Another thing that occurs to me: he’s 75, with a history of alcohol abuse (when you’re driving drunk that much, you definitely have a problem), which cannot be good for his driving even when sober. Add age-related sensory/cognitive/reflex issues to damage caused by alcohol, then throw in refusal to accept that he is not safe to be on the road. He needs to NOT have opportunity to kill innocent bystanders, and if prison is the only way to keep him from behind the wheel, that may well have to be what happens. Mercy toward a willful offender is not practical here, since he’s a threat to public safety.
I agree that public transportation in most of the USA sucks. But in this case the prosecuting attorrney said he had other transportation available.
From the article cited in the OP:
despite how easy it would have been to call a taxi, to call a Lyft, to call an Uber, to take the bus or even call a friend to pick him up, he chose to drive,
Admittedly, that’s the prosecuting attorney. I don’t know what the bus service is like in Seattle, or what the taxis, Lyft, or Uber cost, or how much money the drunk driver had, or whether he had any friends who would give him a ride. I also don’t know where he was trying to get to that he thought was worth his causing a head-on crash (and, presumably, not getting there anyway.)
But in any case, as I said, my opinion about the sentence doesn’t have to do with what he deserves, but with it being necessary to make him stop driving.
Pretty comprehensive, and most of the routes run 20+ hours a day.
Anyone can own a car, you don’t need a driver’s license to own one. Just to legally drive one.
All you people suggesting ankle bracelet - you really think that will stop him getting drunk and getting behind the wheel again? Those things don’t physically stop you from leaving a designated area, it just alerts people that you have done so. Between the time he leaves home and the time the authorities catch up with him he could very well do some damage or even kill someone.
Ankle monitors are for those people we can have some trust will stay home. I don’t think this guy is one of those people.
You can’t force someone to stop being a drunk. It’s very true that an addict won’t change until he’s ready to change. We can add some incentive to that, but only so much.
While I agree the man has a serious problem (alcoholism) and should have treatment available to him the question of jailing him isn’t coming up because he is drinking, it’s because he’s a danger to other people.
There are alcoholics who manage not to drive drunk. There are people who get multiple DUI’s then finally realize that they have a problem they need to deal with and they get sober. I am opposed to confining people solely because they have an addiction, but that’s not why we’re talking about locking him up. He’s facing life in prison because he’s a danger to others.
If he stops being a danger to others he can appeal his sentence/talk to the parole board/whatever, but this guy has been given many chances to behave.
At least here in the UK, there’s some supermarkets have trolleys (shopping carts) with wheels that freeze up if you attempt to take them off the property. Perhaps we could adapt ankle monitors and make some that lock together if he attempts to enter a bar?
No, I’m not in any way serious, but it’s what popped into my head and the mental image keeps making me giggle.
He could go to a liquor store instead. You could get liquor delivered to you (I don’t know if this is legal, but you could do it).
Does it really matter (except to his liver, I suppose) if he gets sloshed at home and stays there though?
I knew a guy who got repeated DUIs and eventually received a two year prison term for aggravated DUI
He was offered ways to reduce his sentence, like attending counseling, and he repeatedly refused to cooperate. Then he was offered early release with probation and counseling. He turned that down.
When he finally walked out of prison after serving his complete sentence, the first place he stopped was the bar he used to hang out at. I was there. It was cringe worthy seeing him “celebrating” his freedom. Nobody was buying him drinks, and he became angry about that.
He came back to that bar around closing time to buy two six packs, but he fell over while attempting to pay. He was thrown out and told not to come back. I’ve since lost track of him.
If he had a Corvette, then I’m guessing he could afford a bus or an Uber.
Nope.
(Unless he’s a violent drunk, but nobody mentioned that as an issue with him.)
A significant number of people with addiction problems seem to be treatment-resistant. They don’t respond to any type of therapeutic intervention. Neither 12 step programs, nor moderation management nor aversive therapies nor supportive counselling nor medication assisted treatment nor combination approaches. Unfortunate but true.
As science figures out the molecular basis of different variants of addictive disease, there may be better interventions discovered. But until then, I’ve no problem with a person like this being locked up for life. He’s shown that he’s a clear and present danger to others and that said dangerous behavior is unlikely to improve.
He’ll probably do ok in a minimum security program with work release. Maybe. If not, a medium security facility should suffice.
17 DUI? Doesn’t anyone stay at home and get fucked up?
Interesting fact:
Whenever I tag one of these old farts driving drunk it’s usually in the late morning. These guys are in the bar right at opening 6am.
They head back home for dinner (older folks call lunch “dinner” around here) about 11:30. As if they don’t drive slow enough already they’ll drive 12 in a 40 when they’re tanked. That’s for real. I paced a beazle neck going 12 on a 40mph divided road one time. She only blew a .11 which isn’t all that drunk yet.
How about liquor stores, home brewing, and home deliveries>
If keep-away ankle bracelets made you giggle, then…shock collars! Invisible fence!
Dan
Googled this one, no luck - I’m always up for a new insult, could you supply a definition? Thanks
Dan
It seems to me it would be easy enough to build a monitor with a GPS capability so the police can track down where the wearer is as well as alarming when they go off the reservation. If it makes the monitor kind of bulky, well sux to be you.
Sure, we can add GPS - think they have already.
But unless you have a squad sitting outside his house to pull him over he’s going to be able to get in a car and drive off, putting others in danger, before the authorities can get to him.
What about those ignition locks that measure BAC?
They’re better now, but my first experience with one was when I walked into a bar and a guy leaving told me he’d buy me a beer if I’d blow for him.
I scowled at him and he said he just needed sober breath to allow him to start his car. I didn’t want to be involved, but he got the next guy walking in to do it.
A neighbor made her husband drive the ignition-lock car while she drove his.
I watched a hidden-camera show on TV some years ago where the supposed convicted drunk driver tried to get a passerby on the sidewalk to blow into the interlock device for him. It took no time at all. Then, they tried it again with a toddler in a child seat in the car. They were still able to get someone to blow for him within a short amount of time.
Just want to point out that a “life sentence” isn’t what the article talks about. It says:
He faces the possibility of spending the rest of his life behind bars.
Which might mean anything from a literal life sentence, to something as relatively mundane as facing 6-10 years in prison, since he’s 75 years old. We need a little more information.