on this subject, we seriously realize the need for reform when it comes to drinking and driving, but has it gone too far ? We worry about both of our young adult children, 25 and 27, both boys, both college grads, and hope that they excersize good judgement when it comes to going out with their friends on a friday or saturday night ! My youngest boy is a career fireman and my oldest boy is a volunteer firemen and holds an excellent computer science job. They both need their licenses to go to work and function in society.

I hold a CDL license, which in this state, you are considered DUI witha .04 BAC. I would never have a drink while driving commercially, but it is nice to have a beer or a glass of wine with your dinner when you go out to eat. Unfortunately that BAC applies even if your driving the family SUV !

While I have been fortunate enough to never have had a loved killed by a drunk driver, what a horrible thing that would certainly be, I also hope that my kids never get caught up in the system and have their lives ruined by todays laws !

In conclusion I think the laws need to be adjusted just a bit. I would like to see just a bit of liencency when it comes to some one consumming two beers, rather than be taken away in the police cruiser and have their life turned upside down. This is just my opinion, and Im sure you guys have your own feelings on this subject, please feel free !

I am the opposite end of the spectrum. I prefer the law in Iran. if caught driving drunk it is summary execution on the spot.

Some of you will say that is too harsh, but once citizens know the law is enforced there are zero drunk drivers, instead there are a lot of people staggering along the roadways.

 

[jgrreed]

Good Evenin Jer,
I was merely trying to make a point that being impaired whether by alcohol consumption or by inattentive driving practices, that result in accidents should be looked at in the same light ! Fines and punishment should be equal.....

Agreed......

Would it matter to you if a family member was harmed by the multitasking mother or by a drunk driver ? The bottom line is the same, your family member is injured or worse, dead !

Nope.....

I dont know how to make a quantitative measurement on this type of a problem, other than the arresting officer interviewing all people involved at the accident or scene. Or maybe the officer saw the multitasking lady just before she caused a pileup on the freeway!!!

If he saw her, that might hold up. If it was from witnesses, I doubt it would. Does anyone know of anyone who was charged with dangerous driving for chatting on the phone while driving past an officer??? I'm asking seriously, no sarcasm on this one.

But why wait till little Johnnys' mother causes a catastrophy on the roadway before making an arrest. If an officer witnesses this behavior on the roadway, then an arrest should be made ! Plain and simple !

Agree on that too.....

Yes I get your point ! I dont look at as the law ruining a bad drivers life, I look at it as the BAD DRIVER ruined his own life !

OK, fair enough. Some of the wording on this thread really got my back up because several members worded it as "the law/punishment ruining someones life"

Can we please stop this thread and start arguing about Kubota vs. John Deere???

Ive been on the forum awhile and I doubt that you will stop that debate !

I was kidding about that. My only reason for going green was 'because I wanted too', no other better reason at all.

A good conversation today. Has a thread ever grown this fast??

-Jer.

 

[jgrreed]

NOTHING WILL STOP THEM, THAT'S MY POINT. Enforcement is the only real defense. Law officers have all the tools they need to charge an impaired driver, right now. A driver can be charged with being impaired EVEN if he blows under the legal limit.

So what good is enforcement without punishment??? If you're caught, should the officer just say "ha, caught ya'!!!" and carry on. I don't understand how you can have one without the other?? Isn't deterrent a part of the puzzle too?? As in "I heard a guy got 3 months in the clink for his 2nd DUI, so maybe I'll call a cab"???

Are you saying we need more enforcement, more cops on the street?? If so, I agree.

They may not meet your standards for proof, but if that is you house with the truck in it, its proof. Bottom line: Drunk driving is illegal, they still did it.

Agreed, 100%. My comment was directed at the statement that the pics were proof that the laws don't work. I'd say there'd be a lot more pics to see if there weren't the laws we already have.

Fine with me, but then why did you choose to debate me?

Sorry, that was tractor racism on my part..... was too cranked up about things to think of any other companies.....

-Jer.

 

[Sigarms]

I am the opposite end of the spectrum. I prefer the law in Iran

And where are you living?