Victim of deadly crash hated the thought of drunk driving

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Too bad we can't see 5 year mandatory minimums for DUI convictions and automatic life sentences for DUI causing death. It is senseless, and it's beyond idiotic, but I gotta believe if the consequences were severe it would curb it a lot. Consequences are now worse for having weed or seeing an escort than most times a drunk driver kills someone.

Totes. After the raging success mandatory minimums enjoyed in curbing drug use and distribution in the USA, finally we'll have the society we all want and deserve!

[Northendzone]

the driver of the escalade should be shown a annual slide show of all of the important moments in these two girls lives that thier father missed

[GGG]

As someone who got a DUI in my youth I would argue that the consequences don't matter because you don't consider them. The problem is that I can rationally tell and could at the time that it was stupid but when drunk that logic would go out the window. The impairment impairs your ability to decide if it's a good idea.

The biggesr problem is the consequences of drinking and driving each time you do it are zero. You go out you drink too many beer you drive home, you don't have any close calls, you don't get caught. So overtime you drive drunker and drive impaired more frequently.

So two things I think would be effective. Make it less socially acceptable to drive drunk. This guys friends probably knew he was getting in the car. This comes through education and I almost want to say bullying of people you know who drink and drive.

The second is better enforcement if you caught someone drinking and driving the first time they did it, or at least the probability of getting caught was 1/10 instead of 1/1000 or worse that would drastically curb it. Why doesn't McLeod trail have a checkstop every Friday and Saturday from 11-4?

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by GGG

Why doesn't McLeod trail have a checkstop every Friday and Saturday from 11-4?

Because everyone would social media the location, and drunks would find a different way home?

[billybob123]

Originally Posted by GGG

As someone who got a DUI in my youth I would argue that the consequences don't matter because you don't consider them. The problem is that I can rationally tell and could at the time that it was stupid but when drunk that logic would go out the window. The impairment impairs your ability to decide if it's a good idea.

Agreed - this is why judgement calls are terrible ideas. People consider that "I'm fine" but how does one know they're "fine"? He or she doesn't. They're impaired!

So two things I think would be effective. Make it less socially acceptable to drive drunk. This guys friends probably knew he was getting in the car. This comes through education and I almost want to say bullying of people you know who drink and drive.

I disagree heartily with you here. It is not, nor has it ever in my life (I'm 38) been socially acceptable to drive drunk. Never. Everyone under the age of 40 has had it drilled into their heads that impaired driving is dangerous. When I was in high school, we had an 18-year old come to talk to us about how he killed his friends in a crash. There are commercials on TV. There are advertisements in the bars and pubs. It is socially unacceptable.

The way to eliminate the few who don't listen is to make it draconian punishment if one attempts to do it. Fear is a good motivator!

The second is better enforcement if you caught someone drinking and driving the first time they did it, or at least the probability of getting caught was 1/10 instead of 1/1000 or worse that would drastically curb it. Why doesn't McLeod trail have a checkstop every Friday and Saturday from 11-4?

Unfortunately cost-wise it's not practical. I agree, though, if people are fearful of getting caught and fearful of being imprisoned, it might deter the dummies who didn't get the message already that DUI is a no go.

I have particular hatred for irresponsible drunks who drive and endanger everyone. I have no sympathy, I have no compassion, I have no leniency.

I have lost two friends to irresponsible chronic drunk drivers. Two innocent people who missed out on their entire life. Children, marriage, travel, career. Because of ignorant ass drunks (repeatedly convicted) who killed them. One of whom spent less than a year in jail for murdering my friend. While driving on a suspended license, from a previous DUI conviction.

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Totes. After the raging success mandatory minimums enjoyed in curbing drug use and distribution in the USA, finally we'll have the society we all want and deserve!

Hang on, are you implying that drug use and distribution laws have anything to do with the reckless endangerment of the innocent public that drunk driving causes? Apples and oranges. I could care less about alcohol consumption and distribution. I care about safeguarding my, your, and everyone's safety on the roads because of irresponsible drunks who decide to drive impaired.

And I feel the same way about drug-impaired drivers. Impairment is impairment.

[La Flames Fan]

On a semi-related note that intersection is brutal. I overlook it and there have been 4 or 5 fairly bad accidents there in the last 2 weeks almost all of them during daylight hours. A roll over, two onto the sidewalk, and of course this one...it's very sad. Not sure what to do about that intersection...

[CaptainCrunch]

I have a particular hatred for Drunk Drivers, I don't want to get into the reasons as they are personal.

Frankly there is no excuse whatsoever for getting behind the wheel of your car after drinking, and I'm not talking, a beer or a glass of wine after dinner, but if you're that idiot that pounded back 3 beers in a couple of hours, then why are you taking the chance.

If your going to the bar and partying why don't you have a designated driver or taxi money or whatever.

Drinking and driving is your fault if you do it, and your responsibility for whatever happens.

Someone said make it less socially acceptable, well the only way to do it is to use the people that drink and drive, since we can't use the stocks in the public square anymore. Maybe instead of long jail terms you give them a long sentence in the public where every day they have to wear a shirt that says "I'm a drunk driver", and then list the number of times they've been caught and what happened.

Make them go to every school and church in their area and talk about what they did, make sure that they have to stand in the kitchen of their victim and explain why they did it.

I'm also of the mind that if you get caught drinking and driving a second time you lose you're license forever and your car is seized and sold to pay for prevention programs.

