Page 1 of 2
How far should drunk driving punishment go?
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:26 pmby DublinDoogey
I'm attending a mock government camp soon and we are required to write a bill for the mock senate section.
I decided to write one that would create stricter drunk driving punishments and I was just wondering what the people here thought would be good limits, jail times, monetary fees, ect...
thanks!
edit: I ask that you take this seriously, it isn't a joke. Also, could you also state actual limits or punishments, I'd appreciate that 
thanks again!
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:30 pmby jay_a2j
death penalty
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:32 pmby Machiavelli
It depends on the outcome, how drunk they were and if they have committed this crime before.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:32 pmby Master Bush
I don't think you should be punished at all.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:33 pmby Machiavelli
Do you guys take anything seriously
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:33 pmby DublinDoogey
Machiavelli wrote:It depends on the outcome, how drunk they were and if they have committed this crime before.
would you mind elaborating?
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:36 pmby jay_a2j
Master Bush wrote:I don't think you should be punished at all.
Well here's a guy we don't want making our laws.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:36 pmby AK_iceman
if its a repeat offense the penalty should be considerably higher than normal.
and if they hurt someone or cause an accident involving innocent people i would also hope the punishment would be higher than normal.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:38 pmby Machiavelli
DublinDoogey wrote:Machiavelli wrote:It depends on the outcome, how drunk they were and if they have committed this crime before.
would you mind elaborating?
AK_iceman wrote:if its a repeat offense the penalty should be considerably higher than normal.
and if they hurt someone or cause an involving people i would also hope the punishment would be higher than normal.
This is basically what I meant, except I also meant that it depends on their b!ood-alchohol level (how much they had to drink)
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:39 pmby 2dimes
First offense $10 000 fine.
Second Casteration.
Third firm warning.
Fourth License suspended for 11 hours.
Fifth free caig.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:41 pmby Machiavelli
And I repeat...
Machiavelli wrote:Do you guys take anything seriously
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:42 pmby Master Bush
Oh, I'm sorry guys. I thought the question was asking about rape. Carry on.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:43 pmby 2dimes
Machiavelli wrote:And I repeat...
Machiavelli wrote:Do you guys take anything seriously
Casteration's not serious where you live?
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:46 pmby Machiavelli
2dimes wrote:Machiavelli wrote:And I repeat...
Machiavelli wrote:Do you guys take anything seriously
Casteration's not serious where you live?
Well giving someone a free keg after their fifth offense isnt
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:47 pmby 2dimes
Well I figured if you were not deffered by casteration you're not going to stop so I might as well get you too loaded to drive.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:53 pmby reverend_kyle
I just got out of driver's ed and well, they are already pretty strict... I'd actually loosen em a bit.
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:04 pmby rocksolid
Actual limits in most places in North America are at .08 - and I may be mistaken, but I think .08 means .08% alcohol/blood volume - so for each litre of blood, no more than 8/10 of a millilitre of alcohol. I think there are still a couple of rogue states in the U.S. where the limit is .10.
In Canada, I believe impaired driving is a distinct crime from driving over the limit, so the prosecution doesn't have to show evidence your driving was messed up to convict you, they just have to show the results of your breathalyzer test, though of course the sentences attached to impaired driving are higher. And refusing to take a breathalyzer test is its own crime.
As for the U.S., I think it differs from state to state, as criminal law is state law, not federal like in Canada.
Hope this helps...
Posted:
Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:44 pmby TitusFinn
jay_a2j wrote:death penalty
The christian jokes.
Posted:
Tue Jul 18, 2006 4:59 amby jay_a2j
TitusFinn wrote:jay_a2j wrote:death penalty
The christian jokes.
Yeah it was a joke. But come on with the "easing up" on the D & D penalties! I drove ONCE under the influance(and only about 1/2 mile) and didn't like the feeling. So I never did it again. Put yourself in the shoes of the family members who lost a relative cause some drunk ran a red light. Tell them the laws are too harsh.
Posted:
Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:27 amby wcaclimbing
i think there should be a big fine and whoever was cought would be put in one of those centers that make them not addicted to alcohol.
that would solve the problems
Posted:
Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:29 amby jay_a2j
wcaclimbing wrote:i think there should be a big fine and whoever was cought would be put in one of those centers that make them not addicted to alcohol.
that would solve the problems
once addicted, you can't be "not addicted". You can however be in recovery.
Posted:
Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:37 amby 2dimes
jay_a2j wrote:once addicted, you can't be "not addicted". You can however be in recovery.
I disagree, however you are correct in thinking a program cannot fix it.
Posted:
Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:16 pmby Aladriel
I really hate zero-tolerance policies when it comes to anything. I also hate the "one-size fits all" punishments as well. Everyone and every situation is unique.
Should someone who was drunk, decided to get in a car, drive, and then plow into a minivan and kill everyone get off with just a fine? Heck no. I'm pretty sure he shouldn't ever be able to drive again. Or that there be some serious barriers that he has to overcome first (rehab, community service, therapy, and I mean all three of those, at least.)
But, what about the person who got in his car drunk and just hit a pole, only injuring himself? And then puts himself into rehab, goes back to school (also on his own) and then gets his own place? Does he deserve the fine, one week in jail, and then two months of home detention? Which of course, then messes up his schooling and puts him behind?
I hate drunk drivers. It's a stupidly selfish thing for anyone to do. It's not that difficult to call a cab, people.
Posted:
Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:27 pmby elebdae
I seriously think the person that gets caugh drunk-driving should lose his licence and have to redoe it all over from the begining (the 8 months that you have to drive with a person who has his full licence and the 2 years with 0 tolerance and only 4 points)
If you only injure yourself, it should be enough (with a program to make shure you are not addicted to alcohol or does not recidivate)
But if you injure other people, it should be a non-premidited attack sentence combine with a drunken "bonus penalty" that you spend time in jail or cummunity service etc...
(sorry for my english, it's not my first language)
Posted:
Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:30 pmby 2dimes
Ok I'm going to break down and be serious for part of a post.
I think there should be a fine. $2000 or more.
Knowing that it will cost a couple thousand dollars suddenly deters people possibly even if they are loaded.
The reason people do it is usually a combination of not wanting to leave their car at the bar and not wanting to pay for a taxi. If it was way cheaper to take a cab most people would respond to that.