Serial DUI gets Life

viscousmemories · #1 05-27-2005, 06:16 PM

News Item

Dude got life in prison for his 8th DUI.

I have long thought that people who get multiple DUI's should have their drivers license stamped "No Alcohol", so they are no longer able to drink at bars, etc. Obviously they would still be able to get alcohol elsewhere, but I really think this would dramatically cut down on the number of DUI offenses.

I think life in prison for a victimless crime is absurd. Of course someone who drinks and drives as often as this guy might eventually hurt or kill someone, but life in prison for harm someone might commit seems creepy to me.

Dragar · #2 05-27-2005, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Of course someone who drinks and drives as often as this guy might eventually hurt or kill someone, but life in prison for harm someone might commit seems creepy to me.

Really?

The reverse always struck me as bizarre. Why would a person who drinks, drives and hits someone recieve a greater punishment than someone who drinks, drives and doesn't? Assuming, of course, the one who hit someone didn't intend to hit someone (in which case, a different course of action may be appropriate).

I liked your idea about the 'no alcohol stamp, by the way.

Dingfod · #3 05-27-2005, 06:34 PM

How else do you keep him from driving while drunk? Obviously the previous punishments haven't deterred him? Ideas?

Dragar · #4 05-27-2005, 06:38 PM

Wouldn't removing his driver's licence be a step that had the desired result of stopping him driving, without reducing the offender’s quality of life quite so much?

viscousmemories · #5 05-27-2005, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragar

Wouldn't removing his driver's licence be a step that had the desired result of stopping him driving, without reducing the offender’s quality of life quite so much?

That's pretty much what I was thinking. There's no way he should've been able to get that many DUI's in my opinion. He should've lost his license after... I dunno, 3.

Dragar · #6 05-27-2005, 06:46 PM

In fact, you're right! We had he not had his licence taken from him? Is that standard in America?

I think in the UK, you get 4 'points' on your licence for drink driving. If you gain 12 points within a three year period, you lose your licence automatically.

And there are various hefty fines and sometimes short term jail time for drink driving, too, I believe.

viscousmemories · #7 05-27-2005, 06:52 PM

Actually I hadn't read the article carefully enough (or at all, actually. I just dug it up after seeing the story on the TV news). Apparently his license had been suspended several times over the last 20 years and he had served 4 years in prison for DWI's, though it was "probably" valid when he was pulled over this most recent time.

But the article also mentions though that Texas' license revocation policy is hobbled by issuing "occupational" licenses that people can use to get to work. :doh:

I dunno now. All things considered it does seem like he may have exhausted all his strikes on this issue, but I still can't help but think something else could've been done earlier on to prevent this outcome. :shrug:

Dragar · #8 05-27-2005, 06:58 PM

It would be nice to think so. I can't understand the thought processes that would lead someone to drink and drive despite having known (first hand!) the result of doing so.

I guess many humans simply don't think that far ahead, especially while under the influence. And when you simply can't allow such a danger to be present in society...you have to give them a long term jail sentance.

Life seems a bit extreme, but I guess he won't serve all of that.

viscousmemories · #9 05-27-2005, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragar

I can't understand the thought processes that would lead someone to drink and drive despite having known (first hand!) the result of doing so.

I think you'd have to be a drunk to understand how our minds (don't) work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragar

Life seems a bit extreme, but I guess he won't serve all of that.

According to the article he'll do at least 30 years of it before he's eligible for parole. At his age that's life.

Ari · #10 05-27-2005, 07:03 PM

3rd time?
To be a little drastic I'd say your drivers license should be revoked for say 5 years for first offense, unless you can prove an emergency requires you to be on the road.
If you aren't responsible enough to not drink and drive, maybe you shouldn't be allowed to control a giant machine in the first place. Being drunk on the job while operating heavy machinery will get you fired, it should be the same in real life, especially since you are much more likely to kill someone while driving on the road than say operating a bulldozer on an almost empty construction site.

I'm torn between saying that it's too harsh of a punishment for the crime and other punishments (such as 5 billion hours of community service, relating to his crime (such as digging drunk driving victims graves) would be better, and hoping the book left a bruise when they threw it at him.

