Drink driving penalties-too tough or too soft

[_Ben]

As a P-Plater, I have to have a BAC of 0.00.
I see this as a problem, if I drink the night before, stay over at a friends place, and drive in the morning, I may still have a BAC of 0.01. This would result in loss of license, even though in essence I did the right thing.

IMO drink driving laws need revision, as do the punishments.

[Stefan]

The problem is in the facvt that a judge dishes out the sentence and uses discretion and therefore the fines and sentence vary hugely.

The footballer's wife driving home from a charity event drunk gets let off completely.

Joe blogs on the way home from the pub doesn't get that benefit.

How about mandatory sentencing? low range 6 months $1K fine, no ifs no buts no court needed.

High range 12 months $2.5K, second offense, double the fines.

Why do we persist in making it hard to deal with when it is not?

[EDManual]

I think fines do nothing other than make money for the govt.

Licence loss and car loss is what drink drivers need. More so than so called hoons that might lose a bit of traction for a few seconds.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Stefan

How about mandatory sentencing?

Mandatory sentencing shouldn't exist at all anywhere in society, you can't take into account any circumstance.

Instead of sending people into jail for things like this, ruining their lives and costing the taxpayer lots of $$$ to keep them there, make them do something for the community.

They can be in the thick of it, helping with the legwork in motorway fatalities, doing the knock, helping out in the emergency ward/morgue etc.

[MWTB]

Originally Posted by _Ben

As a P-Plater, I have to have a BAC of 0.00.
I see this as a problem, if I drink the night before, stay over at a friends place, and drive in the morning, I may still have a BAC of 0.01. This would result in loss of license, even though in essence I did the right thing.

IMO drink driving laws need revision, as do the punishments.

This. I constantly worry about this. I went to the pub on Wednesday night, had myself a few and then got driven home by my brother in the comfort of my own car.

Went to work the next morning and worried the whole way there that I was over the limit.

I realise the law is there in place because P platers don't have as much driving experience and apparently can't drive with any BAC yadda yadda, but come on, at least introduce an extremely low range rating like .02BAC or something for lingering alcohol from the night before.

People like me who do the right thing, pay for a taxi or annoy people for a ride home and try to wait it out until a time when I think its safe to drive (never before 2pm if I've hit it really, really hard) but you can still never know.

I hate drink drivers as much as anyone, probably more in some cases, but things like this should surely have some room for consideration. Only problem is how to prove that you hadn't just sunk a couple before getting behind the wheel.

Cycles. Vicious and all that.

[nipper575]

Originally Posted by cobramania

I don't drink, so it doesn't affect me anyway, but I have no time for drink drivers, they endanger my life as much as theirs, when I'm trying to do the right thing by everyone, & they don't give a stuff.

Thing is though, why is 0.5 the limit & if you're on it, you get charged, but you don't get fined for driving at 60kph in a 60kph limit? Also in America & some other countries I think, the limit is 0.8, why does alcohol affect us & our driving ability more, or why does it affect them less? Are we too tough on the limit to start with, that's why many judges let many drink drivers off, or are other countries too lenient with the limit?

Wasn't our limit 0.08 once upon a time?

Regardless of what the BAC is, some people are worse drivers sober than others at or slightly over 0.05. Being sleep deprived, using your mobile, eating/smoking in your car, having music too loud as to not hear a siren approaching are (imo) bigger problems than being slightly over the BAC limit. I'll add that I've never blown higher than 0.038 (6 stubbies in about as many hours), or received a single demerit/fine since I've been driving.

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Instead of sending people into jail for things like this, ruining their lives and costing the taxpayer lots of $$$ to keep them there, make them do something for the community.

Let me tell ya the community service is a joke as well
People have all the excuses in the world to never turn up,and when they do they want the person who supervisors them to adjust a few hours for them
Ive done community service, done the crime paid the time, we had a bloke turn up who didnt want to be there,like maintaining the local golf course was real hard work, this fella never turned up on time, never turned up on the days required, and didnt do any work, the supervisor couldnt get rid of him fast enuf, so hours were adjusted, which annoyed me no end
The community service is bill adjusted i think its $25 an hour in credit of a fine,yet even bludging dolies run the bills up and wont do community service to help with any fines
The other issue with any fine be it DUI , speeding or anything else, you can pay payments threw SPER, and the monthly, forthnightly, weekly payment is calculated on the fine , coupla hundred in fines is 2 fifth of nothin a week,no wonder people dont care
A mate has $1500 in fines and pays $10 a week, hardly an issue
Make the fines automatic account deduction , then when your overdue on bills, loans,and cop a few extra bank charges cause your overdrafted youll think twice about being a muppet ...

