[Lobowolf]

Winstonm, on Sep 11 2009, 06:27 PM, said:

Lobowolf, on Sep 10 2009, 07:48 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Sep 10 2009, 07:30 PM, said:

kill, kill, kill....

Pretty much what they do, to the tune of several thousand people a year in the USA alone. Not that anyone is any better than a random guy who killed someone and had 114 prior convictions including 18 DUIs.

Well, my point is instead of finger-pointing why not look to solutions? Where was the judicial system and drug court about 110 convictions ago?

Incapacitation (via incarceration) is a solution. The judicial "system" was there (I assume; I'm not familiar with the specifics of Canadian criminal law, but I can't believe this guy couldn't have been locked up on the basis of his past convictions), but the person(s) administering that system failed the public, miserably. Hence the finger-pointing. Hey, if enough fingers get pointed, you never know...the next judge about to sentence an 18-time offender may decide that he doesn't want to be the next guy to get fingers pointed at him, and he might handle things differently.

[h2osmom]

I don't know about Canada, but in the US, we, as a culture, totally accept drinking and driving to a certain level. In many other countries, the accepted thing is that drinking, any amount, and driving, are not done together. It's far more difficult to have a standard like being allowed to drink to a BAC of 0.08 for most people, and no detectable amount for other people. It's also difficult, because different amounts of alcohol over different time periods accompanied with either food, or other mind altering substances, cause different BAC, and in addition to that, it varies from person to person. 0.08 is some derived number, but it's certain that many people's driving ability is somewhat impaired at a lower BAC than that. I would love to see our focus move toward drinking and driving not being done together in any amount. In Norway, where drinking and driving is far less a problem, I have been told that there is serious discussion in favour of requiring alcolocks on all cars. Maybe that should be the direction we should head. For sure I think first offenses of drinking and driving should have a serious and long lasting consequence. No one thinks that they will cause a fatal car accident when they start to drink. It seems so far removed that it isn't seriously enough considered by someone whose thinking is somewhat impaired and doesn't want the problem of how to get home. But a serious consequence for drinking and driving could be far more immediate and cause people to make plans for getting home before they went out drinking.

[Lobowolf]

h2osmom, on Sep 11 2009, 06:59 PM, said:

For sure I think first offenses of drinking and driving should have a serious and long lasting consequence. No one thinks that they will cause a fatal car accident when they start to drink. It seems so far removed that it isn't seriously enough considered by someone whose thinking is somewhat impaired and doesn't want the problem of how to get home. But a serious consequence for drinking and driving could be far more immediate and cause people to make plans for getting home before they went out drinking.

Strongly, strongly agree.

[Mbodell]

Lobowolf, on Sep 11 2009, 04:02 PM, said:

h2osmom, on Sep 11 2009, 06:59 PM, said:

For sure I think first offenses of drinking and driving should have a serious and long lasting consequence.  No one thinks that they will cause a fatal car accident when they start to drink.  It seems so far removed that it isn't seriously enough considered by someone whose thinking is somewhat impaired and doesn't want the problem of how to get home.  But a serious consequence for drinking and driving could be far more immediate and cause people to make plans for getting home before they went out drinking.

Strongly, strongly agree.

What about for driving while talking on a phone? That also has been demonstrated to make one a drastically worse driver (see NYT best selling book Traffic).

Traffic fatalities are interesting when you consider that there are more than 40,000 deaths a year in the US (more than a 9/11 every month!), but few people seem that concerned about it. And yes, alcohol, is a leading cause of a number of the deaths.

[dicklont]

Maybe the judge is a bridge player and decided that for Walsh he could skip the minor punishments and move on to the major one right away.

[Winstonm]

Here's a hypothetical:

A U.S. soldier comes home from Afghanistan, goes into a bar to celebrate, and has too much to drink. He leaves and climbs into his car and drives toward home, but on the way his car hits a man who is riding a bicycle and kills the man - but it turns out the man on the bicycle was a terrorist who was on his way to a suicide bicycle bombing.

Question: Which bumper sticker do we take off our car?
A: Support Our Troops
B. Hang All Drunk Drivers
C. McCain-Palin '08

[Lobowolf]

Winstonm, on Sep 12 2009, 07:58 AM, said:

Here's a hypothetical:

A U.S. soldier comes home from Afghanistan, goes into a bar to celebrate, and has too much to drink. He leaves and climbs into his car and drives toward home, but on the way his car hits a man who is riding a bicycle and kills the man - but it turns out the man on the bicycle was a terrorist who was on his way to a suicide bicycle bombing.

Question: Which bumper sticker do we take off our car?
A: Support Our Troops
B. Hang All Drunk Drivers
C. McCain-Palin '08

Trick question...he wouldn't be "celebrating." He'd be wishing he were still in Afghanistan keeping us safe. If I had to choose, I'd go with:

D. "Pacifism: It Worked Against Hitler"

[Trinidad]

Mbodell, on Sep 12 2009, 03:55 AM, said:

What about for driving while talking on a phone?  That also has been demonstrated to make one a drastically worse driver (see NYT best selling book Traffic).

