Drunk Driving

[martin34]

@Bryan_Ekers

Well, the second part of the penalty phase is hiding their car keys.

Martin

You ever tried to hide a drunk person’s keys? I have. And I have a mouth full of chipped teeth to prove it.

[martin34]

@Rumor_Watkins

Too bad this isn’t a pit thread. I’d have some really choice words for you.

But.

It is absolutely ludicrous that you perceive “the system” as creating “winners” in “Lawyers, the judicial system, substance abuse counselors and cops”. Newsflash: THEY WOULDN’T BE “WINNERS” IF PEOPLE DIDN’T DRIVE DRUNK.

Secondly, it is even more ludicrous that you think I should have to do anything other than turn on my car to be able to drive it because others can’t be trusted to take care of their own shit.

Thirdly, it is beyond the pale of comprehension that you can point out that the offender is a loser in the current system and then make the implied claim that they are somehow victimized by this.

You have a funny world view.

Martin

What I’m trying to say is the current system is working, but not well enough. I’m trying to look out for You and Your family. Not just me and my family of drunks.

[martin34]

@needscoffee

I don’t know that I agree with enacting this proposal, but it’s evident that drunk drivers will not quit driving drunk. Saying we shouldn’t *have *to do this because they really shouldn’t drive drunk doesn’t change this fact one bit. Maybe we should tell them to Just Say No to driving drunk and they’ll do it?

Any ideas on how to prevent them from driving drunk? I knew a woman who had an interlock device on her car after a drunk driving conviction, and she just drove her husband’s car instead, or borrowed one from a buddy. And once her sentence was over, she was back to her own car. It doesn’t do a lot of good to have only one car modified, or for a limited period of time.

Why would breathalyzer interlocks have to be unhygienic? Just use those little packets of alcohol (heh) wipes. Most people only drive their own cars, anyways.

I hate the notion of doing this, but I sure don’t have any other great ideas of how to keep drunks out of drivers’ seats.

Martin

Thank You

[martin34]

@rulesareweights

All of the sudden it is "illegal to drink and drive. HABEUS CORPUS there cannot be a crime without an injured party. If you are injured by a drunk driver, you have absolutely every right to sue that person and own their wages until they pay the fair damages. totalitarian super laws are illegal, unconstitutional, and a violation of human rights. My freind got stopped on a dirt road 100 miles from anyone, and was forced to pay thousands of dollars and ripped of his right to travel. No one was injured, yet the mafia superfascists stole his life savings in court fines and attached a tracking device to his leg. no one was injured when he was travelling home that night, but he was extorted and forced to pay. The government, by administrating these laws, is saying that an automobile IS a weapon, and if someone drives, they have violent intent. if you know law language that is what it means.

Martin

On your side bro. From my understanding driving is a privilege not a right. That shit wouldn’t have happened if my prop was reality.

[Boyo_Jim]

@martin34

Martin

1. It already exists. Called anitabuse.

2. If there were a DNA answer I’ll all for it. So far Dolly ain’t doin’ so well.

I don’t understand what you mean by a “DNA answer”.

Also, I don’t know if that drug could be administered by a pump under the skin – I know the pump part is being worked on to adminster insulin to diabetics, and presumably other drugs as well.

[martin34]

@FinnAgain

They’re laws instituted by Mafia Superfascists.

Martin

Edit:

Martin SuperFacists lol

[martin34]

@Sateryn76

I believe most people are rational, and respond to deterrents. I’m sure many people respond more to the deterrent effect of a shoplifting conviction then to the moral guilt that stealing is wrong.

I think we should ramp up the penalties for drunk driving, something like - the first conviction is automatic loss of license for six months, the second gets you a year in jail. Really make it hurt when you do it, and do away with the numerous pleas deals that take the DD charge down to reckless driving or some such.

It would take about 10 years or so of the new penalties to take effect as the older generation ages out, but the newer generation would understand the penalties and be afraid of jail.

Martin

Right right. That saves your daughter/son’s life. Just like it has in Illinois with some of the most stringent DUI laws.

[Boyo_Jim]

@martin34

…
Their needs to be an emergency bypass system for emergencies.,

Seriously, why would there need to be an emergency bypass? I cannot conceive of any good reason.

