# Toughening DUI



## KEN W

I was very disappointed to see our Senate vote down this bill.It seems they decided it wasn't worth the money to build more prison cells to keep drunk drivers off the road.

It would have made a THIRD conviction a felony,with up to a 10 year sentence and a $5,000 fine.But it would have cost $850,000 to increase jail space.

I guess our safety has a price tag. :eyeroll:


----------



## Bore.224

I do understand your concern, We have over 1 million people in jail more than any other society guess we need more??


----------



## Bobm

I agree Ken, its a big problem if no jail time what alternatives do you think would work.
I have a few ideas

1)I think all dui convictions should go into a datebase that could be checked at point of sale and printed across there DL identifcation.

2) anyone caught buying them liquor would suffer a first time $5000.00 fine ( make it well known in all places of sale with signs and advertising program what the penalty for aiding the purchase of alchohol to give to convicted DUI criminals )
double the fine every time they do it if they are that stupid.

3) permanent loss of driving priviledges, I mean for the rest of your life.

4) first time offense fine $10,000.00 double it every time.

You make the punishment draconian enough most of it will stop happening


----------



## Bore.224

Bobm What about Resturants and Bars would they be suject to this $5000.00 dollar fine and if so say hello to another dollar for your beer "insurance"with dinner and better have your ID ready!!

Not to say this would not be worth stopping a drunk driver!!

What about .08 BAC being leagaly drunk behind the wheel!! That means 1 drink for a 150 lb person !!

Would your new law be enforcable against any of the Kennedy's cause I hear Teddy has gotton away a few times


----------



## KEN W

It still would come down to jail time for repeat offenders.There are a lot of people who couldn't pay a $10,000 fine.

As it is now.....our local paper has people listed for driving w/o a valid license every week.

A lifetime suspension might work for a lot of them.

Isn't 1 drink equivalent to .02 BAC for the average person?

That would be 4 drinks for DUI.


----------



## Bore.224

KEN W said:


> .
> 
> Isn't 1 drink equivalent to .02 BAC for the average person?
> 
> That would be 4 drinks for DUI.


Yeah I am not sure about that My old girlfreind was 4'11 and 105 lbs so I was thinking of that not a 150 pounder.

Yep 1 drink with her and............. Gosh I miss that girl :wink:


----------



## MOB

I think the 0.08 BAC limit imposed by the federal government on the states is draconian enough. It's not the 0.08 or the 0.1 BAC drivers that are the problem out on the roads, it's the higher ones that cause all the problems. The lower limit was a "feel good" law pushed by groups like MAD that put more innocent people into the judicial system and made the insurance and counseling companies richer.
Now maybe if we could make the penalties relative to the BAC while behind the wheel would be a good approach. I don't think an occasional drinker coming home from a party at 0.08 and stopped at a checkpoint should be treated the same as someone who has a BAC of 2.0. Do you?
In SD, your BAC does make a difference in jail time suspended on your sentence but not in the fine or the insurance premiums.
I've never got a DWI, but do know a few who have and it's an ugly affair. It does make you think twice about whether to have another if you have to drive.


----------



## jgat

Our drunk driving laws are a joke. People are not afraid to drive drunk, because they know if they get caught that it will sting a little bit, but not hurt them that bad. We need to make the penalty a lot stiffer. Things won't start to change until we do. IMO .08 should be the same as .20 as far as being a drunk driver. Obviously someone with a .20 is in a lot worse shape than someone with a .08, but breaking the law is breaking the law. If you're afraid you could get arrested for having a few drinks and driving home, than stay home and drink! Don't risk my life or yours by making a dumb choice that can be 100% avoided by doing the right thing.


----------



## Bore.224

MOB that is exactaly what I was trying to get at, Great post I agree with you 100%


----------



## Bobm

When your looking at your little brother (and best friend you ever had )dieing in the street due to a drunk driver you can't get draconian enough to suit me.

I would support the death penalty to repeat offenders and vowed to 
myself that if it ever happens to one of my kids I will personally deliver it.

I hope I never have to suffer like I saw my parents have to, over this.

I don't give a F about restaraunts and bars way too many people good people are killed by idiots screwing up their brains on that crap....

IF they have to do it they should do it at home on their living room couch nothing good comes of it anyway.


----------



## huntin1

MOB said:


> I think the 0.08 BAC limit imposed by the federal government on the states is draconian enough. It's not the 0.08 or the 0.1 BAC drivers that are the problem out on the roads, it's the higher ones that cause all the problems. The lower limit was a "feel good" law pushed by groups like MAD that put more innocent people into the judicial system and made the insurance and counseling companies richer.
> Now maybe if we could make the penalties relative to the BAC while behind the wheel would be a good approach. I don't think an occasional drinker coming home from a party at 0.08 and stopped at a checkpoint should be treated the same as someone who has a BAC of 2.0. Do you?
> In SD, your BAC does make a difference in jail time suspended on your sentence but not in the fine or the insurance premiums.
> I've never got a DWI, but do know a few who have and it's an ugly affair. It does make you think twice about whether to have another if you have to drive.


Ever had a loved one killed by a drunk driver?

Impaired is impaired, be it a BAC of .08, .1 or .2 there is no innocence involved if they are driving impaired.

Would you consider drinking 4 or 5 beers and then hitting the duck blind with your buddies for a little shooting? Oh, that's different, right? You are handling a dangerous weapon, right?

So a 2000-3000 pound vehicle being driven by an impaired driver isn't a dangerous weapon, but it will kill you just as quick as a load of 4 shot from your drunken buddies shotgun.

huntin1


----------



## Gohon

> It would have made a THIRD conviction a felony,with up to a 10 year sentence and a $5,000 fine.But it would have cost $850,000 to increase jail space.


Not strong enough. First conviction should be $5,000 or 30 days in jail with road gang work. Second conviction should be a felony, $10,000 fine or one year in jail. Third conviction should be mandatory $10,000 and 5 years in jail. That new jail would be paid for pretty soon. It is not a joke when you're burying a loved one because some idiot doesn't know how to stay from behind the wheel when drinking. Another million in jail wouldn't bother me a bit.


----------



## Bore.224

Ok lets go with what you fella's want can't get Draconian enought?? this is what you do.

Close down all the bars!! Stop serving alcohol in resturants!!!

This will help stop the problem and save I don't know how many lives.

Bar's and resturant's "ALL OF THEM" know legaly impared drivers, drive out of thier parking lots every night. THIS IS THE TRUTH I KNOW!!!!

It's big money and the bottom line is YES their is a price on your saftey!!! Plus the state rather create programs for DWI and collect the fines then really save lives.

