How Society Should Deal With Drunk / Distracted Driving

Discussion in 'The Perfect Line and Other Riding Myths' started by jimhaleyscomet, Mar 19, 2014.

  1. jimhaleyscomet

    jimhaleyscomet Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Oddometer:
    96
    Currently when a driver gets a DUI or kills/maims a cyclist, pedestrian, or rider our laws have no way to address the risk that offender puts on the rest of us when he/she returns to the road (either legally or illegally). Drivers sometimes get an "exemption" to drive to/from work or school but we are the ones put at risk. Existing laws do not provide a way for a questionable driver to continue to get to the places they NEED to go without putting the rest of us at risk. I propose we develop laws that shift the risk back onto the offender as follows:

    1. Drivers fount to be 70% or more at fault in a fatality/severe injury crash are not permitted to drive any vehicle except motorcycles under 101cc and/or Type B Low Speed Vehicles for 10 years. Convicted drivers will not be allowed to have a powered cell phone or electronics comunication device anywhere in the vehicle.
    2. Drivers arrested for DUI are not permitted to drive any vehicle except motorcycles under 101cc and/or Type B Low Speed Vehicles until charges are dropped. Drivers will not be allowed to have a powered cell phone or electronics communication device anywhere in the vehicle.
    3. Drivers convicted of DUI are not permitted to drive any vehicle except motorcycles under 101cc and/or Type B Low Speed Vehicles for 10 years. Convicted drivers will not be allowed to have a powered cell phone or electronics comunication device anywhere in the vehicle.
    4. Drivers and occupants that flee the scene of an accident are not permitted to drive any vehicle except motorcycles under 101cc and/or Type B Low Speed Vehicles for 10 years or until found not guilty in a court of law. Convicted drivers will not be allowed to have a powered cell phone or electronics comunication device anywhere in the vehicle.
    5. Type B low speed vehicles are similar to current Low Speed Vehicles (max speed 35mph, legal only for roads up to 45mph speed limit) except the passenger compartment will be sized for a maximum of two occupants. The passenger compartment must not be taller than 5 feet and the rest of the vehicle (Hood, trunk, cargo bed) must not exceed 3 feet in height. Type B low speed vehicles will weigh less than 700 lbs and have GVWR of less than 1000 lbs. The vehicle will not have a radio /audio device and windows must be down except when raining or snowing (i.e. windshield wiper interlock with windows up). Type B low speed vehicles must have a black box that stores 60 days worth of usage information. Type B low speed vehicles must have a plackard facing front,back, and both sides (or perhaps on roof) identifying them as Type B low speed vehicles.

    Obviously these restrictions are on top of existing restrictions such as loosing one's license for a year or two after conviction for DUI, mandatory breath analyzer interlocks and the need to pass drivers and eyesight tests.

    Am I nuts or is this something AARP, the AMA, and MADD (among others) should pursue?
    #1
  2. pretbek

    pretbek Long timer

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2008
    Oddometer:
    1,337
    Location:
    SE Pennsylvania
    Why the "for 10 years"? What purpose does that serve? It seems arbitrary, and long just for punity's sake, to me.
    In this country, having to drive a 45 mph scooter for 10 years could seriously screw up your ability to retain/find work to support your family, because you can't get there.

    While I agree that there should be much more serious repercussion to driving drunk and especially after causing an accident while driving drunk, this seems a bit overboard.

    I would prefer huge fines, which could then fund more targeted DUI checking and enforcement. If the chance that you get caught driving drunk is very high (with known serious penalties), the chance that you do it diminishes, I would expect.
    #2
  3. jimhaleyscomet

    jimhaleyscomet Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Oddometer:
    96
    Perhaps 5 -7 years is sufficient but the long term is to give folks time to mature for the better. People mature a lot in 10 years. By providing for a Type B Low Speed Vehicle we are not punishing them as much as forcing them to take on themselves the risk of their actions if they want to continue to drive. Perhaps allowing graduation to a high speed (yet still light weight) vehicle after 5 or 7 years?
    #3
  4. atomicalex

    atomicalex silly aluminum boxes

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Oddometer:
    4,498
    Location:
    Detroit mostly
    Just think of the Twizys!!

    Or these wonders?

    [​IMG]
    #4
  5. randyo

    randyo Long timer

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Oddometer:
    2,153
    Location:
    Northern NewEngland
    the laws and penalties are different in every state

    over the past several decades we have come a long way with education

    compared to the 1960s, alcohol related fatalites are down 60%

    EDUCATION
    #5
  6. jimhaleyscomet

    jimhaleyscomet Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Oddometer:
    96
    Actually,

    If someone has a texting or drinking problem or runs from the law we should encourage them to drive far less (i.e. low speed vehicle) by perhaps moving closing to work or ?????