[martin34]

@Bryan_Ekers

It’s easier and cheaper to just fuck over the criminals who drive drunk than to try to impose some kind of expensive, untested, possibly error-prone technology on all of us.

Sorry, martin. I’d rather see you horsewhipped in the public square and tossed in the dungeon for your crimes than have to pay to prove I’m not also guilty of the same crime each time I drive.

And for the record, on the very rare occasions I drink alcohol at events from which I’ll be driving home, I drink very lightly and stop drinking hours before the event ends, to give me full chance to metabolize. If I’d been driver-tested constantly over the last 20 years, I doubt I’d ever have registered higher than a 0.01, if that.

Martin

I’ll take a horsewhipping if this gets enacted.

[martin34]

@Wilbo523

Anybody that has had 4 dui’s and is still worried about themselves drinking and driving that they believe there should just be a device on the car to save me and others from myself would figure out how to bypass it as well.

Why not come up with a medical solution, that somehow causes your body to become highly allergic to alcohol. If you consume alcohol your body goes into toxic shock and without an injection from something like an epi pen that neutralizes the alcohol in your bloodstream, you would die. Hey we put a man on the moon. Besides, that would put more responsibility on you and less of a burden on the rest of us.

Martin

10,000 people muther fucker. Every year. What don’t you understand? Are you going to have this conversation with every potential? According to what I’ve heard in these classes, a drunk driver only gets caught 1 of 500 trys.

Sorry. I think my jeans were cut for women.

[needscoffee]

@martin34

1. It already exists. Called anitabuse.

Isn’t that what Clarence Thomas committed?

[martin34]

@Mr.Excellent

I’m always amused by the self-pitying drunk-drivers complaining about how unfair it is that they’ve got DUIs on their records.

Folks, it’s very simple - if you’re going to get drunk, use public transit (if available) or a taxi to get home. If there isn’t any public transit, and you can’t afford a cab, then get drunk in the comfort of your own home, and limit yourself to a single beer (two at the most) when you go out. Problem solved.

Yes, I know there’s a chorus of people who’ll shout out that they don’t feel impaired at blood alcohol level whatever, or that they’re confident they can still drive, or whatever. Frankly, these claims aren’t particularly credible. People are terrible at assessing their own state of impairment. Perhaps you really do have an unusually high tolerance - but drunk driving is so dangerous that we, as a society, have a right to err on the side of caution.

As for the OP: If you have four DUIs on your record, I don’t want to even think about the number of times you’ve driven under the influence. Shame on you, sir.

Martin

Believe me. Shame is mine. But my shame hopefully will help solve this problem that hasn’t been fixed. (Mr. Brightside) Next thing you know I’ll be railing on how prostitution should be legal. POW BANG BOOM to be continued…

[martin34]

@pravnik

We’ve discussed the possibility of requiring interlock devices on all cars in the United States before. Currently, it’s unworkable.

Ignition interlocaks are expensive, to the tune of $1500 to $2000 per unit. Also they have to be maintained and recalibrated every 60 days, and are a pain in the ass to use, particulalry the “rolling test” that retests the driver periodically while operating the vehicle. Any such law would also very likely have to be passed at the federal level to pass constitutional muster, the end result being that the vast majority of lawabiding citizens with no intention of driving drunk in the first place aren’t going to stand for the federal government requiring them to pay an extra grand or two to get the unit, get it recalibrated six times a year, and blow into it every 30 minutes or so while driving.

Martin

Not what I’m suggesting. A workable hand on the wheel system cannot be that complicated. Something that only takes alcohol samples from the warm wet spot on steering wheel. Not a scientist, but it has to be possible.

New rivers: Oh my hands are cold. The seat belt wrinkles my shirt. The air bag broke my nose. Cry me.

[martin34]

@Rumor_Watkins

what the OP proposes is not proactive. its inane.

you know what? there’s a simple way to fix this. don’t fucking drive while under the influence.

it is a tiered system. first time offenders get off with a fine and some mandatory education programs - programs which, frankly based on the apologist/“i’m a victim too” comments made in this thread, are sorely needed. sots who can’t help themselves face progressively stiffer penalties. here’s a tip: once you get your first freebie DUI, stop fucking drinking outside your home!

