Victim of deadly crash hated the thought of drunk driving

[T@T]

Originally Posted by troutman

In Europe the differences are:

1) stricter penalties
2) easily accessible public transit (at all hours)
3) denser cities that are walkable

just too add

4) more taxi cabs

Not that it would make a difference but I wonder how many times drunk drivers have tried to get a cab at 2:30am?

[Daradon]

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.

While I'm not against stiffer penalties for impaired driving causing injury or death, your comparisons seem out of whack and mostly hand wringing hyperbole. Do you have stats to back it up? If I'm wrong I'll own it. But penalties for impaired driving causing death (and impaired driving penalties in general) have gone up dramatically in the last twenty years. A friend of my stepdads spend several years in prison for just that.

As for weed and the prostitution question, I too think they are wrongky focused on compared to real ills of society, but let's not get carried away here. I don't know anyone who has spent multiple years in jail for either. Remember, you said 'having weed', not selling. I think weed should be legal as it is, but regardless, you didn't talk about selling which we both know is punished more harshly than possesion.

[driveway]

I think improved access to public transportation and taxis and services like uber would be a way better way to spend money than any increase in policing or punishment.

[Daradon]

Yeah, prevention through the improvement of city services would probably work tge best. I've mentioned that before. Was just saying I wouldn't be against harsher penalties in some cases.

[polak]

I think if checkstops were more prevalent, especially on side roads it would completely kill the issue.

The moment the chance of being caught is higher than the chance of getting away with it, you'll see a massive reduction.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

That's no excuse for drinking and driving.

For me a significant part of the drunk driving issues is that we are not looking at the root causes of drunk driving. I think you could make a significant impact in drunk driving by doing the following:
- Increase the number of cabs
- Mandate that cabs cannot refuse a fare because they are drunk.
- Increase the frequency and lateness of public transit
- Step up enforcement; more checkstops.

I'm not saying that any of the above are any excuse for drunk driving, but they are often indirect causes. Most of the first hand experiences I have with drunk driving would never have come up had the above been followed. Especially the cabs refusing fares; there was one case where I was trying to get a friend home who had too much, and she was ready to just go get her car because no cab would let us in.

[Nyah]

I don't buy that an increased number of cabs would help solve the problem. Part of the problem lies with people not thinking ahead and driving themselves to the bar/pub and not wanting to leave a vehicle. An increased number of cabs wouldn't help that, we would still have cases like this because some people just don't ####ing get it. Years back at a Christmas party downtown, everyone was given taxi vouchers and there was a plethora of taxis out front and one guy still decided to drive home drunk. Luckily he only got a DUI and didn't kill anyone, but it just goes to show that idiots will be idiots regardless of how many alternatives they are given.

[CaptainCrunch]

Personally I think that drunk drivers can be fixed without expensive jail time.

Here's my plan

First time DUI, no accident
- insurance rate triples automatically for 5 years, if your under the age of 18, You cannot be insured
Drivers license suspension for 6 months
- Car is seized for 6 months, and you pay the costs of storage
- You have to make 5 public service messages, and 5 public speaking appearances
- you have 52 public services (sweeping streets, cleaning camp toilets, etc) all while wearing a shirt that states that you are a drunk driver

First accident DUI, accident up to and including death
- you cannot be insured for 10 years, your vehicle is seized and sold
- 5 year sentence to be served in the community
- Drivers license suspended for 5 years.
- You have to make 10 public service messages and 10 public speaking engagements
- You have 5 years of community services and have to wear a shirt that reads, I drove drunk and killed a person.
- you have to meet the victims family face to face
- You have to volunteer at a rehabilitation facility or hospital and work with victims of impared drivers.

Second incident of DUI, no accident
- two year driving ban
- un-insurable for 2 years, minimum of 5x the standard insurance rate
- You cannot take a job that involves a motor vehicle
- Publice service requirements including working with drunk driving victims.
- You have to disclose your drunk driving convictions to employers.

Second incident of DUI can include accidents and death, (this is the second DUI overall)
- Permanent driving ban
- uninsurable.
- 10 year suspended sentence
- public service reaquirements, including working for advocacy groups for DUI educations and work with victims of drunk driving
- Meet with your victims
- a massive fine
- Your car is sold
- You have to wear a label that designates you as a drunk driver who hurt or killed someone when in public.

If you break the terms of the above

Automatic 5 year prison term, 10 year on second offense.

[Sliver]

Isn't there some statistic about unemployment where you can't get below 5% or something to account for the ne'er-do-wells that just aren't going to work no matter what jobs are available? I think we're approaching the same thing with drunk drivers.

More cabs, later-running transit, more check stops, etc. aren't going to help. At this point, we are basically left with idiots that are going to drive drunk in spite of easy better options and in the face of all the education in the world. Best thing to do is work hard at convincing your buddies to stop drinking and driving at a one-on-one level "in the moment."

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I'd be extremely surprised if this 20 year old guy serves his time and goes "Welp, time served, back to my normal life".