If you hadn't guessed, drunk driving is a pet peeve of mine.

viscousmemories · #11 05-27-2005, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ari

If you hadn't guessed, drunk driving is a pet peeve of mine.

Unfortunately in my experience drinking and driving isn't really dealt with consistently in America. I used to drive drunk somewhat regularly for many years and though I was pulled over innumerable times I never got a single DUI. Here's my apology for being an antisocial asshole, but as you can see no new legislation would've really impacted me since I was never charged with a drunk driving related crime.

SharonDee · #12 05-27-2005, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

...but as you can see no new legislation would've really impacted me since I was never charged with a drunk driving related crime.

I actually think it wouldn't have stopped you even if you had been charged. This guy who continued to drink and drive in spite of repeated convictions is hardly the first I've heard of.

Which probably helps to explain why the guy got life. How else were they going to stop him from doing it again? Even if driving licenses were suspended or revoked, that won't stop those who are determined to drink and drive. "I won't get caught this time" seems to be the thought of the day for repeat offenders.

Ari · #13 05-27-2005, 07:36 PM

If DUIs and DWIs were enforced better I bet there would be fewer accidents. As your case attests too for many people each DUI represents more than one offense that they weren't stopped or charged for.

Here in california the highway patrol has been under fire for what appears to be misuse of drunk driving funds. Using DUI checkpoints to catch illegal immigrants or other offenses besides DUI. Often impounding more cars for other offenses than DUI.
(Not to mention checkpoints aren't the greatest way to stop drunk driving to begin with).

LadyShea · #14 05-27-2005, 07:54 PM

My Dad worked with a guy who had to take Antabuse by court order. Seems like that could have prevented him drinking...or at least if he did he would be too busy vomiting to drive anywhere.

Also, you say "possible harm"...had the guy been caught waving a loaded gun around in public 8 times, would you still consider the sentence too harsh simply because he never accidentally shot someone? For the record, I also have mixed feelings on this, and am asking myself the same question.

Skep · #15 05-27-2005, 07:59 PM

I read this article in my local paper just minutes before I saw this thread. The guy got 3 years after his 9th OWI.

viscousmemories · #16 05-27-2005, 08:04 PM

Well one important point to me is that I don't believe anyone makes a rational choice to drive when they've had too much to drink. I think that whatever they would normally do is irrelevant, since their judgement is typically impaired beyond recognition. At least mine always was. When I was sober I recognized and respected how dangerously stupid and wrong it was to drive drunk. But when I was drunk I thought I could handle it just fine and in fact had considerable personal experience to support that belief.

Now this is when some people say "well then you shouldn't have gotten drunk", but as anyone with even casual experience with alcoholism can attest, telling an alcoholic they just shouldn't get drunk is telling a chronic depressive to cheer up.

viscousmemories · #17 05-27-2005, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skep

I read this article in my local paper just minutes before I saw this thread. The guy got 3 years after his 9th OWI.

Wow, talk about your dramatically disparate judgements for almost identical crimes. :eek:

See that judges comment that the dude needs to "come to his senses" in the article you cited reflects the mistake I refer to above. Obviously his senses when he's drunk are hopelessly obliterated, and he can decide not to drink and drive all he wants while sober but unless he stops drinking there are no guarantees.

LadyShea · #18 05-27-2005, 08:11 PM

I agree Tom, but after 8 DUIs, shouldn't a rational person make arrangements of some kind while they are sober? Obviously he can't handle driving drunk since he gets caught alla damn time.

Dingfod · #19 05-27-2005, 08:20 PM

In a Fox 23 Tulsa news report:

Quote:

Sean Stinnett from Cleveland County has had least 10 alcohol-related arrests between 1988 and 2002. In 1993, he got 2 DUI's just three weeks apart. He's been serving time in Vinita since his most recent DUI in 2002.

Tied with Stinnett is Phillip Gooden of Oklahoma City. He, too, has had at least 10 arrests between 1988 and 2002. He too was picked up "twice" in 1993, just three months apart. Gooden is out of prison, and on probation. However, FOX23 found he was picked up again on April 30th, and charged Friday, May 20th. An affadavit says police found him passed out behind the wheel of a car, with keys in the ignition.