So in short you are pointing the finger in the wrong direction, to punish a guy with .08 the same as a guy all over the road that cannot speak is criminal in itself!!!!!!!


----------



## KEN W

Heck in some Arab countries they shoot you for a DUI.I think one of the Central American countries does that to.

I guess my point in this is that.....money for jail space shouldn't be a deciding factor in keeping drunk drivers off the road and that's what it came down to when our Senate voted it down. :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman

If most of our legislatures were to trip, fall, and hit their head on the sidewalk, money not brains would leak out. If this were not true they would have passed the stickter DUI, and pen shooting animals would not exist either. Money is their God.


----------



## DJRooster

The problem with people drinking is that they use poor judgement so when they drink and are the most vulnerable and they still think they can drive and we know where this leads. For many repeat offenders it is an addiction and without a cure, a jail cell is the only way they will not be back on the road. For most repeat offenders, alcohol is such big part of their lives that is impossible for them not to drive and drink. A very tough penalty will ruin the life of a chronic DUI offender but how much do we owe people with an addictiion vs the innocent people who are out on the street and the potential victim of a DUI driver. It's too bad that alcohol is such a big part of our culture. Here in lies a big part of the problem. A more strict DUI law may help but there is so much more to the problem than the penalty for the infraction.


----------



## zogman

I have been watching this thread and been trying to decide how to compose my thougths. That being said Rooster's post said it best.
It's real easy to punish the crime, however jail time and big fines will NOT cure the Alcoholic. I don't have the answer and it is a very serious problem.


----------



## Norm70

Ken, in ecuador you get executed for Drunken Driving.


----------



## g/o

Plainsman said:


> If most of our legislatures were to trip, fall, and hit their head on the sidewalk, money not brains would leak out. If this were not true they would have passed the stickter DUI, and pen shooting animals would not exist either. Money is their God.


WOW!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## KEN W

Norm70 said:


> Ken, in ecuador you get executed for Drunken Driving.


I'll bet there aren't a lot of DUI's in Ecquador.


----------



## Powder

There definitely aren't any repeat offenders!


----------



## Plainsman

Rooster, I can't improve on what you have said. We can not forget that when we send a DUI to prison the whole family suffers. What to do???? Fine a drunk guy and the wife and kids suffer. Maybe incarceration with work release, and week-ends with public service for five years? They tick me off and if it wasn't for innocent people suffering when they go to jail I would throw them in for a long time.


----------



## Norm70

Thats a pretty "liberal" statment plainsman. I am proud of you


----------



## Bobm

Don't put them in prison and they kill a member of someone elses family which one suffers most :******:

F them throw away the key.


----------



## huntin1

Bore.224 said:


> Ok lets go with what you fella's want can't get Draconian enought?? this is what you do.
> 
> Close down all the bars!! Stop serving alcohol in resturants!!!
> 
> This will help stop the problem and save I don't know how many lives.
> 
> Bar's and resturant's "ALL OF THEM" know legaly impared drivers, drive out of thier parking lots every night. THIS IS THE TRUTH I KNOW!!!!
> 
> It's big money and the bottom line is YES their is a price on your saftey!!! Plus the state rather create programs for DWI and collect the fines then really save lives.
> 
> So in short you are pointing the finger in the wrong direction, to punish a guy with .08 the same as a guy all over the road that cannot speak is criminal in itself!!!!!!!


In my 27 years as a police officer I've seen an awfull lot of pain and suffering cause by drunk drivers, including those who were "only" .08 or .09. My Grandfather was killed by one of those impaired drivers that was "only" .08, witnesses said that she was all over the road. So don't tell me that arresting drivers who are "only" .08 is criminal.

Come back and talk to me when drunk driving has impacted your life.

huntin1


----------



## Plainsman

So maybe we need to have different types of incarceration. Like the Sheriff in Arizona that makes these people work to earn their keep. Start a plant that produces products for the army or other government agencies. Accompany these manufacturing plants with housing and throw these drunks in there for five to ten years. Provide family visitation on week-ends. We need to keep these guys off the road, and I sure agree with that. Give them a five year term for their first offense. If they keep doing it throw them in and the key away I guess. Wifey can find something better. If they know this before hand, who's fault is it if they never see daylight again? It's their fault not ours. 
Your right Bob and hunt1, the hurt of their family seeing mom or dad in prison is not comparable to watching your loved ones casket get lowered into the ground. I guess this is a loose loose situation and the drunk started the ball rolling. 
It's like war, I don't like the peripheral damage of jail time, but I don't feel bad enough to leave the drunk out their to kill someone. I have little sympathy for the repeat offender. Perhaps your doing the family a favor when you throw the multiple repeat in for a long time. It might be one of them he kills next time he is on the road with them in the car. 
Nothing is going to make me feel good about this situation, it's just variable degrees of bad.


----------



## 280IM

I have buried a grand child killed by a drunk driver. I travel many miles every year and will not drink and drive,nomatter where you are you can always get some to take you home or back to a motel room. The fact is you cann't drink and drive!!!! There is no such thing as pitty for a drunk behind the wheel. When a repeat offender can plea bargin down to a second offense after being arested for the 4th time is not what the law should allow. The fact that a dumb *** college student that kills your grandchild and his father can bring his check book and beg the court not to ruin his sons life for a mistake he has made is not right. A drunk driver that hurts or kills a child is not better than a child molester and should be treated the same. This is my opion build the jails, charge a tax on the booze you drink to build them. Give them all the treatment you want behind bars not out with the possibleity of killing another child!!! On CNN tonight it was said that half of all college students binge drink and use illegal drugs. Build bigger jails there is more coming!!! Drink yourself to death if you want to, just don't drive!! As the man said you can't fix stupid! This might piss some of you off but I was more than ****** off with the sentance the idiot got for taking my grqnd sons life!
hunting 1 I know how you feel.


----------



## Plainsman

Norm70 said:


> Thats a pretty "liberal" statment plainsman. I am proud of you


Ya, Rooster was proud of me for a short while one day also. Real short while as I remember. 

