The drunk driver that hit my wife ....

[charlie12]

All this drunk driving **** gets me and I could go on and on.

The SOB will keep doing it until he kills somebody or his own ass which probably won't happen.

I've been wanting to ask about your wife, how's she doing?

 

[Cbro]

I think the dui check point are great and wish the PD and SO's had the manpower to do them more often. I drove through one at about 10:30 Friday night on hiway 1.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I AM TOTALLY AGAINST DUI CHECKPOINTS!!

Which I am sure does not surprise most here. What I am for however is very strict punishments for those who injure others while drunk driving.

Here are my suggestions:

1. If there is no loss of life the offender becomes an indentured servant to the victim till all lose is recovered.

1b. Offender losses his right to drive for 5 years

2. If there is lose of life, the offender receives life at hard labor or life as an indentured servant to the victims family. This of course is at the families discretion upon conviction.

I am of the opinion that there is no need to punish a "victimless" crime, but as soon as there is a victim the punishment is swift and severe. No leniency for first time offenders!
That in and of its self should be enough of a deterrent.

The problem we have today is that when there is a victim, the punishment is not severe enough.

A agree with you 100000 billionity. If that could be honestly fixed in our society, I would be behind all the rest of what you said. Until then, Checkpoints are the best we can do. DOes it "solve" the problem, of course not, but if we can stop just one......

 

[oldman45]

Just shows you how we need stronger laws that make people pay for the damages they cause. He hits you, he has no money, well then he works at a work farm/jail till he pays you back. Instead people get charged with a DUI and you get nothing. My DA worked hard on getting harsher penalties for DUIs when he should have pushed to change things. So stupid.

Best study the law.

The driver without insurance cannot get a driver's license re-newed or register a vehicle in his name until damages are paid the injured party, IF they file for it. Most people never file with the DMV to get the money from the adverse party.

Also over 30% of all drivers in the state of Louisiana are uninsured. This alone is the best reason for Uninsured Motorist coverage and Medical Payment.

 

[oldman45]

You missed my point here, I know what the Law is, my point is that they can still phisically drive somebody elses vehicle that doesnt have one, they didnt care about getting a DWI so why would they care about another charge.

The problem is they do not care. They know the DA will reduce the charge down to a 2nd offense. District Attorneys do not want to waste their time on a multiple DWI offender that stands to go to jail for years to come. They want high profile cases. Reduce to a guilty plea and credit the guy some time.

People think their DA works for them. He does not. He works for him self and he is wanting life to be good for him. He knows the guilty party will be represented by a lawyer that has been paid $5000+ and the state would be feeding the guy for the next 10 yrs or so, along with putting the man's family on welfare or food stamps while he is in jail so he accepts a plea bargain. He also considers it to be the best for the taxpayer.

I deal with this daily.

 

[oldman45]

My suggestion is a mandatory 10 year jail term on the first offense. Period. End of DUI problem.

The reason the current system works so poorly is that everyone who drives under the influence thinks they're okay to make it home. And we all know someone who got caught and gets a fine and some community service. Make it severe enough for the first offense that most people will just not risk it.

I think it shouldn't matter if you kill someone or not-- you put the public at risk by driving under the influence, so your crime is complete. It's just dumb luck whether you kill someone or make it home safely.

The 10 yr sentence will never happen. There are thousands of DUI in Louisiana daily. One out of every 14 autos is being driven by a driver under the influence. It is called the Redneck Mentality. Check the stats on the number of DUI drivers. ABout 1/8 of the state would be in jail at any given time. The taxpayer cannot afford the upkeep or the construction of that many jails.

 

[oldman45]

Checkpoints are not cost effective. Drivers find where the checkpoints will be and they avoid them.

A checkpoint will tie up several officers and vehicles. Maybe 60 people will be checked and might be one found to be legally intoxicated. The checkpoints are more of a feel good approach to raise public awareness.