    I am all for giving folks all the opportunity we can. But once they demonstrate a weakness for alcohol or distracted driving OR a weakness for avoiding responsible behavior then they should no longer have the privelage to drive a huge Suburban or other (as defined by NHTSA) "aggressive" vehicles.
    #6
  7. atomicalex

    atomicalex silly aluminum boxes

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Oddometer:
    4,498
    Location:
    Detroit mostly
    Which brings on graduated licensing....


    Which I do agree with.
    #7
  8. WRW9751

    WRW9751 7th Day Adventurist

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Oddometer:
    575
    Location:
    Ankeny Iowa
    Why is it we give Drunk Drivers a chance to re-offend?
    There is a very high percentage of DWI violators that get right back into there cars and don't think anything about it!
    Our courts are full of multiple violations! Some haven't had licenses for years and drive their cars to the court house for their next date!
    They are caught on cameras everyday!
    This is BS!
    #8
  9. randyo

    randyo Long timer

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Oddometer:
    2,153
    Location:
    Northern NewEngland
    lobby your state legislature to toughen your laws

    I know locally, its tough to get your license back, even after you have paid your fine, paid to go to alcohol education, paid for a psycologist to evaluate you, and you still may not get a license back if that psycologist says no, second offense is mandatory jail, 3rd here is never drive again, ever
    #9
  10. jimhaleyscomet

    jimhaleyscomet Adventurer

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Oddometer:
    96
    This proposal recognizes that poor drivers feel compelled to drive and therefor do re-offend. By offering a legal alternative that is safer to the at large community perhaps we can limit the carnage they create by driving.
    #10
  11. 131unlimited

    131unlimited Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Oddometer:
    546
    #11
  12. PT Rider

    PT Rider Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Oddometer:
    885
    Location:
    NW Washington State
    My state is gradually toughening the DUI penalties.

    They should make the penalties so draconian that even the sloppiest drunks and biggest partiers take notice. A drunk will remember that a second DUI will earn them a year in prison. They can't quit drinking, but they won't drive. A partier will face that year and either always use a designated driver or take a cab.

    The penalties for injuring or killing someone while driving drunk/stoned/texting should be the same as intentional assault or second degree murder. They intentionally drunk or smoked or text'd, so make it assault or murder.
    #12
  13. randyo

    randyo Long timer

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Oddometer:
    2,153
    Location:
    Northern NewEngland
    the drunk that killed my grandson got 35 years for manslaughter
    #13
  14. blackvans1234

    blackvans1234 Talking to myself...

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2014
    Oddometer:
    546
    Location:
    Dutchess County New York!
    How does that make you feel?
    #14
  15. dm635

    dm635 I Roll

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2012
    Oddometer:
    382
    Location:
    Louisville Ky-actually 30 miles east
    Here in 'ol KY. if you are drunk and kill someone you are charged with murder. One that happened just this weekend was some idiot with over 10 years of alcohol related offenses multiple pages long and driving on a suspended. He ran a light and plowed into an SUV killing a 5 month old. He's got a $750,000 full cash bond. All the laws on the book don't mean shit if you are the victim. No recourse to the law.
    #15
  16. Yossarian™

    Yossarian™ Deputy Cultural Attaché

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Oddometer:
    10,518
    Location:
    the 'Ha
    While it will never heal the pain that the loss of his grandson caused, the felon won't be able to immediately go out and repeat the act. That much, I feel good about. I lost a very good friend to a DD years ago, and if that DD had been in prison due to a prior conviction, then maybe Mark would still be alive.
    #16
  17. randyo

    randyo Long timer

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Oddometer:
    2,153
    Location:
    Northern NewEngland
    I was very surprised, afik, it was the stiffest sentence anyone has ever received in my state

    I do not believe that killing someone in a DWI accident reaches the definition of murder, I do not believe the intent to harm is there, a charge of manslaughter, or a lesser charge of negligent homicide, is more fitting
    #17
  18. atomicalex

    atomicalex silly aluminum boxes

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Oddometer:
    4,498
    Location:
    Detroit mostly
    We have graduated licensing in Germany, it works fine. Maybe Quebec has screwed it up (like most other things they do)?
    #18
  19. Foot dragger

    Foot dragger singletracker

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Oddometer:
    13,751
    Location:
    chico,just below rag dump(nor-cal)
    Texting has proven to be just about as dangerous as drunk driving,and just as addicting for some it seems.
    Those electronic devices have taken over people's lives.
    #19
  20. Foot dragger

    Foot dragger singletracker

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Oddometer:
    13,751
    Location:
    chico,just below rag dump(nor-cal)
    I dunno bout that one,the drinker makes a choice at some point,its a known fact drinking and driving kills,yet he/she drinks and drives.

    Nobody forced him or her,and he kills someone through his actions.
    If there's no stiff sentence that is life changing then dont bother.
    #20