I was going to pass up commenting on this thread, because I can imagine how people feel who have lost a loved one to a drunk. I can also imagine (notice I didn't say understand) how a wife, husband, or child must feel seeing a loved one go to prison. I don't however have any sympathy for a drunk who kills someone. 
I guess if the wife or husband doesn't become more active in helping their alcoholic spouse they are part of the problem. I know some don't have any control especially wives with alcoholic abusive husbands. In some cases we are perhaps doing the wife a favor throwing the low life husband in jail. 
I mentioned locking them up in a manufacturing plant, work type prison, so that they could not only pay for their keep, but perhaps earn some money towards supporting their family. This isn't a conservative or liberal idea, it's an idea that makes the drunk responsible while keeping his family off the welfare rolls. Prison for the offender, no tax burden to the public, and support for the family. 
There is no doubt that for some prison is the only thing that will keep them from being drunk behind the wheel. Some don't get it, some don't care, and I don't have any ideas with ideal outcome so I am probably getting myself into trouble just commenting on this thread. I shouldn't pass up these opportunities to keep my mouth shut.


----------



## 280IM

I paid in the 6 figure range with all taxes last year and dam glad to pay my share to keep a poor mis-understood drunk driver in jail. By having them there they will not kill the member of someone elses family. Just what is a life worth compared to the cost of keeping the SOB in jail? Build more jails crimnals belong there. Killing someone with the excuss of being drunk or just under the .08 makes you a crimnal!!! I feel very strongly about this and I am only one of many that buryed a family member do to a drunk driver. If the doctor told me I had 2 weeks to live I know someone who would have less time!!


----------



## Plainsman

280IM, I know I would feel the same as you in your situation. No doubt in my mind.


----------



## zogman

280IM and Huntin 1,
I am very sorry for your loss. My earlier post was not complete. I too feel we need to get the drunk drivers off the streets. As a new grandpa I am sure you feel the loss every day. I will pray for you both.


----------



## boondocks

Plainsman said:


> So maybe we need to have different types of incarceration. Like the Sheriff in Arizona that makes these people work to earn their keep. Start a plant that produces products for the army or other government agencies. .


Best idea I have heard in a long time. They should be working the heck out of all prisoners and the ones that don't want to work, break out the ole whips and whip them till they do work.

As many prison inmates that are out there the tax payers shouldn't have to pay a red cent towards the prison system.

Illegal immigrants want to come up here and work so bad, throw them in prison and put them to work. The possibilities are endless.


----------



## KEN W

All these strong feelings about DUI and our legislature votes it down.I don't think enough people let them know how we really feel about this.


----------



## Gohon

> All these strong feelings about DUI and our legislature votes it down.I don't think enough people let them know how we really feel about this.


I've always felt those that always and do loudly voice their opinion on these matters are the judges and trial lawyers who hate the word mandatory. It takes away one of their favorite tools which is sentence negotiation. After all, aren't most all legislatures lawyers and who better to sway the votes than peers of the same flock.


----------



## Plainsman

Gohon, here in North Dakota the greatest representation in the legislature is farmers not lawyers. Go figure.


----------



## zogman

And in good ol GF can you believe..............Ken I hope you are sitting down.
School teachers that are Republician :beer: One is retired. Still counts. :wink:


----------



## KEN W

Retired teacher Ray Holmberg from GF is a Republican Senator.


----------



## zogman

Wasn't/isn't Darrell Notastad(sp)a teacher also??????


----------



## KEN W

He is a retired principal from Park River.

Gil Herbal is also a retired teacher who is Republican.


----------



## 280IM

If jail time and an attempt to rehabilate doesn't stop these drunks form driving,seriously what can be done? I like a drink but will not drive, I couldn't live with myself if there was an accident. Out lawing booze has been tryed it will not work. There is a law against shooting them,I had that explained to me in a big way.. The Bible says to forgive and God will take care of it. Beating hell out of a drunk driver makes your hands sore.
Plus it doesn't look good on your resume if you get your *** kicked by a drunk driver. If the drunk driver does't care what happens to him and continues to drive just what can you do?


----------



## Bobm

You keep ramping up the punishment until the pain outweighs the pleasure


----------



## 280IM

life in prison will only stop some of them. I did a lot of resurch after the death of my grandson. Repeat offenders keep getting reduced sentances depending on how big their bank account is, Lawyers and Judges make money off drunk drivers. If drunk driving was stopped or cut down 90% some of these lawyers income would come down. Booze and durgs create money for some and death and grif for others.


----------



## Bobm

mandatory sentencing, take it way from the slick lawyers and their buddies the judges uke:


----------



## Bore.224

huntin1 said:


> Bore.224 said:
> 
> 
> 
> !
> 
> 
> 
> In my 27 years as a police officer I've seen an awfull lot of pain and suffering cause by drunk drivers, including those who were "only" .08 or .09. My Grandfather was killed by one of those impaired drivers that was "only" .08, witnesses said that she was all over the road. So don't tell me that arresting drivers who are "only" .08 is criminal.
> 
> Come back and talk to me when drunk driving has impacted your life.
> 
> huntin1
Click to expand...

huntin1.. 1st off I am sorry to hear about your grandfather, as a police office their is no doubt you have way more experiance with this than myself. With that being said and the fact that with your experiance you feel .08 is a dangerous BAC level how do you feel about what I said!! No serving of alcohohal at all in bar's or resturants?

Look at it this way, their is a momma snake in your back yard! Every day you run around stopping her little baby viper offspring running around your yard looking for somebody to bite.

Hitting the baby viper's is great but why not dig out the momma snake once and for all?? I think I know why but will not get into that rigt now.

Once again I am sorry for folks who have lost loved ones and I in no way ment any disrespect, I am as you are looking for a solution to a problem.


----------



## Bobm

people in restaraunts should have a designated non drinking driver or not drink.

.08 is way to liberal anything over .00 send to jail.


----------



## not for hire goose guide

Ken W posted Heck in some Arab countries they shoot you for a DUI.I think one of the Central American countries does that to.************************************************************ "get facts before you assume and start a post saying i think" please this only adds to more confussion to the nature of the laws intent!! just my 2 cents


----------



## Bore.224

Bobm said:


> people in restaraunts should have a designated non drinking driver or not drink.
> 
> .08 is way to liberal anything over .00 send to jail.


Allright then!! How about prescription drugs, just recently one of the kennedy's beat a DUI rap because he blamed it on sleeping pills'.

How about the worst drug abusers of all "the elderly" they play bumper cars all the way to the drug store hey sometimes they drive their cars right into the store.

50% of accidents are alcohol related from what I hear! I wonder what % are the elderly on med's?

I think we should also consider taking away the licences of most of these elderly driver's as well or at least mandatory eye , ear and reaction testing evry 6 month's and the one's on drugs should have their licences taken away!! Or they too should be put in Jail to spend their golden years!!


