News, highlights and more relating to this great province!
This may be my naive opinion, but more than two counts of drunk driving or any counts of driving (e: drunk) with a suspended license should put someone beneath the minimum qualifications for being able to have a license at all, ever.
You need a license to drive only if you get caught.
Over here people get their license suspended for 10 years and still get caught drunk driving without a license, unless they're put in jail what are we to do?
Then put them in goddamn jail?
It's crazy the lengths we as a society will go to to protect the criminally dangerous from the consequences of their actions... if they were driving.
If someone is knowingly being a deadly menace to society and has already proven that they cannot and will not stop themselves after being criminally sentenced, then as a society we should take any steps necessary to make them stop, up to and including incarceration. This shouldn't be a hot take.
Want to put them in jail for life for DUI when much worse crimes don't get that kind of treatment? 🤔
Not for DUI, for recidivism and driving drunk against court orders. At this point it's not a mistake, it's a pattern. A deadly dangerous one. It's not about punishment, but about public safety.
Of course step 1 should be to remove access to cars for this person. Impound it, crush it, fine whoever let an unlicensed driver drive their car, whatever.
But if the courts are impotent at enforcing driving suspensions against such a dangerous driver, what else is there to do besides jail? Throw our hands in the air and wait for them to drunk-drive their way through a pack of schoolchildren so we have an excuse to arrest them?
That would ignore decades of study that shows that just being tough on crime doesn't lower it... What these people need is help, you don't get caught DUI 20+ times because you're life is going well.
Well then do that! Do fucking something!
Sitting on our hands and doing nothing also is not the answer.
Jail should include that rehabilitation. I don't care just don't leave them to reoffend over and fucking over!
Encourage a transition to public transportation.
If everyone has access to reliable transportation without sacrificing their sense of freedom, everyone would benefit on a micro level (No more contracts/maintenance/fuel etc. and LESS STRESS), meso levels (Safer and cheaper roads, condensed parking lots...), all the way up to the macro levels (Cleaner environment, maybe even better inter-city connectivity)
I'm still researching the idea myself, but I struggle to see an alternative that resolves as many of societies problems as just removing cars from the picture or finding another place for them to exist other than for civic purposes.
It's anecdotal but from my experience most drunk drivers are in remote locations where they don't get caught and where public transport will never be an option no matter how much some people wish it was.
In theory, this should be true. But here in Japan we have a state-of-the-art public transportation system that is very cheap and easy to use and is often faster than trying to drive somewhere, but it has not curtailed drunk/elderly driving accidents.
I think the competing element is that those people most likely to cause an accident don't want to give up their personal freedom to be in control of the vehicle they're in, even if they lack the ability to control it safely.
I think one place to start would be with ownership.
Make it illegal to sell a vehicle to someone without a valid license.
Make it impossible for someone with a second conviction to be the registered owner of a vehicle for 5 years. Lifetime for third conviction.
There are already ways to charge registered owners for the infractions of those they allow to drive their vehicle. A few tweaks should be enough to make it virtually impossible for a repeat offender to gain access to a vehicle.
But some essential vehicles are owned to drive off public roads only (farm trucks for example), not much stopping a farmer from just taking theirs and driving to the bar in the closest village... Or their tractor or ATV...
Yes, I wondered how to express that. I settled on "registered". Where I live, the vast majority of on farm vehicles that can be are formally registered for use on public roads and streets and must display appropriate plates or permits. The vast majority of the rest are some combination of expensive to operate, slow moving, or not permitted to park in town.
As with all edge cases, some are worth dealing with and others can just be left as cracks in the system, at least until we see how things play out.
You need a license to drive only if you get caught.
You need a license to drive, period. It's a rule you agree to follow as a driver whether someone is doublechecking you or not.
The 'It's not a crime unless I get caught' mentality is very troubling, and potentially dangerous, to all the upright people who just want to live in peace.
I don't think you understand what I meant.
There's tons of drivers on the road without a license, especially drivers who got their license suspended for one reason or another. There's nothing preventing them from owning a car, putting the key in it and hitting public roads, so what do you think happens? They just do it!
t's a rule you agree to follow as a driver
so is not driving under influence? Why should they care about having a license if they're going to drive drunk anyway, rules aren't stopping them
If they don't have a license they never agreed to that rule, no?
or any counts of driving with a suspended license
Sometimes licenses are suspended and people don't even know. One of my friend's license was suspended because he switched his insurance to another state and the issuing state could see he had a license with them but no insurance. He didn't know until he got a new license.
Did your friend drive drunk and cause an accident while his license was suspended?
Because when your license is suspended for driving while intoxicated you tend to be well informed about it.
I clarified my previous comment.
Uh...We did it?
But seriously, how is this guy even on the road to accrue that many convictions?
If you makes you feel better (or worse I suppose depending on how competitive you guys are about this) an American man from South Dakota set the American record at 30 DUIs.
While 11 DUIs over a lifetime might sound like a considerable number, it is nowhere near the top record. That dubious honor falls instead to a man named Jerry Zeller. The South Dakota earned the nickname “Mr. DUI” during his lifetime, and he allegedly committed more than 30 DUIs (2)
Without reading the article, I imagine some are while having a suspended license?
It's just, you know. After the 15th or 16th conviction you'd think the law would get more...Urgent.
How else do you get records like this though?
You don't need to even read the article, literally says in the title that he has "21 drunk driving convictions". Sure, he may have accrued some of them whilst suspended, but he was still drunk when he did accrue em...
OP was asking how he even did it.
You can probably only pull that off if you drive with a suspended license
Ahhhhh, right, fair, that's totally on me. It's my one complaint about sites like this one, Reddit, etc. My ADHD brain gets confused by the layout of replies. I much prefer the old school newsgroups, forums, etc in that regard...
After 3 strikes they should chain a giant ball to his ankle that makes it impossible to enter or drive a personal vehicle.
"twice the legal limit" is like 2 beers isn't it?
Subjective to a person's height or weight... but yeah i usually consider any alcohol in my system as risky if I get pulled over.
Yeah me too but to me it doesn't exactly sound like the guy was drunk. The legal limit is pretty much nothing
US native here, but this applies to everyone.
A single DUI should be the last time anyone drives. No exceptions. No mercy. No flexibility.
I honestly can't be bothered with how negatively it could impact their life. Should have thought of that then.
Catching them driving after the DUI should have exponentially increasing punishments. Severe to the point of probably ruining anyone's life after just 1 or 2 convictions.
It is treated FAR too casually by everyone. I don't understand. Ruin their lives, en masse. So many people that deserved to live died because people that deserve eternal sadness made an intentional error in judgement, many of which were guilty of other interactions like this before.
I cannot understand a fraction of why something this dangerous is such a "slap on the wrist" kind of deal given its negative impact on people who are, quite honestly, much more deserving to live.
Given how commonplace it is to hear about it, it's absolutely crazy to hear how low the punishments are for it. Doing something this terrible should in fact have a huge debilitating affect on one's life. And if we can't reach that, then at the very least the ones convicted of it should be dealt with harshly.