At least he gets that chance. The same can't be said for the two deceased.

[darockwilder]

I'd be fine if he got this treatment...

http://www.msn.com/01/en-ca/BBjhFGp?ocid=se

Unfortunately he's in Canada and will likely get only a couple of years, if that.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by ken0042

For me a significant part of the drunk driving issues is that we are not looking at the root causes of drunk driving. I think you could make a significant impact in drunk driving by doing the following:
- Increase the number of cabs
- Mandate that cabs cannot refuse a fare because they are drunk.
- Increase the frequency and lateness of public transit
- Step up enforcement; more checkstops.

I'm not saying that any of the above are any excuse for drunk driving, but they are often indirect causes. Most of the first hand experiences I have with drunk driving would never have come up had the above been followed. Especially the cabs refusing fares; there was one case where I was trying to get a friend home who had too much, and she was ready to just go get her car because no cab would let us in.

Those aren't the root cause.

The root cause is straight up stupidity and/or lack of concern for their fellow man. Stupidity to do it. Stupidity to not recognize you do that stupid thing when drinking.

The above are ways to maybe mitigate against that stupidity but I've known a person who would drive drunk who didn't do so because a cab was available. They are going to drive drunk because they are idiots. The ONLY reason they take a cab is because their friends aren't idiots and take their keys (Tackling them if they have to) and force them into a cab.

[Johnny199r]

I was in court today. So many people pled guilty to impaired driving that the judge said he was too tired to keep giving the same speech and just sentenced them towards the end of the day. Most people got a $1000 fine and one year driving prohibition. And those were the ones that actually pled guilty, most people in Alberta spend 10k on a lawyer and fight the charge looking for a technicality (delay, irrelevant disclosure, hope for a witness to be unavailable). A lot of people in this province don't even accept responsibility for their dangerous actions.

I can assure everyone, the message isn't getting across to anyone.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

I was in court today. So many people pled guilty to impaired driving that the judge said he was too tired to keep giving the same speech and just sentenced them towards the end of the day. Most people got a $1000 fine and one year driving prohibition. And those were the ones that actually pled guilty, most people in Alberta spend 10k on a lawyer and fight the charge looking for a technicality (delay, irrelevant disclosure, hope for a witness to be unavailable). A lot of people in this province don't even accept responsibility for their dangerous actions.

I can assure everyone, the message isn't getting across to anyone.

What a ####ing depressing post.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

I was in court today. So many people pled guilty to impaired driving that the judge said he was too tired to keep giving the same speech and just sentenced them towards the end of the day. Most people got a $1000 fine and one year driving prohibition. And those were the ones that actually pled guilty, most people in Alberta spend 10k on a lawyer and fight the charge looking for a technicality (delay, irrelevant disclosure, hope for a witness to be unavailable). A lot of people in this province don't even accept responsibility for their dangerous actions.

I can assure everyone, the message isn't getting across to anyone.

I don't necessarily equate going through a trial with the intention of your lawyer getting the best possible outcome with not taking responsibility. Our justice system is what it is, and having a lawyer defend you side to the best of his ability is pretty much automatic.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I don't necessarily equate going through a trial with the intention of your lawyer getting the best possible outcome with not taking responsibility. Our justice system is what it is, and having a lawyer defend you side to the best of his ability is pretty much automatic.

Pleading guilty to something you did is taking responsibility. You were drinking, operated a vehicle and had readings over .08 %. I can appreciate people want to have a lawyer and have the best possible outcome, but how the hell is that not attempting to avoid the responsibility and the consequences for what you did. I don't mean when you ask a lawyer to resolve the matter, but when one looks for a loophole "set it for trial, I can't lose my license" when they actually committed the conduct they're accused of.

I give a lot of credit to those people who show up on the first appearance and say yes I did it, I accept it. You don't see that very often these days.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by T@T

just too add

4) more taxi cabs

Not that it would make a difference but I wonder how many times drunk drivers have tried to get a cab at 2:30am?

There is also a problem in some larger cities where cabs won't even take you if you live too far. They make more money taking a bunch of short fares than driving one person out to the suburbs and then having to drive all the way back with no fare.

They aren't technically allowed to do that, but it happens all the time. I know people that driven after drinking because of that. Not that drinking and driving is ever excusable. If someone is going to drink, then they need to figure out safe transportation and if they can't afford, then they don't need to drink. But sometimes the logistics do convince people to make the wrong the decision easier.

[polak]

I've had cabs in Calgary tell me no cause I didn't have cash and needed debit/credit.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by polak

I've had cabs in Calgary tell me no cause I didn't have cash and needed debit/credit.

I've been in cabs where the driver is nice and talking lots, then at the end where you say credit/debit, they get mad. My personal thoughts are many of them would like no paper trial for CRA.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

- You have 5 years of community services and have to wear a shirt that reads, I drove drunk and killed a person.
- you have to meet the victims family face to face

These types of things don't really work out in actual application, for a multitude of possible reasons.