----------



## huntin1

Bore.224huntin1.. 1st off I am sorry to hear about your grandfather said:


> It would be next to impossible to outlaw alcohol in restaurants, bars would be imossible. Just too much money made in these businesses. 1 or 2 drinks with a meal is not the problem. Although when I know that I will be driving I even avoid that. Not everyone does. I don't have any easy answers.
> 
> When compared to the cost of a DUI a taxi is cheap. If you consider what can happen if you have an accident, a taxi is unbelievably cheap.
> 
> So I guess that would be my answer, if you want to drink have a designated driver or take a taxi.
> 
> huntin1


----------



## 280IM

Bore.224 your remarks about the elderlys Golden Years is way out of line but I can understand how a person like you would say something like that. Why don't you oranize your own prisons for them? Now when you come to get me and put me behind bars for my Golden Years wear your vest!!!! And don't show thinking if you test .08 is alright. Now go have a beer or two and drive around.


----------



## Bore.224

280IM said:


> Bore.224 your remarks about the elderlys Golden Years is way out of line but I can understand how a person like you would say something like that. Why don't you oranize your own prisons for them? Now when you come to get me and put me behind bars for my Golden Years wear your vest!!!! And don't show thinking if you test .08 is alright. Now go have a beer or two and drive around.


Ok next time some old guy stomps on the gas instead of the break "Don't come crying to me".

What kind of vest should I wear for that!!!????

Yep the elderly get all the break's but hey they do most of the voting so I guess that makes sence!

Now I will go have a few beer's but leave the driving part out!!


----------



## 280IM

Don't any of you old guys pull out in front of Bore.224. Just how old are the old guys? Maybe prisons for drunk drives and the elderly is the way to solve a number of problems.


----------



## Bore.224

C'mon 280 don't be so touchy feely!!


----------



## 280IM

I am an old guy, I got to take away my fathers car he is an older guy. It is like taking one of the last freedoms an old guy has. Why don't you take an hour or two and visit a rest home this afternoon? A walk through might do you some good. Just a sugestion from an old guy and see how they get all the breaks. While you are there find out how much if cost for that old guy to stay there. Don't worry none of them will run into you that don't have cars!!!


----------



## Gohon

Teenage drivers between 16 and 19 years of age are involved in 40% of automobile fatalities. Closely following them are drunk drivers but a large portion of that group are teenagers. White males between age 19 and 25 years follow up in the third group. The elderly are actually not even a blimp on the radar screen as they tend to change driving habits such as not drive at night, obey speed laws and even give up driving altogether. Ask yourself who has to pay the highest insurance premiums and then ask yourself why. It certainly isn't the elderly. What really ****** hot shot (in their mind) drivers is being forced to slow down and obey traffic laws by some white headed lady or gentleman in front of them&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. you know, you've seen them before. They whip around the old couple honking their horn, shaking their head and cut dangerously back in front of them in a fit of anger. And then when they hit the kid up the block or side swipe another vehicle&#8230;&#8230;. why it was the old couples fault for slowing down to just 40 mph in that 40 mph speed zone&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; the nerve of those old folks.


----------



## 280IM

The Drunk Drive that killed my grandson was 20. Thanks for the facts from an old guy 280IM


----------



## Turner

Taking the alcohol out of bars and restaurants and blaming the elderly are not even close to the solutions of our drunk driving problems. The United States has set the drinking age to 21, because you are supposed to be an adult and make the right decisions. 
Blaming the restaurants and bars for someone being drunk? Where is the key factor for taking responsibility for your OWN actions? Again I am seeing people pointing and blaming, it is no ones fault accept the drunk driver. I do not have the right answers, however, stiffer penalties and heavier fines are a good start, and INFORCE THEM.

Take responsibility for your actions and quit blaming others.


----------



## DJRooster

As much as this hurts, I have to agree with Gohon. Good post! Don't blame it on the elderly unless they are drunk.


----------



## 280IM

Turner you are right After the death of my grandson and everything that followed I came to relize the laws are in place to some degree but they get plea bargined down. don't blame the elderly I am dam close to being there!! Does anyone know how many deaths there are a year do to drunk drivers?


----------



## Turner

Plea-bargaining is another issue that needs to be looked at in these cases. If you are arrested for drunk driving and they take your blood alcohol and it is past the legal limit there are no more questions, you are a drunk driver. 
How can you plea-bargain when you are caught dead to rights drunk? If they will allow DNA in other cases to put people away for life or issue a death sentence, why wouldn't a sample of your blood with a reading of over the legal limit of alcohol be good enough to issue the max penalty? We have a great legal system we just need to use it.


----------



## 280IM

The plea-bargaining is on which offense it is> They may have been picked up 5 times but if they get the right judge he will reduce it to secound offense. The punishment for secound offinse is a lot less then 5th.


----------



## Bobm

If you dirnk one drink you are impaired and should not drive period.


----------



## KEN W

Your'e right Gohon....that's why unmarried males 19-25 pay the most for insurance.Based on statistics,they are the most likely to have an accident.


----------



## DJRooster

Pretty easy to plea bargain a DUI into a reckless driving charge if you are barely on the scale and cooperate with the arresting officer. This makes sense for a first time offense but with repeat offenders I doubt they will give them the opportunity to plea bargain. Chronic driving while drinking is a major problem in our state and stricter laws can act as a deterrent for most and for the others it doesn't matter what you do short of locking them up they will continue to drive. Tougher laws will do more good than harm in my opinion. Put them in jail and then get them some help and work towards early release with a strict alcohol testing program post release. Repeat offenders obviously have a drinking problem and need a deterrent to help them with their addiction.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y

I am really surprised that North Dakota hasen't followed Minn. With W plates, often called wisky plates. What they are is a plate that is a different color and starts with a W. They give officers the right to pull them over for no reason. They get these plates after a certain number of DUI's. I think if someone gets one DUI they should have to have them for 5 years after no more dui's they can get rid of them If they get a second one they should have to have them forever. This would give officers a way to stop DUI's. There are so many good DUI lawyers out there that nit pick officers and find loopholes in the officers field tests and SD2 tests. Many departments are now going to blood tests which are making convictions cut and dry, however there is still the fact of probable cause for the stop.

I guess what I am getting to is there should be more cut and dry laws.


----------



## 280IM

Rooster you are saying a first offense drunk driver should be cut slack? If his driving kills someone that not as bad if he was a repeat offender. Do you think a person arrested for the first time is the first time he drove Drunk? If someone was killed in your family by a first time offender it would not be as bad as a repeat offender? First offenders should spend jail time,lose there driving privilages for a long time. No slap on the wrist,but a good solid kick in the nuts a real attion getter. Secound long jail time, no driving for life, third same as the 3 strikes and you are out
inprisonment. Much longer than my grandson was able to live!!!!