I fully agree.

BUT... There is a big difference between a drunk driver and a caller.

When someone is waiting for a traffic light, calling or being drunk has little consequences. But when the light turns green, the caller can stop calling. The drunk driver cannot stop being drunk.

To put it differently: Both men have decreased their ability to drive. But the caller can choose when this ability is decreased and the drunk cannot. In practice, many callers don't choose wisely. (But I know some who do. )

Rik

[blackshoe]

Winstonm, on Sep 10 2009, 08:30 PM, said:

kill, kill, kill....

"I wanna kill,
I wanna see blood, 'n guts, 'n gore,
'n veins in ma teeth.
I wanna kill."
..........Arlo Guthrie, "The Alice's Restaurant Masacree"

[Winstonm]

Lobowolf, on Sep 12 2009, 08:36 AM, said:

Winstonm, on Sep 12 2009, 07:58 AM, said:

Here's a hypothetical:

A U.S. soldier comes home from Afghanistan, goes into a bar to celebrate, and has too much to drink.  He leaves and climbs into his car and drives toward home, but on the way his car hits a man who is riding a bicycle and kills the man - but it turns out the man on the bicycle was a terrorist who was on his way to a suicide bicycle bombing.

Question: Which bumper sticker do we take off our car?
A: Support Our Troops
B. Hang All Drunk Drivers
C. McCain-Palin '08

Trick question...he wouldn't be "celebrating." He'd be wishing he were still in Afghanistan keeping us safe. If I had to choose, I'd go with:

D. "Pacifism: It Worked Against Hitler"

Hitler? You are playing the Hitler card? You must be desperate.

[kenberg]

Drunk driving needs to be dealt with but I would not wnat to see the law changed to define drunk as having had one glass of wine. Having driven for fifty-five years, i have made some errors and been very lucky that there were no consequences.

Example: In my teen years I was coming home late from a date. The stoplight was flashing red so, asI was supposed to do, I stopped. Then I went. The I realized I forgot to look to see if anyone was coming.


Example: In my twenties we were driving from Minneapolis up to northern Manitoba. After driving all night we stopped for breakfast in Winnipeg and set out again, me at the wheel. I drove right through a red light.

Example: The only semi-serious accident I have had. I was sitting at a red light waiting for it to turn. I got rear-ended by a young woman who had borrowed her boyfriend's car. She was not used to a stick shift and put on the clutch instead of the brake.


Example: I am now 70. I think I still drive fine but I recall how relieved I was when my father gave up driving in his late sixties. Yes, I believe I can tell the difference.


I cannot recall any close calls that were due to modest alcohol consumption, and I have a pretty good memory. People are not perfect. Reasonably good sense should be demanded but I am not in favor of going after folks who are often in far better shape for driving than others who would never touch a drop. If I drink much, I give the keys to my wife. If I have a glass of wine with dinner, I don't bother. Neither does the other guy out there and I'm fine with that.

[mike777]

keep in mind the issue was never do we need to change the law.


Many cops tell me after 1 am.......about a third of the drivers on the road are driving impared.....the issue as always is money....money for jails...money for judges...money for etc........


Please do not view the issue as......we have lots of jail space...but too few law breakers......

For all countries, I mean all, the issue is, we have limited jail space and too many law breakers....

[Winstonm]

Quote

Many cops tell me after 1 am.......about a third of the drivers on the road are driving impared

What were you doing out after 1 a.m. talking to cops?

[helene_t]

mike777, on Sep 13 2009, 04:37 AM, said:

For all countries, I mean all, the issue is, we have limited jail space and too many law breakers....

The US has plenty of prison cells imho. No other country has anywhere near US's prison population (as a proportion of the entire population).

[Lobowolf]

helene_t, on Sep 13 2009, 02:56 PM, said:

mike777, on Sep 13 2009, 04:37 AM, said:

For all countries, I mean all, the issue is, we have limited jail space and too many law breakers....

The US has plenty of prison cells imho. No other country has anywhere near US's prison population (as a proportion of the entire population).

So does that mean we have far more criminals per capita than other countries, or just fewer criminals per capita walking around amongst the rest of us?

[Winstonm]

Lobowolf, on Sep 13 2009, 03:04 PM, said:

helene_t, on Sep 13 2009, 02:56 PM, said:

mike777, on Sep 13 2009, 04:37 AM, said:

For all countries, I mean all, the issue is, we have limited jail space and too many law breakers....

The US has plenty of prison cells imho. No other country has anywhere near US's prison population (as a proportion of the entire population).

So does that mean we have far more criminals per capita than other countries, or just fewer criminals per capita walking around amongst the rest of us?

Are those the only two options we get? I was planning to vote C) None of the above.

[matmat]

poke the guy's eyes out so he doesn't try driving again.