Letter to the Editor
DUI fines
Published Thursday, May 15, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!May 7, 2008
To the editor:
Just a note to give some additional information as to why the drunken driving laws don’t work up here.
I follow the aftermath from what happens when someone gets a DUI. Anyone can, you just have to go to the state of Alaska trial court page and you can see for yourself. Follow the names of people that are arrested for this.
What you see for judgments in the News-Miner look pretty substantial, but when you actually look into it further you will notice that the fines are not being paid. Our court turns them over to collections.
So, even if the people are not paying their fines they are still allowed to get their licenses back.
So really, a first-time offender can get away with a minimal three-day jail sentence (some do this in their homes) and no charges at all.
The last case I followed, there was the initial arraignment, two hearings (defendant did not show up to either) and four different fines — none of which got paid!
That really does not seem like a real deterrent to me.
Sherry Smith
North Pole
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Take their cars. Don't even send them to jail. Just take the cars and auction them off.
If convicted, yes, take the car. Would be more due process then when you commit a hunting violation and they confiscate everything.
The law lost its balance and it is hysterical now. Just get rid of the alcohol or tax it to outer space like cigarettes.
I think a driver with their damn cell phone is a lot more dangerous that anyone with a .08 alcohol.
Take their car ... now that is really brilliant. How about we take your cell phone instead?
I don’t this the article author has the facts right either.
If you want people to take DUI/DWI serious, then get serious about holding their feet to the fire.. Courts need to stop suspending the fines, they know well before they ever drank what the penalty is supposed to be.
The punishments are not sufficient. Someone who has endangered the community should pay a fine that truly stings and they should also have to do a significant amount of community service that is assigned and not necessarily pleasant work. It starts young--the punishment for minors consuming alcohol are laughable--a pair of sneakers costs more these days. These kids should be taught a lesson and the punishments should truly deter the behavior. If people need counseling for substance abuse, that should be freely and readily available, because punishment alone does not work for an addict.
What happens with those who are financially strapped, do they get to perform community service? And if they do, does that show against the fine you see on the trial court page that HAS A DISCLAIMER that tells you that the information you are using for the particular case you are looking up may not be accurate!
I am not saying the laws work or dont work for DWI's, I am pointing out that the authors source states up front that the information being used from that website is not always accurate or up to date. Check your sources, I would not accept this lack of research from the DNM or from one of its readers.
How is someone supposed to pay off fines when the no longer have a job and can not get to work? The repeat offenders are often in a position where they have nothing to lose and drive without a license or insurance. Does this make our streets safer?
It has been scientifically proven that talking on a cell phone or driving while exhausted is more dangerous than driving with a BAC of .08. This is becoming a witch hunt just like the anti-tobacco campaign. Even the American Cancer Society states that radon is a much, much greater risk than second-hand smoke but you have never heard a PSA warning about radon.
I'm not saying that it is OK to drink and drive. I'm saying that the laws in place are effective and sufficient. If our goal is to save lives than we could do more good by using our resources in other areas. I would bet that more people are trampled by moose and attacked by bears than are killed by drunk drivers.
Actually, a DUI 'follows' a person around forever, in higher insurance costs, a blot on their record, AND they can't go into Canada without paying a hefty toll!
As far as community service for the financially strapped, when they give up alcohol in the quantity they have apparently been consuming it their financial strappededness will most likely lessen considerably!
Perhaps we should all be grateful they aren't ALSO talking on their cell phone while driving in such a condition. . . boggles the mind, eh?
Although very wrong, sometimes a DUI is just one of those things that happens. "One more for the road", momentary lapse in judgement, and sometimes just bad luck. Still wrong none the less. But for those who don't learn thier lesson and get a second DUI they should be put away for a long long time. Not so much for the DUI but for being to stupid to function in society.
Recently heard on the radio that Japan or China had passed a new DUI law that every single person in the car goes to jail for several years. What an awsome way to police ourselves. Many DUIs are given to people who have sober or at least less intoxicated people in the car with them.
I'm sorry, but what does talking on a cell phone have to do with DUI? Just because one activity is more dangerous than another doesn't mean the other shouldn't be looked at.
This is about DUI, not talking on cell phones while driving. Please quit using that same old stupid argument of "but this is more dangerous! Regulate it not DUI!"
Fairbanksgas, have you ever been convicted of DUI/DWI?
Why don't people that get caught drunk driving just fess up, admit they have a problem, take responsibility for their crimes and clean up their #$%@! lives!!!?