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y

I have a quick story.

When I was about 5 years old. I am 19 now. My parents and sister and I were driving to Star Lake IN minn. from Pelican rapids. And that road that splits lake Lida I can't remember the number right now. Well we were driving on the road where it splits the lake, and there was a truck with 4 people in the back pulling a boat and two people in the cab of the truck they lost control and crossed lanes and went right into lake Lida. My dad had to go into the on coming lane to avoid the whole ordeal thank god no one was coming. He stopped and at the time cell phones weren't really around so he ran back to our boat and told my sister to get on the CB and start calling for help. She was 12 at the time. My mom and Dad had to jump into the lake to try and get people out. I think 4 of the people died. and the driver had like a .2 BAC. I don't really remember it because I was to young, but every time I drive by there with my sister she always freaks out and tells whoever is driving to slow down and be careful. I guess what I am saying is people don't even know who they are effecting when they drive drunk. If my Dad woulden't have been paying attention there is no doubt we would have been swimming.

To leave something like seeing four dead bodies and having to try and call for help at age 12 is very trumaic and not worth it.
I have seen a few bad accidents that have been caused by drunk drivers all of them should have been avoided.

Sorry for the long post but this topic hits a nerve with me much like many of you. This is one of the reasons I am going into Law Enforcement.
So Watch out.


----------



## 280IM

It would be interesting to know if the driver survied and where he is at now.
It should be prison 4 deaths and all.


----------



## hunt4P&amp;Y

He was one of them that lived.


----------



## Gohon

Strange how drunk drivers usually survive most crashes. Someone once told me that a person who is drunk and in a wreck don't have time or thought for fear and as a consequences their body doesn't stiffen up, muscles don't tighten in anticipation of the wreck. In a sense they just become kind of elastic and flexible. Don't know if that is correct or not but that is what I'm told.


----------



## Bore.224

Gohon said:


> you know, you've seen them before. They whip around the old couple honking their horn, shaking their head and cut dangerously back in front of them in a fit of anger.


Yeah sorry about that Gohon 

I still think their should be a mandatory Eye and ear test for folks 65 and older. They should have to pass this test every 6 to 8 month's.

Also if they have a heart condition or are in danger of dropping dead behind the wheel maybe their licence should be taken away.

Lets face it we will all get to the point when our reation time is just not quick enought to drive safely. Hey I will be 39 in July so I know my day is comming as well!!!

I think we can all agree on the alcohol issue "JUST DONT DRINK AND DRIVE".


----------



## 280IM

Bore.224 Last month we buryed a guy that lived down the road who fell over from a heart attack he 34. I agree with being checked but here you run into that age discrimation thing and a yearly thing would be what I would be in favor of.


----------



## Gohon

> we will all get to the point when our reation time is just not quick enought to drive safely.


What usually happens is you get to a point that you realize you can no longer drive as dangerously as you once did. Seems that is what irritates most younger drivers that are in a big hurry to go no where fast. It is probable closer to the truth in that most older people slow down and pay more attention to what is going on around them than some hotshot with his 20 speaker stereo blaring at full volume. An eye and ear test every six months just because you are over the age of 65? Do you know what it cost to have a Otolaryngologist perform a ear examination with testing? If a eye test by the motor vehicle department, which is really a joke but is required each time I renew my license then fine but a hearing exam. Get real............

Maybe I'm wrong but I get the impression that booze is a very important part of your life. Like I said I'm probable wrong but you seem awful anxious to steer the conversation away from drunken drivers.


----------



## Longshot

I agree with having stiffer penalties for DUI.

A side not AZ has been working at requiring people over 60 to retest with eye exams every other year. It was brought to the table by a 66 yr. old representative because of the traffic problems in the retirement community areas. I usually avoided those areas as much as possible, because of some of the attitudes. While surveying in a right turn lane we closed the lane down. An elderly man drove around our devices and stopped in front of me. I asked him to exit this lane since it was closed. His response was that "he was retired and didn't have to listen to my request." I typically turned down work in those areas after that there was plenty of work elsewhere. I have been chewed out more by old ladies for slowing traffic than any other group. It makes for good entertainment at times.

I glad to not see that kind of attitude here at home, but you would be amazed at some of the comments down there I have been given.


----------



## Bobm

Old ladies give you the finger Longshot :lol: :lol:

I had a senile old guy hit me with his cane in the grocery store because I was in his way, damn my brothers laughed so hard I thought they would wet their pants :lol:

This was just a few years ago and I'm 54,he had to be 90, his poor daughter who was about my age was pretty upset but I just laughed it off, and told her not to worry about it.

If my brother starts telling that story he laughs so hard he cries.

Funny stuff

( I think she called him Gohon :wink: )


----------



## Gohon

> ( I think she called him Gohon )


Be nice now......... old guy......... maybe but at 63, don't feel like it. Hit with a cane.......... don't use one yet but I've been know to get wild with my shopping cart. That senile part does hurt though Jim....err... Tom..... Bill?


----------



## Bobm

:lol: :lol: Just kidding.

I'm having knee surgery the day after tomorrow so I'll be the one with the cane. 

I think I'm starting to get old timers disease, I cant remember stuff from last week as well as I can things that happend in high school in the 60's.


----------



## Bauer

Gohon said:


> Maybe I'm wrong but I get the impression that booze is a very important part of your life. Like I said I'm probable wrong but you seem awful anxious to steer the conversation away from drunken drivers.


Ouch, is it really necessary to take it to a personal level, that was damn harsh.

Steering it in the other direction, not hardly, I just read every post in this thread from start to finish and I dont see any of Bore's topics steering this thread anywhere but straight along and between the lines. Ive seen quite a few elders who should not have been driving, and it wasnt because they were slowing me down and I got mad at them. Bore's points are logical and very well backed, and should be taken seriously. Take any medication bottle and read the directions, im sure 75% of them say something about not operating machinery, but it is something that we dont take as seriously. Maybe were just too naive to admit to it, who knows????

Drunk driving = stupid we can call agree on that.

Stiffer penalties definately, the problem is, nobody steps up, for the most of us, we havent experienced a DUI, so we are all talk, "make em pay" "5000 for the first offense, 10 for the next" all fine and dandy, except you see, put yourselves in the shoe of the guy/gal standing before the judge, they are the only voices being heard, and they cant afford, or dont want to have to fork out that much cash. 
Now, im as much for the fact as they gave up the right to bargain when they blew a .08 or greater, but, thats how todays law system is. And until people speak up, it aint gonna change.

