I have a close friend who was sentenced to 52 weeks of AA meetings by a Judge in California. His crime was blowing a .02% (1/4 of the current limit).
He was not enjoying attending at all, was not interested in quitting drinking. After about three weeks of saying nothing he was asked to speak by the leader.
He went into a monologue about how much he enjoyed drinking, what he was planning on having when he returned, home, what brand of gin made the best gin and tonics, etc.
After the meeting the leader came over and told him that he was not very funny, that people were trying to get their lives together, etc.
He handed her his "book" that she was supposed to sign off on his attendance and she signed off the remaining 49 weeks there and then, and asked him not to come back.
I always found this amusing.
If he had no interest in their program (and why should he?), he should never have been there - above all, its a stupid decision by the judge.
This "meeting leader" sounds like a very wise person. She's there to guide and help people who have a serious problem, and who have admitted they have a problem, not babysit for some @$$hole judge, or the state, who think they can play psychotherapist.
How does he get sentenced to aa for being well under the legal limit? I just don’t get that. He could hsve been coming home from a baseball game or a picnic and had a beer.
If he blew a .02, he shouldn’t be in trouble at all.