FOX23 found Oklahoma's worst offender is Ralph Sonday, Jr, of Muskogee. He's had 13 arrests, including two in 1995 and two in 1996. In 1996, his DUI's were 13 days apart. Today he's out on probation.

[...]

FOX23 discovered thousands of repeat drunk drivers in Oklahoma, including Tulsan Donald Davis. He's been busted 10 times between 1982 and 2002. He's now on probation, and his license is suspended.

Armed with Donald Davis's mugshot, and his last known address, FOX23 went out to see if this repeat drunk driver is still getting behind the wheel.

Day one, March 24th: It takes just a few hours to catch Davis in the car. FOX23 videotapes him as he drives by a school, and to the bank right across from the police station! Later that night, he breaks the law again, and drives to his DUI school!

April 7th: FOX23 catches Davis behind the wheel again, heading to Catoosa, then driving back to Tulsa. That's about 15 miles round-trip.

April 20th: Davis drives again. We catch him coming home.

May 4th: Davis is in the car a fifth time and we decide to get some answers.

Jace: "We want to talk to you about why you're out driving? Have you ever been arrested for drunk driving?"
Davis: "Yeah."
Jace: "How many times?"
Davis: "Uh, four."
Jace: "Only four?"
Davis: "That I'm aware of."

The court records we dug up show ten alcohol-related arrests.

Jace: "We talked with the Public Safety Office, they people who hand out driver's license, they say your license is suspended?"
Davis: "No, it's not."
Jace: "Do you want to show it to us?"
Davis: "No."
Jace: "This isn't the first time we've caught you driving, we've caught you driving other times before."
Davis: "No, sir, you have not."
Jace: "This is the first time you've been driving?"
Davis: "Right."
Jace: "Today?"
Davis: "Right."

There's a guy that is in serious denial... or was just too drunk to remember.

Ari · #20 05-27-2005, 08:25 PM

Alcohol just isn't the right drug for some people.

I agree that the courts should do something more, it should seem pretty obvious that alcohol impairs your judgement, so telling him to "have better judgement" is a big waste of time. If he doesn't get better judgment by the 9th time he isn't going to get it until after he kills someone (and then maybe not even then).

It also annoys me to no end when people brag about how they can "handle themselves" driving drunk, like it's some macho thing to endanger innocent people because you have to prove you're tough.

lady cop · #21 05-27-2005, 08:26 PM

my view may well be pretty predictable, but i have scraped too many peoples' guts or brains off the pavement as a result of DUI. and a habitual offender who has been caught many times, has done it many more times without getting caught, endangering everyones' loved ones.

Dingfod · #22 05-27-2005, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ari

It also annoys me to no end when people brag about how they can "handle themselves" driving drunk, like it's some macho thing to endanger innocent people because you have to prove you're tough.

The women too?

viscousmemories · #23 05-27-2005, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyShea

I agree Tom, but after 8 DUIs, shouldn't a rational person make arrangements of some kind while they are sober? Obviously he can't handle driving drunk since he gets caught alla damn time.

But that's the thing, alcoholics aren't rational. At least when it comes to drinking. That's why I really think the better course of action would be to stamp a drunks license "No Alcohol". Sure I probably could've still gotten drunk and maybe would've even continued driving, but if I wasn't able to get into bars or buy my own alcohol it would've drastically reduced the frequency of it.

For some reason there's this meme in America that buying and drinking alcohol is a natural right of every citizen regardless of the impact it has on their own or others lives. We'll suspend someone's license but we won't tell 'em they can't drink. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

LadyShea · #24 05-27-2005, 08:45 PM

What do you think of court ordered Antabuse?

John Carter · #25 05-27-2005, 08:53 PM

In the state where I live, there was an incident recently where a man was convicted of some number of multiple DUIs. This carried with it a mandatory jail sentence. However, the judge in this case was reluctant to impose that sentence on the offender. Last I heard, he had delayed sentencing for two weeks.

The problem is, the man has serious health issues. He needs a heart transplant, and his medical bills will probably run to at least six figures during the time he is supposed to be incarcerated. If he is serving a jail sentence, then these bills become the county's responsibility, and they simply cannot afford it (New Mexico is among the poorest states in the US).