280, Gohon, Bore (to name a few), you all have your points, some of you also disagree with the way the vote turned out, my question, why werent you there voicing your opinion when this bill was in session, it aint doing it or you a damn bit of good to do it here.

Id also like to comment on one thing you said 280, you saw on CNN that X% of college kids binge drink and do drugs, the thing is, media wanted you to see that. Media reflects the things that will draw the most attention, if they would have said X% of college kids have a head on their shoulders and dont do drugs, you wouldnt have even batted an eye at it. I have no statistical proof, but with my experience, that number is far smaller. I am a college kid, am around campus alot, the parties I frequent are not binge parties, and the only thing being smoked are cigs, however, if you want to talk binge, lets just say that there is somebody there who wants to play his night like that, thats 1 person in 100, thats 1% of the population. You seeing what I mean with media??? My point is, (and I mean no offence) just because a 20 year old kid (or college kid) affected your family, all of them are bad and that is not the case, more and more kids are being educated on the affects of alcohol, more and more, that X% of teens # decreases.

Now, after reading this, your wondering about me, im 20 years old, 3 months shy of my 21'st bday, I drink, ill admit it, but I always make damn sure that I have a DD or I stay put for however long it takes to sober up, may I be one of the few? probably, but more and more everyday due to education and the like, more and more people are joining my side.


----------



## Bobm

Many of the people here are not residents of ND and cannot vote one way or the other. This is a opinion / discussion forum not a voting booth.

AS for old people driving thats immaterial, this dicussion is about DUI.

The argument that some other part of society needs correction has nothing at all to do with DUI.

All to often we hear the reasoning , well hes doing X so why can't I do Y?

If X and Y are both wrong both need to be corrected but if they are unrelated then its a pointless and really stupid to try and equate them.


----------



## 280IM

Bauer "5000 for the first offense,10 for the next" ' put yourself in the shoes of the guy/gal in front of the judge" Put yourself in the shoes of a parent or a grandparent at the funeral home making arrangements to bury a 9 year killed by a first time offending 22 year old collage party boy. If you party you will have to pay the bill!!!!! If you can't pay the fine or do the time stay out of the car when drinking!!!!! I don't know way you are worryed about the elderly back up 5 and that a good look at your age group. Penilities need to be much higher,drunk drives not only ruin thier own lives they ruin others.


----------



## Bauer

280IM said:


> Put yourself in the shoes of a parent or a grandparent at the funeral home making arrangements to bury a 9 year killed by a first time offending 22 year old collage party boy. If you party you will have to pay the bill!!!!!


Agreed, as I said, im all for the fact that they gave the right to bargain for anything lesser when they turn the keys in the ignition, nail em to the wall, I couldnt agree more, Now go back and re-read that paragraph, I was explainin WHY there are lesser sentences, not the reasoning behind them.



280IM said:


> I don't know way you are worryed about the elderly back up 5 and that a good look at your age group.


I agree, teenagers are nuts behind the wheel, but admit it, you were like that when you were young, im trying to remember, but I believe you said you were in your 40's, so that means that when you were starting to drive, is when the hot rod era was just getting into full swing. You CAN NOT tell me that you never had your fair share of oop's when you were behind the wheel as a teen. The only difference between now and then is, you had alot less distractions(less traffic, no cell's ect). Teenage drivng deaths, non alcohol related, have been a part of our society since the auto was invented. 
Im not worried about the elderly, just explainin that Bore had some finer points also. I lived in a small town, Garrison ND if you know of it, I saw my fair share of elderly involved in accidents. Now this is a town that has only stop signs, mostly yeild signs. Take these same adults that are driving in downtown st. paul during rush hour, you cant tell me that they dont have the ability to be dangerous. Im NOT saying 100% of them, so you can relax 280, just because you think you are getting old, doesnt mean that you fall into that bracket. I also know my fair share of elderly people that are sharper than me when it comes to reaction time and the likes.
I have to ask, you took your keys away from your father, so obviously he was no longer able to do the duties required of driving. (again, I mean no disrespect, just using it as a reference) Now step to the X% of that age bracket that ARE still driving, they just dont have a caring son or daughter to recognize that they are no longer cabable of it. Isnt this a problem????? Its a loaded gun either drunk, or over medicated, and its just waiting for the right moment to go off, agreed???

Now lastly this is for Bob and 280. Is elderly driving immaterial in context to drunk driving, yes, BUT the point is, the end result could and has been proven to be the same. Bob, you say this is about DUI, isnt over medicated not under the influence??? It has the same affects, as I said before, this is just something that we take for granted. Equating them, not hardly, obviously medication plays a much smaller role than alcohol, so you are right in that comparing them is pointless. However, the EFFECTS are relevant and thats all im really seeing for posts from Bore and I.

I would react the same way, if my fiance' was killed by a drunk driver, as I would if an elderly person on his/her medications, missed a stop sign or ran red and did the same damage. Both had the ability to stop themselves, or be stopped, and they werent. Where is there a difference?


----------



## Gohon

> Where is there a difference?


Well lets see............. according to google searches there were approximately 44,000 people killed in the USA during 2006. The elderly were responsible or involved in approximately 6,000 of these deaths. Drunk drivers were responsible for 16,000 deaths. That means there were 22,000 killed by the average Joe driver except that teenage drivers are responsible for 17,000 of those remaining deaths. Break it down and it comes out to drunks drivers 36.4%, teen age drivers 38.6%, elderly 13.6%, and average Joe driver takes up the remaining 5,000 deaths with 11.4%. Appears to me that the elderly are just as safe as the average Joe driver.............. that's the difference. Comparing elderly drivers to drunk drivers is apples to oranges at best and just dumb at worst.



> that was damn harsh


It was meant to be kind of harsh but Bore and I have been around the track with each other enough times to know that a harsh comment towards each other is not necessarily a personal attack as it is more of a inquisitive question. When someone appears to be against anything that involves stiffer penalties for DUI and tries to spin in another direction by throwing in elderly and medications then it is time for a wake up call. You yourself seem to think every senior citizen on the road is on some form of medication. What made you come to that conclusion? Well I'm 63 and I don't take any prescription drugs. My wife at 62 uses no prescription drugs yet you use terms like "the biggest abuser of drugs is the elderly". That's hog wash and you know it. Still by Bore's idea I should be required to take a eye exam and hearing exam every 6 months. That's just short of idiocy.........


----------



## Bauer

Gohon, please re-read my entire post once more. Let me draw your attention to one part taken directly from my last post.