I know of a a few that have, it can be done.
no fines. Just jail. Thats fair to everyone, poor people and rich people alike.
Fairbanksgas, have you ever been convicted of DUI/DWI?
You automatically assume because this person has a different idea then "take their cars, send them to jail for years" they must only be humane because they are a perpetrator of the sin you are discussing?
Crazy, that we as a society can not look at a problem and discuss it without attacking other people who have a different opinion. That is how we find a solution that will work. One size does not fit all. The reasons behind a DUI are as different as the "punishment" that will work for the people arrested for it. How about we have the punishment be 72 straight hours of watching movies showing the results of an accident or interviews with the families and friends left behind? How about they serve a couple days at Carriage North (Denali Center) helping clean and feed a 32 year old permanently disabled (in a DUI accident) mother? How about for once talk about the problem and stay on track of the thread instead of attacking the writers?
You know thats funny I have a buddy who got 3rd DUI paid his fines for all of them, did everything that is required. He has a job is succesful has completed all the requirments of the court and I belive learned his lessons, however he is still being punished, so tell me where we dont hold there feet to the fire. Thats BS you guys really need to get some facts.
I do belive though that people convited of DUI's Should have to have a special Licnese plate for say 5 years after there latest conviction say a nice bright Orange so you know that, this indvidual has a histroy of driving intoxicated and to be EXTRA CAREFUL. Even my buddy included.
Three DUIs? Well as long as he has the money to pay the fines I guess its ok. It's just my responsibility to stay off the road to keep my family safe. That would look good on a victim's tombstone, "The guy paid all his fines".
Bornnbred, it wasn't an attack or assumption. It was a question because I feel that he seems very sympathetic to drunk drivers. Please learn to discern the difference.
agibson,
Wow, three DUIs? I can guarantee he has driven drunk more than three times. How many DUIs do we need before someone learns their lesson? Sounds like your buddy is selfish and pretty daft and should be in prison for years to come.
I agree with Bornnbred, my best friend was killed by a drunk driver. Someone on here said just throw them in jail with no fines. Do you know how much it costs PER day to keep someone in jail. And no I don't know the exact cost, but the fines are there for a reason; paid or not. And being sent to collections, if you have the money they will get it eventually. I'm not saying the system is anywhere near perfect and I especially appreciate the feeling of wanting people who drink and drive to pay more, SR-22's on your insurance are really really expensive, so they may not take the person's car, but it costs them a hell of a lot to drive it.
Goldie, was the drunk driver who killed your friend a first time offender? If not, would you rather have that person in jail and your friend back, or are you content with your friend being dead because you saved a few bucks by not keeping them in jail?
What happened to the drunk driver?
How do you know the fines were not paid? If you go to jail for three days on your first offense the fee for incarceration comes out of your permanent fund...they do not allow you to charge it or pay cash for it. I received this information from over a dozen folks who got their 1st DUI conviction. This is one FACT from them. If the state is allowing others to pay cash or charge for their jail time I cannot substantiate so I can't say it is a FACT that all folks get their "go to jail" time fee deducted from their permanent fund.
It is a fact that the largest human factor involving traffic accidents is speeding. Inattentive driving and drinking are two other human factors involved with traffic accidents.
If we are concerned about safety on our roads we pass laws that target the problem. We have responded with laws on drinking and driving. These laws have become stricter over the years and the impact of these laws has increased the safety on our roads.
We took away some of your constitutional rights to pass and enforce these drinking and driving laws. All in the name of public safety and the belief that driving a motorized vehicle is a privilege.
You can be arrested for impaired driving even if the police did not see you drive the car. You can be arrested for impaired driving if you are sitting in your car at home cleaning the dashboard. You will be convicted of impaired driving if you refuse to take a breath test after you have been arrested. Your constitutional right not to incriminate yourself was waived when you signed your drivers license so we decided to give you an automatic conviction if you refused. We don't care if you were driving OK on the road. If we (by WE I mean the state of Alaska) find a legal reason to stop you we can do all kinds of enforcement because you gave us permission by signing your drivers license.
It is not against the law to drink and drive. It is against the law to drive impaired. The level of impairment is now 0.08 blood alcohol content, BAC. The BAC used to be 0.10.
It appears folks are more concerned about folks drinking alcohol than they are about drinking folks driving. If we really wanted safe roads we would be applying the same penalties to folks speeding down our highways. During rush hour on the Richardson Highway everybody I am driving along with is doing 60 to 65 mph on the posted 55 mph four-lane. Because speed is the largest cause of traffic injuries and deaths in Alaska we should apply the same penalties.
