What can YOU do to reduce drunk driving? PLENTY!
Much of it can be accomplished by contacting your local state legislator(s). Let them know that you support:
- Extended license suspensions and/or revocations for those with multiple drunk driving offenses. We seem to have lost the concept that a driver’s license is a privilege, not a right. Here at DUIBlotter.com, we would be in favor of something along the lines of the following:
1st DUI Mandatory 90 day suspension
2nd DUI Mandatory 2 year suspension
3rd DUI Mandatory 10 year suspension
4th DUI Lifetime loss of privilege
- We suggest that conditional or restricted licenses which permit driving to/from work or school be granted only in exceptional cases, and NEVER for repeat offenders.
- Ignition interlocks for convicted drunk drivers.
- Alcohol-monitoring bracelets for convicted drunk drivers whose licenses are temporarily suspended.
- Elimination of laws that clear DUIs from an individual’s record after ‘x’ years.
- Elimination of laws that increase penalties for multiple offenders only when they occurred within a predetermined time limit. Second, third, and subsequent DUIs are indicators of a serious problem and signify the presence of a major threat to the safety and well-being of the community. It makes no difference if those offenses were separated by days, weeks, months, years, or decades. All repeat offenders must be dealt with by the court system as a serious threat to public safety.
In addition to state lawmakers, it can help if we make our views known to local judges and prosecutors. Let them know you support:
- DWI Courts – They are building an amazing track record of success in reducing repeat offenders.
- Ignition interlocks
- Alcohol-monitoring bracelets
- Aggressive license suspensions and revocations.
- No plea bargains. If we are to reduce the carnage caused by the chronic drunk driver, we must first be able to identify them. We have to stop treating the drunk driver like they were just unlucky to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. It was the wrong place at the wrong time because the drunk driver made it that way. Get them help, by all means – treatment, counseling, education, etc. But failure to build the appropriate and accurate legal history leaves the public vulnerable
- No diversion programs. See the discussion regarding plea bargains. Again, we fully support getting help for the individual with an alcohol problem – POST-conviction! If services are warranted or desired while the matter is pending, compliance with or accomplishment of those programs should have no bearing on any subsequent plea agreements or sentencing guidelines.
More to come!
Meanwhile, please feel free to join in the discussion.
I am trying to figure out if I support this ( think I may). Are you suggesting that the judicial process should have exceptions (or lack thereof) to other crimes? I.e. no authority for prosecutors to show leniency in individual cases. That seems counter to the whole base of the judicial system in the states. Please let me know your thoughts.
I apologize for being slow to respond to your query. This site is obviously something I do in my very limited spare time. I do attempt to respond to any and all questions or comments. Mandatory sentencing laws are not a new concept. Quite the contrary, the plea negotiation process as we know it is a much more recent construct. It presents many advantages, streamlining the criminal caseload immeasurably. But just as states have minimum and maximum penalties for various crimes, establishing some state standards in sentencing, suspensions, and the like is far from a radical proposal. Thanks for your interest.