> Equating them, not hardly, obviously medication plays a much smaller role than alcohol, so you are right in that comparing them is pointless. However, the EFFECTS are relevant and thats all im really seeing for posts from Bore and I.


Since you are so apt with google, do this search.....

define: DUI

second to last result......
The acronym for the criminal charge of Driving Under the Influence of alcoholic beverages, illicit drugs, or medications, which impair one's ability to operate a vehicle

For figures sake, lets say 50% of those 6000 elderly adults had their judgement impaired by medication while driving, that means that 19000 (16000 alcohol, 3000 medication) people were killed from a person DUI, THAT is what I am getting at. 
Once again I will quote my post....


> The EFFECTS are relevant


 NOT the comparison

Once again I will reiterate that I am not comparing them, the numbers you posted prove that, but it is still a problem. I could go on and on, but for the sake of keeping things on track here ill leave it at that.[/quote]


----------



## Gohon

You're starting to grasp at straws now. It doesn't change the fact that 16000 (36.4%) people died because of drunk drivers as compared to 6000 (13.6%) killed involving elderly drivers. The drunk drive figure is solid and we know what their condition was, but the condition of the elderly drivers is not known. Your 3000 figure is nothing more than a fictional number that means nothing.


----------



## 280IM

bauer As for your question about my father, he is 85,third generalion Irsh,youngest of 9 boys,served in the USMC during the deration of WWII island junping ending up on Iwo. He knew it was time to quite driving and really wasn't any trouble, he just said it was one ot many freedoms he liked. Age is uncontollable,Drinking and Driving is a chioce,there is no conparison. I admit I have a chip on my sholder, I have very little compasion for a drunk or an addict, it is there choice!! If you are going to dance don't ***** about the price of the fiddler. I will give you a piece of good advice from an old 59 year old, liscen to Gohon and Bob, figures don't lye. Compareing age to drunken drivering you are in the bracket that has the problem.


----------



## 280IM

Bauer I guess I forgot when you asked about my teenage driving. I gaduated in 1966,never had a car while in high school couldn't afford one.
Was drafted 2 weeks out of high school at age 18 was in the sevice untill 23. No I didn't tare the streets up. When I was home on leave used dad's car never had a speeding ticket untill I was in my 30's. I saw enough drinking and drug use those 5 years to last me forever never could see any sence in it myself,if you want to kill yourself thats you bunisses just don't take anyone with you. Like Gohon said you are grasping for straws


----------



## Bobm

IF an old person is incompetent and cannot drive everyone is good with getting them off the street, especially their family, thats irrelevant to a DUI discussion.

I have a question for you what do you think the ratio of drunk drivers vs
over medicated old drivers. Not just old drivers they have to be over medicated ones. very very small number of overmedicated drivers.

I would hazard a guess that after nine o clock on friday night in most places over half the drivers have had a drink, smoked a joint or some such nonsense.

Its a rampant problem in our society.

For the record I find no problem with adults using either substance in their homes without children present.


----------



## 280IM

Bob what do you think drunk driving costs this country a year? If a guy could find out I bet the amount would be huge 280


----------



## Bauer

Gohon said:


> It was meant to be kind of harsh but Bore and I have been around the track with each other enough times to know that a harsh comment towards each other is not necessarily a personal attack as it is more of a inquisitive question.


My bad for coming between you and bore, I apologize, I just thought it was a bit harsh.



Gohon said:


> You yourself seem to think every senior citizen on the road is on some form of medication. What made you come to that conclusion? Well I'm 63 and I don't take any prescription drugs. My wife at 62 uses no prescription drugs yet you use terms like "the biggest abuser of drugs is the elderly". That's hog wash and you know it.


Now your just putting words in my mouth. 
1. In one of my last posts, I said not 100% of the elderly are incompetent, I also said I know of several that are sharper than me. Hence also my 3000 instead of 6000 # you called me on earlier, now who is grasping for straws?
2. I know damn well I never said "the biggest abuser of drugs is the eldery" show me where the hell I posted that, again, now who is grasping for straws?
3. I have SEVERAL times in my posts voiced my opinion that drunk driving deems severe punishment, Never once have I tried to push it across any other way.

LASTLY
I NEVER SAID I WAS COMPARING THE 2, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I SAID THAT SO FAR IN MY POSTS, IS THIS BIG ENOUGH TO GET MY POINT ACROSS

You want to drop the elderly out of this, we'll drop it, Its going nowhere anyways, Im not poking fingers and for the thousandth time im not comparing them. The thing I hate about typing over the net is a persons position is blown way off key just by how the context is taken, You have mis-understood where I intended on going with this and thus here we sit. If given the chance, Id like to sit down face to face and discuss it over a drink of your choice, id even buy the round so until then, lets just call a stalemate and go on with the topic at hand.

Back to DUI of Alcohol, my PERSONAL position on it is people should be given one chance. NOW I know how some of you feel about that so no need to bring the chip out again, but honestly, IF I was to get 1 DUI, and the second on up fines were much more severe, and were legit (no pleabargains etc.) I know damn well id be scared ****less to have it happen again. But I guess im just one of the honest few. :-?


----------



## Gohon

> In one of my last posts, I said not 100% of the elderly are incompetent


Still you arbitrarily pull out of the air that 50% of them are when in fact you don't know if it is 1% or 99%. Incompetent? I thought the word was impaired.



> I know damn well I never said "the biggest abuser of drugs is the elderly"


I may very well have confused that with someone else and if so I stand corrected.



> I NEVER SAID I WAS COMPARING THE 2, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I SAID THAT SO FAR IN MY POSTS, IS THIS BIG ENOUGH TO GET MY POINT ACROSS


Oh but your are. Whether actually saying it or just by implying it, that is the point you are putting across.



> You want to drop the elderly out of this, we'll drop it


Not a question if I or anyone else wants to drop the elderly out but that it simply doesn't belong here. You've tried to make a big point that DUI covers a wide spectrum of impaired driving and you pushed the elderly as part of that. Go back and read the very first post by the OP. The subject title may have said DUI but the post was specifically about *DRUNK DRIVERS*.



> You have misunderstood where I intended on going with this


No one including myself has missed anything. But the subject is drunk driving and a bill about drunk drivers. If elderly drivers is of concern to you then you might want to start a new thread.



> my PERSONAL position on it is people should be given one chance. NOW I know how some of you feel about that so no need to bring the chip out again


Do you feel that way about all crimes? Why not....... If you are of legal age to drink then you should by then know not to drink and drive. Personally I feel that fines (paying money) has become nothing more than a crutch for permissible bad behavior. Want to be scared ****less so you don't do it again then add 30 days mandatory jail time first offense. Fines are not a deterrent



> But I guess im just one of the honest few.


