I'm responsible enough. No chargeable accidents against me in 35 years driving. Driving Impaired is a major factor in accidents BUT SPEED is the real killer drunk or sober and any cop will tell you this. It is driving beyond your skill capabilities and road conditions that kills most persons on the road. Now how about we put governors on all vehicles so nobody goes over 55 MPH? I don't care how drunk somebody is they hit a person slow enough the chances of causing death are nil. No I don't support that either as there is situations which call for people driving to the fullest extent of the abilities in life and death situations.
I knew a man who drove when he was so drunk he could not stand up but rather crawled. He never hit anyone or caused a wreck. He never drove over 20 MPH drunk or sober. The cops knew he was drunk as well most likely as everybody in a three county area knew the man. I think he died at an old age of cancer.
I am real sick and tired of the it is never the drunks fault he's just sick and needs help B.S. Nobody forced that first drink down someones throat and yes I've drank my share myself. Age and maturity taught me not to do it driving. Most of the time I didn't anyway. Not one DUI charge and only one FST given me by a cop and I was very sober. My eyes were bloodshot from an all day session of Fire Fighting school and Barney swore I was on drugs. I had been driving 450 miles and was stiff as a board. Barney thought I could get out and walk a straight line. Well I can't pass a FST period except blood alcohol. I can not do the other test they give. Never mind the fact I had ID stating my vocation plus military ID.
Taking a car away from a drunk or disabling it is like trying to take a gun away from a determined criminal it's just not going to happen. You make the machines and I'll keep figuring out ways to disable them so will drunks when they are sober.
A novel idea comes to mind. For habitual offenders of DUI how about jail time where they must actually not be able to drink and can not drink plus MANDATORY Treatment. A year should do it perhaps? Three years the next time. Five the next. Put the burden of punishment and responsibility for treatment where it belongs rather than making everybody else in the nation prove they are not drunk.
Everybody it seems has their precious Nanny State good idea law to support. For some it's seatbelts. For others it's kid seats of which only the Lord himself could ever figure out the actual correct way to use them for their eight year old???? The so called experts sure as the devil can not agree on it. I loathe those death traps but yet some Moron or rather insurance companies all powerful lobby sold the government on the idea everybody must have them for da Childrens sake. Well they don't fit in my 78 Chevy K-5 worth a hoot. I drove my 5 year old grandson to school all last year without the booster because I knew in my heart and by common sense he was safer in an old fashioned seatbelt. If someone hit us they were likely going to be the ones hurting anyway.
I read this entire thread, plus the thread about fatasses being charged more by their employer for insurance..... and found that just about every one of FR’s favorite residing rabid smoker-hating, ‘convenient’ conservatives -At Bay, Ditter, Moomman69, A CA guy, Raycpa,Whee The People,on and on-were conspicuously MIA. But also noticed that Quix Are For Kids adequately filled in for them by somehow hijacking the thread and turning it to smoking and an evangelical meeting. Lord, there are SO many on this board that are for total government control over every aspect of ourv lives.
I’m often torn about how to handle even guilty multiple DUI folks.
I certainly believe in forced treatment—residential of at least 90 days.
But by then, usually, the guy has lost his job; the wife and kids or shack-up and kids are worse off than ever etc. etc. etc. yadayadayada.
No easy solutions. Certainly society can throw the book at them.
I think the military finally wised up . . . when I last checked, it was 2 strikes and 2 chances at treatment. 3rd, you were out with a bad conduct or some such.
And, there was some progress made against the Navey etc. traditions of breeding drunks.
But lots of employers just slice a guy off first thing. Which, is certainly reasonable from a number of perspectives. But . . . without treatment, it doesn’t do him or society that much good.
And, treatment has to be long enough and well ran enough that the guy learns a WHOLE DIFFERENT WAY OF LIVING and coping with the pains and discomforts of daily life. For some thick-headed stubborn souls, that can take a bit.
Incarceration is an option. I think an ankle bracelet and confinement at home and to job after treatment would likely be more cost effective and more effective generally. Anywhere near a bar in a given period of months and it’s instant 30 days in the clink or some such.
I think the family system needs to be involved in treatment, too. Don’t need the little woman sabotaging treatment because she needs someone to be needy and dependent on her.
Certainly the kids need help. Look at Billdo Klintoon. Don’t need any more of those!!!
Actually, I’m mostly p*ssing in the wind. Nothing significant is going to change before the whole world goes to hell in a hand basket. And then there will be a long list of much more urgent priorities.
Still, if I’ve helped wake anyone up and pay more attention to the consequences of alcohol abuse, it’s worth it.