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?
“Two drivers head out on the roads just as drunk, behaving with the same degree of recklessness...”
You forgot the 3rd through 10th ones, who were just as drunk, and did nothing worse that head home and sleep it off. So tell us, AMPG, how many children have you molested?
“I think we need to fundamentally change the warped view that drunken driving is “just a mistake”.”
I think we need to fundamentally change the warped view that you get to say what others should do.
To me the issue should be ability to operate the vehicle. If it turns out a drunk can drive better than grandma - or maybe you, or that matter, why not lock up you and grandma instead?
The point here is intent. Were the driver sober, yet intended to hit somebody, yeah, vehicular assault. You would criminalize behavior where they may well be no criminal intent whatsoever.
Second, this "dangerous crime" may not cause any property damage or injury to anyone, just the increased possibility of injury or property damage.
It's reasonable to take the "results" into account.
I have no DUIs either.