A well trained officer on the streets in a urban area will get more impaired drivers and any check point. Checkpoints are good about finding no insurance and expired plates and licenses.

I have been dealing with DUI, court cases and traffic accidents for 34 yrs. I have studied the laws and we could put away a lot of people but the DA will not be agressive and the taxpayers will not support it.

 

[Yrdawg]

Checkpoints are not cost effective. Drivers find where the checkpoints will be and they avoid them.

A checkpoint will tie up several officers and vehicles. Maybe 60 people will be checked and might be one found to be legally intoxicated. The checkpoints are more of a feel good approach to raise public awareness.

A well trained officer on the streets in a urban area will get more impaired drivers and any check point. Checkpoints are good about finding no insurance and expired plates and licenses.

I have been dealing with DUI, court cases and traffic accidents for 34 yrs. I have studied the laws and we could put away a lot of people but the DA will not be agressive and the taxpayers will not support it.

You are suggesting the law be made and administered with common sense ??
Is that a possibility ?? Surely there's an ordanance against that somewhere ??

 

[oldman45]

You are suggesting the law be made and administered with common sense ??
Is that a possibility ?? Surely there's an ordanance against that somewhere ??

I would love to see the laws on the books now be enforced. If someone has 2 prior DUI offenses, then let the next one be DUI Third and the penalty be what is called for. It is not going to happen. The DA will reduce simply due to the person paying a lawyer a large fee and then getting a small sentence. The smaller the Parish, the more chance for a complete dismissal or a reduction to a C&R.

I have seen cases of seven offenses being handled as a second.

 

[dantheman]

Best study the law.

The driver without insurance cannot get a driver's license re-newed or register a vehicle in his name until damages are paid the injured party, IF they file for it. Most people never file with the DMV to get the money from the adverse party.

How can I find out more about this ? My insurance company said something about putting a flag on his license until they were reimbursed for their expenses . I guess that's what you are referring to ?

 

[oldman45]

How can I find out more about this ? My insurance company said something about putting a flag on his license until they were reimbursed for their expenses . I guess that's what you are referring to ?

Pretty much but they are only going to recover the actual amount they are out and not what you are out of pocket.

Go to the DMV and explain the facts and they will give you a form to file. Doing so will give you recovery for the entire amount of both the insurance payout and your out of pocket plus other damages. Even bankruptcy will not clear his debt to you.

 

[TomTerrific]

A while back I read that in one of the Scandinavian countries, Sweden I think, if you are above the limit on the breath test, you go immediately to jail for several days, do not pass Go, do not collect two hundred dollars - straight to jail for 3 or 4 days.

Apparently, it's effective. It doesn't address the problem of the OP, tho.

 

[oldman45]

A while back I read that in one of the Scandinavian countries, Sweden I think, if you are above the limit on the breath test, you go immediately to jail for several days, do not pass Go, do not collect two hundred dollars - straight to jail for 3 or 4 days.

Apparently, it's effective. It doesn't address the problem of the OP, tho.

Most areas in the US will keep you in jail for a day or more if you get charged with a DUI. At any rate, you will remain in jail until you are sober.

A DUI is an arrestable offense. It can be a felony as well. In either case, it is likely the most expensive driving offense I know of. The first DUI will cost someone over $25,000 in seven years.

 

[smith625]

Dui checkpoints are a start and they work. Something has to be done and this is a start.

 

[Yrdawg]

I don't know if I am fer or agin 'em

BUT.....before MADD and the like brought so much heat to DUI, I did IT...I never considered consequences when they were minor and fixable

But NOW.....age and good sense plus the road blocks, penaltys plus I drive as part of my job...now I won't even consider it

I'd say all things considered the check points work....are the constitutional ?? not to me

BUT I'n not exactly a heavy hitter on constitutional law

 

[dantheman]

But NOW.....age and good sense plus the road blocks, penaltys plus I drive as part of my job...now I won't even consider it

Yep . I've gotten plumb paranoid about it .