Martin

Tell that to the 10k dead every year.

[Der_Trihs]

@Stranger_On_A_Train

Un-fucking-workable, as in easily circumvented and prohibitively expensive to the overall public, the majority of whom seem to have no difficulty in remaining within the allowable BAC for operating a motor vehicle.

Stranger

How exactly do you know that it’s “easily subverted”? And as I’ve repeatedly said I was talking about the technological side of it, not the expense which I (repeatedly!) said would be too high.

[martin34]

@martin34

Ok Peeps…here I go again,

Another half drunken/half baked idea.

The last year I found data (2008) there were 13,846 alcohol related deaths on the roads of America (alcoholalert.com) down from 26,173 in '82. Close to 4x the current Iraq war total of 4,432. (antiwar.com)

Pass this sentence:
I think this is due to a combination of buckle-up campaigns, airbags and tighter DUI/DWI regulations pushed by MADD.

Me and people I have spoken with about this, think that the next step is Alcohol detection devices on the steering wheel as standard equipment on all cars.

Not saying a breathalizer, because I think that’s unhygenic, but something that I’m not sure has been invented yet, on the steering wheel. (we went to the moon muther fuckers)

Disclaimer:
I have 4 DUIs. I have never hit or hurt anyone, but if I had, I could never forgive myself as well as I’m sure most of the offenders.

Anecdotes:
While in jail for one of my Dueys I was met by an older guy who asked me what I was in for. I told him and when I asked him what he was in for he said, “After my father’s funeral me and my brother went out drinking,” which is standard fare for most in my demographic, “and on the ride home I lost control and killed my brother.”
His family didn’t want him to do time, as proved by his county sentence and not a prison term.

During a lot of the counseling I went through, everyone had a bad taste in their mouths because of their sentence. (in Illinois a second DUI is considered a Felony)

You pay 5k for a lawyer, do counseling, and lose your license. Fair objectively, but not a solution. People loose their jobs, become unproductive citizens and are a further supposed weights on society.

Who wins with the current system:
Lawyers, the judicial system, substance abuse counselors and cops.

Who loses:
MADD, and more impotantly victims and offenders.

With my proposed solution:

Winners:
Victims (Not saying there won’t be any because there will always be people who can circumnavigate the system. So I propose increasing the penalty for people who tamper with their cars.)
Offenders (Won’t loose their license and possibly their job.)
Society (Dramatically less sober vehicular casualties and more people being employable.)
Insurance Companies (Less claims)
Cops (more time to work on crazier shit)

Losers:
Auto companies (higher production costs)
Society (higher auto costs)
Lawyers/legal system (reduced work/fees for DUI related offenses)
Cops (Less arrests and OT for court cases)
MADD (Very little drunk driving. Hopefully, if their credo is what I think it should be, they can move to a skeleton crew to make sure the laws aren’t repealed.)

That’s my proposition. I have sent a letter to MADD but I’m not sure anyone got it.
P.S.
Keep the machines calibrated to allow the legal limit.

Their needs to be an emergency bypass system for emergencies.

P.S. sorry for all the commas

P.P.S. Goulet

BTW Thank you everyone for commenting. My point was to plant the seed to the Edu/Alliteratti.

[Bryan_Ekers]

I think we have enough ragweed plants, but thanks.

[FinnAgain]

I, too, can not stand people who use alliteration.

[Marley23]

@martin34

10,000 people muther fucker.

You’re not allowed to insult other posters in this forum, or any forum here except the BBQ Pit. I’m giving you a formal warning, so please don’t do this again.

[Marley23]

@martin34

You can drink and drive, just not over the legal limit.

You missed the point. The point is that a small number of people drink and drive, which is a stupid and dangerous thing to do, and your solution is to treat every driver in the country like a parolee and make them constantly prove they’re not drunk. That’s unreasonable. Why not just ban cars? Then the sober drivers AND the drunk drivers won’t kill anybody.

@martin34

The system sets off an SOS to the local 911 service.

If I can jailbreak my iPhone and steal movies online, it would probably be very easy to download a hack that would make the BAC detector useless.