Posted on 10/11/2010 7:04:01 AM PDT by KeyLargo
Austin chief pushes for new drunk driving charge
Acevedo says proposal is aimed at impaired drivers, who can be dangerous even if they aren't legally drunk By Mike Ward
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Updated: 5:14 a.m. Thursday, Oct. 7, 2010
A campaign to create a new category of driving while intoxicated is being promoted at the Capitol as one way to curb growing problems in Texas’ system of punishing drunken drivers.
Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo, among the supporters of the change, said the idea behind a new offense of “driving while ability impaired” — DWAI — would cover drivers whose blood-alcohol content is between 0.05 and 0.07.
That would be less than the 0.08 level required before police can charge a motorist with drunken driving.
A first-offense DWI is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a $2,000 fine, plus potential driver’s license restrictions. No specific penalty has been proposed for DWAI.
(Excerpt) Read more at statesman.com ...
Open containers are a no no here now, but there are drive thru liquior barns in many cities and towns.
If lawyers and cities find a way to make money on it, all those things will happen soon!
Meanwhile, crimes that create no revenue stream - like murder - will barely be prosecuted.
If someone took a loaded gun out into the street and started firing at random, we would lock them up. Well, a drunk driver is no different. Drunk drivers kill innocent people at random. My wife and children are out on that street. I have no sympathy for anyone who drives while truly impaired, I'm talking about .12 or higher, not the typical .08. If you are .12 and driving, you are a killer just looking for a target of opportunity. You made the bad choice to drive and the people around you made a bad choice allowing it to happen. Bad things should happen to bad people, not innocent victims.
No, and yes (some places).
As an aside, I’m a municipal court judge and a prosecutor (different jurisdictions :-)), but one of my fondest recollections is (back in college) cracking open a cold one in the pickup truck, windows rolled down, on the way up to Canyon Lake Friday afternoons for a weekend of water skiing.
Colonel, USAFR
On December 16, 2008 here in Houston, a friend of my son was killed by a drunk driver at 3 in the afternoon, while stepping off of her school bus.
The disgusting pig who killed her had been slapped on the wrist for driving drunk numerous times and he was released every time to drink and drive again.
Why not start with keeping these people off the road first??? Why go after the people below 0.8 when they won’t keep the people over 0.8 off the road????
“If someone took a loaded gun out into the street and started firing at random, we would lock them up”
If only that were true.
We could easily require blood testing for those who blow a number over the limit, eliminating the possibility of false convictions based upon faulty breathalyzers. If I ever blew anything over 0.0% I would demand a blood test to prove my innocence.
It is far more common for “stone cold DRUNK” drivers, with slick lawyers, to weasel their way out of convictions.
There already are laws against reckless driving (while sober).
Driving drunk is a reckless, selfish, anti-social act that puts innocent lives in grave danger. No conservative should tolerate such an affront to a Civil Society.
If people know they will serve a year in jail for a first offense, only degenerate drunks and criminals would ever get behind the wheel drunk.
I saw a motorcyclist on a crotch rocket two weeks ago, driving 70MPH down I-10 while texting. He swerved into my lane and I almost hit him.
Guess he’s just one of those who’s SOOOOO good a rider that he couldn’t possibly screw up by texting while riding...
Good news: San Antonio passed a ban on TWD last Thursday, although as a prosecutor, I envision all sorts of problems proving that the driver was texting rather than just dialing a number.
Colonel, USAFR
Just lock us all in our houses. That will work too. ;)
Hey, this is America, you are entitled to your pro-drunken driving views. Just curious, how many DUI convictions do you have?
Austin is very well known for a healthy music scene and nightlife. I suppose they’re missing out on too much cash from the two beer crowd it would seem.
Reading news stories on drunk driving crashes, I don't seem to recall a lot of drivers being .08 or .09. Usually they tend to be .11 or higher. Are there any stats on this?
In the past year, I don’t know why, but it seems that every time we are out on the road we are nearly hit by someone. Of course we live in south florida where the average age of the drivers is probably in their 70s or more, so that is likely part of the reason, but I also notice that over half are also on cell phones and the rest are doing something in their laps (I hope they are texting, I don’t want to know what they are doing if it’s not texting!). I think it is supremely selfish to think that the world revolves around you to the point that your own entertainment comes before the safety of everyone else.
In addition, we were hit by someone who ran a red light last year, which totaled our car (fortunately all injuries were minor). The girl who ran the red light was NOT CITED because we were making a left turn (it was a flashing red as the light was not working). We had witnesses that it was our turn to go and she was traveling at a high rate of speed and appeared out of nowhere and never even slowed at the light (I suspect she was on the phone or texting and never saw the red light). She didn’t even stop and kept going but did eventually come back.
It was called no-fault but we got 60% of the blame! She hit us in the rear of our car, so we were nearly turned when she hit us. The cops didn’t take photos, didn’t talk to witnesses, didn’t measure, nothing. They don’t care anymore.
My son was recently also involved in an accident in another state, someone cut in front of him and slammed on her breaks. He rear ended her. Very little damage but he got a ticket because of course, she wouldn’t admit that she changed lanes right in front of him, and so he was cited for following too close. I’m beginning to think that all cars should have video cams on the front dash since it appears that most people are lairs and honest people get the shaft and the laws appear to now be written to keep the cops from having to do too much work. I hate to be cynical, and I am generally in favor of our law enforcement officers, but when it comes to traffic patrol, I think they are falling down on the job.
I recall reading years ago, probably in an Eric Peters column, that the original .12 was set by the various authorities by correlating a certain level of accident with the level of alcohol in the blood of the driver. I think this was pretty close to the original breathalyzer (sp?) time. Since then, MADD and others have used the blood alcohol level as part of a temperance campaign, not an impaired driver campaign.
It would be nice if “impairment” could be measured honestly, for pills, tiredness, whatever. When you get down to .05, very tired is probably equivalent to .05 blood alcohol.
I think we need to fundamentally change the warped view that drunken driving is “just a mistake”. It is a dangerous crime that is easily prevented.
I believe the lax laws contribute to this way of thinking. If a first time drunk driving conviction (real drunk driving not .05 like this chief is proposing) resulted in a felony and a year in jail, people would think of it as “the one mistake I am going to be darn sure not to make.”
IMHO, our drunk driving laws are hypocritical. Two drivers head out on the roads just as drunk, behaving with the same degree of recklessness. One hits a tree, or is lucky enough to be pulled over, and he gets a slap on the wrist. Another is not so lucky and kills someone and does 10 years for manslaughter. Recently drunk drivers have even been convicted of 2nd degree murder.
Now, of course, the results of the crime should play a part in the punishment, but IMHO, in the case of drunk driving, the results affect the punishment way too much.
The law is also supposed to be a deterrent to crime. Before getting behind the wheel drunk, nobody thinks, “What will the penalty be if I kill somone?” However, they are much more likely to think “What will happen to me if I get pulled over?”
BTW, you didn’t anwer my question. How many DUI convictions do you have?
I have zero. Have you stopped beating your wife?
Never started.
This is the standard argument of nanny-staters who wish to bargain away our rights in exchange for a little perceived safety. Next, I expect you to come back with "If just one live can be saved, then these new laws will be well worth it..."
People like you will simply not be happy until we live in a police state where everybody is subject to roadblocks and search & seizure at any time.
While I despise all drunks whether they’re driving or not, this is not going to pass. It won’t even make it to a ballot, certainly not in Texas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.