 

[hunter5567]

Give people with mutilple offenses- 2nd and 3rd --ankle bracelets with house arrest and no driving privileges even to work. Make their loved ones feed them and cart them around.
The most we would be out would be food stamps and the losers are likely already on that already and most alcoholics don't care about food anyways since they consume liquid dinners.

 

[oldman45]

Give people with mutilple offenses- 2nd and 3rd --ankle bracelets with house arrest and no driving privileges even to work. Make their loved ones feed them and cart them around.
The most we would be out would be food stamps and the losers are likely already on that already and most alcoholics don't care about food anyways since they consume liquid dinners.

What people do not understand, and I deal with it daily in the south, is how little it takes to be legally intoxicated. A person's sense of reasoning is the last to go when drinking. They can be unable ro walk straight but they feel like they are fine and they drive. People will stop to have a drink on their way home from work and that drink turns into two drinks. Oops, they are now likely on the line for being legally intoxicated due to body weight, an empty stomach and fatigue. A third drink and they are over the limit.

Another thing is a person does not need a driver's license to drive. They do not need insurance or a car in their name. All they need is a car that runs. We had a man here last week that was able to pick the lock on his ankle bracelet and put it on his bed while he left driving to the neighborhood liquor store in his 88 yr old mother's auto.

Checkpoints are worthwhile in catching a lot of things but they are inefficient in catching DUI drivers. They would be better if the locations of the checkpoints were not announced in the media.

Then we have the Judges. Wait until a favorable judge is hearing DUI cases and the charge will be reduced to a C&R , if not dismissed. I have a case right now where the defense attorney has gotten a hearing continued since 2008 as he waits for a certain Judge. The atty is known for charging $5000 for his services but will get you off. Some of his clients got DUI second while waiting for the First to be heard.

 

[dantheman]

Here's some interesting info . http://www.edgarsnyder.com/drunk-driving/statute-limitations/louisiana-drunk-driving-laws.html

 

[Summit_Ace]

A agree with you 100000 billionity. If that could be honestly fixed in our society, I would be behind all the rest of what you said. Until then, Checkpoints are the best we can do. DOes it "solve" the problem, of course not, but if we can stop just one......

I really appreciate the fact that I said something you actually agree with I will remember this day. All kidding aside.

This is the same thought process anti gunners use. Every year thousands of people are killed or injured by guns, many of those are self defense (something the anti gunners will never admit to), but many are not.

They look at owning a gun as a "behavior" like we look at drunk driving. "We" would never drive drunk, just as they would never own a gun. They sell the anti gun agenda in much the same way you sell the anti drunk driving agenda. "Most" gun "accidents" or crimes are caused a stupid decision by a stupid persons, much the same as drunk driving. So the anti gunners propose (and many times pass) gun legislation witch not only effect stupid gun owners, but the good ones also. What do we do when this happens? We through fits! Do we consider at all how DUI laws affect the person who does not drive drunk? No, not at all. Why? Because drunk driving is "evil" and it kills innocent people, unfortunately the anti gunners look at gun ownership the same way.

Do we wish to pass laws where a LEO can randomly stop people on the street and ask if they are carrying a weapon, then demand they answer questions about the laws regarding the carrying of that weapon? Then have them submit to a field proficiency test? If they refuse to submit to that test the state then subjects them to fines and a suspension of their gun ownership privileges.

DUI checkpoints effect non drunk drivers kind of the same as weapons bans and carry restrictions effect gun owners(we pay for stupid people).

How is it "OK" with "us" that there are DUI checkpoint, yet it is not ok if there were random weapons checkpoints? IF you think the ani gunners would not have it that way, think again.

My point is not to say by any stretch that drunk driving is OK, but that we do not want gun owners harassed unless they commit a crime, yet we are willing to have law abiding drivers harassed.