Get caught speeding and we arrest you. Take your car. Put you in jail for three days. No driving privileges for 90 days on the first speeding ticket. May even loose your job.
If the 0.08 BAC is the magic number for drinking folks the 55 mph is the magic number for speeding folks. How come the magic is not there when it comes to penalties, fines and jail time. Do you want safe roads or do you just want people to stop drinking?
That's the way I see it.
Look, I realize that 3 DUI's is pretty crappy of him. I am not sympathetic to Drunk Drivers or Criminals. However we do have a justice system that says when you commite a crime ANY CRIME you have to pay your dues to the community whatever that may be.
He did this, MANY DONT, one of the few that has learned, however after he as paid his dues done his time he is STILL being punished for what he has done even though he has served his time paid his fines to the community. Jeeze thats fair. We dont even punish some people who commit murder as bad.
As well anyone on this board that says THEY HAVE NEVER DRANK AND DRIVE IS A LIAR for sure did you realize you can get a DUI even if you are under .08 if the officer belives in anyway that you are impared just to let you know, this is everyone judging not knowing the facts once again.
I have seen many DUI's where people were below .08 but still very impared, and I am sure there are many of you that dont understand that the rate of consumption, absorbtion and elmination of Alcohol in and out of your system. This is very technical and not worht my time to explain to anyone on this board however the basic point is, I am sure everyone on this board who has ever consumed alcohol has drove when they were impared.
Belive it or not our system works for those who want to change and realize that they have made bad decisions.
Let him with out sin throw the first stone
vehicular manslaughter, and I would give anything to have my friend back you jerk for lack of a better term. I what I was saying is that KEEP them in jail, but the reason for the fines are so that it covers all the inmates we have. What a stupid and just plain rude comment to write.
The rules and punishments in place would work fine if they were simply enforced. Suspending punishment accomplishes nothing positive. Is there any reason why the courts couldn't remand the offenders to jail and hold them there until the fines are paid? if they knew that they would be rotting in a jail cell until the balance is zero, the offenders would find a way to pay.
Great comments Bornnbred. Although I think the videos are not enough for people, hands on. When I was in high school if you got a MCA (minor consuming alcohol) you had mandatory community service (80 hours I believe) working with victims of drunken driving, a tour of the local prison and had to work at MADD. Not picking up trash or other community service. For many it got the point across.
I also say take the cars and sell them to pay for our overcrowded prisons, it's not much but it's a start. I also like the orange license plates. Although I am a huge supporter of all sex offenders posting signs so maybe I just like the old scarlet letter style of punishment.??.??
While I think the cell phone issue is a bit off topic I do agree there is a BIG problem there too. Many states have laws that prohibit the use of cell phones while driving. If that is what you believe we should do then contact your local lawmakers and tell them. Just last week I was driving down Geist Road (left lane) and a full size Dodge came up on my bumper served around me like there was some sort of emergency when I looked at the driver she had one hand out the window with a (sorry smokers)cigarette, her other hand had a cell phone glued to her ear and was using her elbow to navigate her vehicle, I will say that when she cut me off she did use her smoking hand to assist. If I would have been able to get a good look at her license plate you are darn sure I would have called her into FPD but she was gone in a matter of seconds. I have seen people reading and driving, writing and driving, putting on make-up while driving and eating while driving to name a few. I am not sure where we draw the lines here, I do believe the less distracted we are the better the odds are we won't be involved in any sort of accident. I know what works for me, both hands on the wheel and my eyes on the road which is what a teach my children.
Goldie- some comments aren't even worth responding to. Surely you have met those people ... waste of your breath. Try not to let it bother you. In our real lives we distance ourselves from those people. On a blog you can't stop them from writing but you don't have to read it (well more then once anyway) I lost an Uncle two years ago to a DWI hit and run, he on his way to work early in the am and the kid on his way home from partying.. The pain is terrible but the reaction does not have to be vengeful.. hopefully it can be a lesson learned. Just because a person makes a very terrible, terrible mistake (I am not talking habitual) I hope we do not settle for just lashing out and throwing them away. There is more to every story then what appears on a court judgment page in the FDNM.
Many people I know that have had a DUI/DWI have said it was a stupid mistake and thankfully the penalty for your first DUI/DWI is not that bad. In most states it is much worse!
There does need to be a change in our laws on DUI/DWI. What we have right now does not seem to be effective. or at least it is not stopping most from doing it again.
I won't say what I think would or would not work but I do feel that most people agree there needs to be a change in our laws.