Wow....... that ought to make you a lot of friends on here. You make a statement "The thing I hate about typing over the net is a persons position is blown way off key" and then turn around and imply most here are dishonest. I damn sure know I didn't read that wrong.

You are right that reading something in a forum is not the same as talking to someone face to face and more often than not what a person types is not what they are trying to convey. However, when every reply to your post is getting the same message from what you write then you have to back up and take a look at who really has the problem with getting their point across. Everyone can't be taking your words out of context.


----------



## 280IM

Bauer it is my hope to get 1st time drunk driving charge a felony like canada. Forget the fines the don't do any good a felony would get some attention


----------



## Bauer

Gohon said:


> Do you feel that way about all crimes? Why not....... If you are of legal age to drink then you should by then know not to drink and drive. Personally I feel that fines (paying money) has become nothing more than a crutch for permissible bad behavior. Want to be scared ****less so you don't do it again then add 30 days mandatory jail time first offense. Fines are not a deterrent


I agree, The second on up fines (be it monetary or jail time) should be much steeper so that you dont want it to happen again. That was what I was hoping to convey in my last post.



Gohon said:


> But I guess im just one of the honest few.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow....... that ought to make you a lot of friends on here. You make a statement "The thing I hate about typing over the net is a persons position is blown way off key" and then turn around and imply most here are dishonest. I damn sure know I didn't read that wrong.
Click to expand...

Oh but you did read it wrong, My meaning by that was that Im one of the honest few that dont want to get a dui, so I chose my plans accordingly. All through my life, the only things I had to deal with the police over were 2 speeding tickets, (5mph over). Ive never stolen anything, hell im even afraid to sell something to somebody if it isnt in perfect working condition. THAT is what I mean by honest few. Not that anybody was dishonest there you go again putting words into my mouth.



280IM said:


> Bauer it is my hope to get 1st time drunk driving charge a felony like canada. Forget the fines the don't do any good a felony would get some attention


Agreed
One thing about that is say I do the duty on my 21'st bday, 5 years from now when im filling out a job application, family on the way, and MUCH more of a head on my shoulders, that felony conviction could very easily take away my chances of getting that job, all over something stupid I did as a college student. However, make it so a "second violation gets you a felony" then stupid is as stupid does. With that one chance I was talking about ealier, the law is basically telling you that you f'ed up, do it again, and we'll nail you to the wall. 
Would it stop everybody, most likely not, but it would stop a majority of people, the people who are just going out to the bars on a friday night to be with friends, and feel that at .09. or .10 they can drive home. I have several friends who go out on the weekends to have a good time, their BAC is unknown to me, but its usually just borderline, they arent the hard core type. The bars close so they feel they should go home and they dont belive they are tanked enough to have their driving abilities impaired. (be that as it may) If they were to get pulled over, and have a dui written up, they would sober up in a hurry if they knew that next time they were getting a felony.

In most cases now days, there are taxi services that could hinder this, but now more and more those taxi's dont want to handle drunks, so there goes one opportunity for keeping a drunk of the roads. Secondly go to the rural areas, towns of 1500 or less that dont have a taxi service, then what? Thats why I say there should be that one time buffer.


----------



## huntin1

Bauer said:


> Back to DUI of Alcohol, my PERSONAL position on it is people should be given one chance. NOW I know how some of you feel about that so no need to bring the chip out again, but honestly, IF I was to get 1 DUI, and the second on up fines were much more severe, and were legit (no pleabargains etc.) I know damn well id be scared ****less to have it happen again. But I guess im just one of the honest few. :-?


So what if the first time you had ever driven with a BAC of .08 you had an accident and killed someone? Do you still get that one chance. I believe that the first time should have very stiff penalties, several thousand dollars in fines etc. Then if there is a second offense double the fine, several months in jail and seize their vehicle.

Really, what you should be scared ****less of is depriving another person of their father, mother, son, daughter, whatever, you should be scared ****less of killing someone through your thoughtless act. Take a taxi, call a sober friend or WALK for ****s sake, you still have two legs. Living in a small town with no taxi means nothing. If the town is that small you can walk from one end to the other in 15 minutes or less, it ain't going to hurt you.

huntin1


----------



## 280IM

Bauer you must do a lot of drinking and driving to be so sure you should have a 2nd chance. The kid that killed my grandson it was his first time caught also, at 9 years of age he got know secound chance.A DUI will end up on a job background screach even if it isn"t a felony along with any life insurace app. Drink and drive you will pay one way or another unless you are an alcoholic with no conscious, you reason like one.


----------



## Bobm

All DUI convictions have had a second chance.

They have already gotten away with it, most of them many times, and yet no guilt or true reflection about the possible consequences.

Lock them up for a long time no parole, zero tolerence.

Bauer if you ever get a DUI after this discussion its your fault, no one cares about your future job prospects thats your repsonsibility, if you take the risk you don't either.

I love how people claim they have the right to drink even a little and drive ,yet they claim they are so so sorry when the ineveitable happens.

"I was in college and didn't mean it" BS collge kids claim they are adults, until adult circumstances seem too harsh, then the "I am just a kid" argument comes out of their crybaby mouths.

280 if my grandson was killed by that guy I would kill him. And I'm serious.


----------



## 280IM

Bob he plea bargined down from 1st degree motor Vic. homicide to 2nd. degree mansluter got 18 monthe and a lot of probation,he has less than 9 months left. I was served with a paper a year ago that I was not to get with in 100 feet of him or his father.

edited for your benefit but I agree wholeheartly :beer:


----------



## Longshot

280IM, sorry to hear about your grandson.  For him to only get 18 mo. plus probation is a sad joke. If you drink and drive and kill someone, you shouldn't see the light of day for a long time at least. I would have to agree with Bobm's last statement.


----------



## Bauer

oy, such an insinuating bunch, actually 280, ive never driven with a BAC, my personal preference, I find a way to get home safetly, or I stay where I am. Exactly the reason why I have no MIP/MIC or DUI's on my record, when over half my classmates do,(graduating class of 21) in small towns, drinking is very hard to hide, yet by having a head on my shoulder, I made it through it.

Anyways, im done with this thread, we all have our opinions, all different, and thats exactly why this bill didnt pass. The fact is, I have mine, its how I feel and thats that.

Have fun guys.


----------



## Bore.224

Bauer , be proud you just went a few rounds with some very tought guy's, and in my opinion did very well.

I was away , but you did not need me :wink:


----------