I'm sick and tired of drunk drivers, its not a mental illness issue, its either laziness, or not giving a crap and those are the two worst reason to do it.

[Weitz]

One of the major reasons I love living downtown. I have zero excuse to drive drunk/buzzed. It's so nice that I can walk home any time of the year if I can't get a taxi.

There is no excuse for drunk driving. Zero.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Weitz

One of the major reasons I love living downtown. I have zero excuse to drive drunk/buzzed. It's so nice that I can walk home any time of the year if I can't get a taxi.

There is no excuse for drunk driving. Zero.

Every pub/bar in town is walking distance from my house, or if I am lazy I can get a cab and pay $5.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Weitz

One of the major reasons I love living downtown. I have zero excuse to drive drunk/buzzed. It's so nice that I can walk home any time of the year if I can't get a taxi.

Weren't these people killed right in downtown? Could have easily have been you squished like a bug when drunk driver blew through the red light or when the secondary collision was spun out onto the curb.

[habernac]

My friend Kelly's sister was killed 5 years ago, in the middle of the day, in a head on collision with a drunk driver who crossed the centre line. Kelly is broken, can't physically do even a 30 hour work week anymore because of the injuries she sustained. He got 2 years or less. A joke of a sentence.

[goodyear]

Just very sad hearing about this. A young woman doing the responsible thing and a family man working to provide for his family. So senseless.

I've heard of a vehicular homicide charge in the States, is it a charge in Canada as well?

Will this qualify? If not, should it be?

[polak]

Harsher sentences won't matter cause drunk people wont consider them. They don't think they'll get caught or that they're not okay to drive so they won't consider the consequences.

I think a Breathalyzer ignition is the only way it'll ever happen.

I commend bars like Hudsons south that go up to every car leaving their bar late and grill them about being. okay to drive.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by billybob123

I disagree heartily with you here. It is not, nor has it ever in my life (I'm 38) been socially acceptable to drive drunk. Never. Everyone under the age of 40 has had it drilled into their heads that impaired driving is dangerous. When I was in high school, we had an 18-year old come to talk to us about how he killed his friends in a crash. There are commercials on TV. There are advertisements in the bars and pubs. It is socially unacceptable.

The way to eliminate the few who don't listen is to make it draconian punishment if one attempts to do it. Fear is a good motivator!

I honestly don't think that jail time for a first DUI or loss of license forever on a first offense would deter anyone. If a person is already going to risk killing someone or themselves these are far higher consequences then anything the law can throw at them. The it won't happen to me and I was okay last time falicies are very strong with people who Drink and Drive. From a punishment point of view it would feel good but its not going to stop it.

I would also disagree with you that its not socially acceptable to drink and drive. Maybe in the city here it is better but Im about the same age as you and in rural areas drinking and driving was the norm. Sure they brought in speakers about the tragidies that occur but the next night people still drove home. University was the same. The fact that drunk drivers have passengers in their vehicles shows you its still socially acceptable. At parties with Taxi chits you still see people drive after 3 beer because they don't want to leave their car.

Its getting there but it certainly isn't at the point where you can go up to a random person and tell them not to get in their car becasue they have had too much to drink. Its still taboo to intervene and intervention, getting caught, or killing someone are about the only things that have a chance to stop someone who is drinking and driving.

[Northendzone]

while i do not have any stats, other than my onw observations - but it sure seems like more often than not the drunk drivers walk away from these crashes and leave a wake of destruction behind them and change lives forever and all they ahve to do is give up two years of their lives to repay their debt

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

while i do not have any stats, other than my onw observations - but it sure seems like more often than not the drunk drivers walk away from these crashes and leave a wake of destruction behind them and change lives forever and all they ahve to do is give up two years of their lives to repay their debt

I doubt that's true. Do you think if your average person kills someone because of stupid and dangerous decision, they just go on to live happily every after? I doubt it.

There's two facets to the punishment: justice and deterrence.

Life sentences might be justice, but I don't know.

The certainly aren't going to deter much

[lazypucker]

How about making public transit more accessible and more socially acceptable? I know the cost of running more c-trains and buses will be high, but I think people will be more willing to take public transit if it runs throughout the night.

Calgary is still more of a private-vehicle city, partly because of the public transit system can't keep up with the city's growth. Most people still prefer to drive than taking a bus because it is more convenient. And also there is the notion that taking public transit is lame. I have friends in their 30's who have never taken public transit before and they drive everywhere.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by habernac

My friend Kelly's sister was killed 5 years ago, in the middle of the day, in a head on collision with a drunk driver who crossed the centre line. Kelly is broken, can't physically do even a 30 hour work week anymore because of the injuries she sustained. He got 2 years or less. A joke of a sentence.

And he probably is allowed to drive, too. And honestly, I would not be surprised if he still drinks and drives.

Brutal.

[habernac]

Originally Posted by Peanut

And he probably is allowed to drive, too. And honestly, I would not be surprised if he still drinks and drives.

Brutal.

Makes me angry every time I think about it. I see her and the scars on her arms from repeated surgeries and how she can't walk properly anymore. Her son was so lucky, he was in the backseat, broke his leg but the car seat saved his life.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

So knowing that impairment occurs at different levels in all people, what limit would you assign to the mandatory interlock device?

Like mentioned the legal limit or zero tolerance. I'd love the insurance discount I'd get from having my car set to zero tolerance.

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

It also fails to address other forms of impairment that are just as bad as alcohol.

You're right it does - but it's better than nothing which is what we have right now.