[BHDOGS]

Excellent post 302XC just as I was saying pointless

[Smoke Pursuit]

They don't need jail sentences..... Our jails are already full.... 0.05 to 0.075 18 months no license... 0.075 to 0.10 3 years and any higher 5 years..... Might slow a few down.

[IDT]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

Let me tell ya the community service is a joke as well
People have all the excuses in the world to never turn up,and when they do they want the person who supervisors them to adjust a few hours for them
Ive done community service, done the crime paid the time, we had a bloke turn up who didnt want to be there,like maintaining the local golf course was real hard work, this fella never turned up on time, never turned up on the days required, and didnt do any work, the supervisor couldnt get rid of him fast enuf, so hours were adjusted, which annoyed me no end
The community service is bill adjusted i think its $25 an hour in credit of a fine,yet even bludging dolies run the bills up and wont do community service to help with any fines
The other issue with any fine be it DUI , speeding or anything else, you can pay payments threw SPER, and the monthly, forthnightly, weekly payment is calculated on the fine , coupla hundred in fines is 2 fifth of nothin a week,no wonder people dont care
A mate has $1500 in fines and pays $10 a week, hardly an issue
Make the fines automatic account deduction , then when your overdue on bills, loans,and cop a few extra bank charges cause your overdrafted youll think twice about being a muppet ...

The soft on approach by places and organisations where community service is conducted can be easily fixed. Fail to show or dont do the job you were sent to do gets you sent to a military base or police academy where you scub toilets, wash rubbish bins, recycle waste by hand, mow lawns or whatever under military or police supervision. See how a smart **** attitude or harry hard man complex works there. Until you do your time you cant apply for a licence. When you do a full report on your attendance and work ethic is required as part of getting your licence back.
Every problem has a solution.

[TRUBLU4DS]

[QUOTE=Nic85]

Originally Posted by Olbucko

I'm all for a blanket ban - 0.00, but I think there needs to be some tolerance for ambiguity's sake. Maybe 0.03 or something.

Please tell me you are joking. Do you know how many things can take you over that?

[TRUBLU4DS]

Originally Posted by WAForce8

Every problem has a solution.

Do you really think so?

[QUOTE=TRUBLU4DS]

Originally Posted by Nic85

Please tell me you are joking. Do you know how many things can take you over that?

[pottery beige]

[QUOTE=TRUBLU4DS]

Originally Posted by Nic85

Please tell me you are joking. Do you know how many things can take you over that?

mouthwash, mentos & fanta, rum and raisin icecream.. rum..

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by Nic85

Oh, the poor little things. Maybe they should learn to not drink and drive then.

Yes they should learn, but for the ones that don't should have to work for their punishment. Few grand in fines, loss of car for a certain amount of time and lots of community service.
If you send them to jail, they will go to a minimum security one which will be like an all expenses paid holiday where they hang out, watch tv and just generally bludge.
It would either be a little rest for them or ruin them. At least with my idea they will be able to live a semi normal life while doing their punishment.

Leave jail for the true psychopaths.

[falconator]

A lot of people here,are not acknowledging the basic fact.Once you ARE drunk you simply do not care about anything!Which is what alcohol does to you, by it very nature.It does not matter what the fines are ,at the time when you are tanked. One answer,obviously is the device thats fitted,that you have to blow in,etc.I heard a police officer say once that alcohol was the worst drug because it is the most accessible.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by protd

i don't see why the law should drop to 0.00 why should the majority be punished because of a minority, i enjoy a couple of beers with dinner when i go out, just because some moron goes on a 12 hr bender shouldn't mean people who are responsible should have to suffer..

there is nothing wrong with a .05 limit

Agreed, 0.00 is a dangerous threshold, if we go with that - then the half-cup mouthwash brigade will end up in the local courts, even with the second reading. 0.02 min - to cater for late-next-day drinkers who might just be over?....

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by WAForce8

The soft on approach by places and organisations where community service is conducted can be easily fixed. Fail to show or dont do the job you were sent to do gets you sent to a military base or police academy where you scub toilets, wash rubbish bins, recycle waste by hand, mow lawns or whatever under military or police supervision. See how a smart **** attitude or harry hard man complex works there. Until you do your time you cant apply for a licence. When you do a full report on your attendance and work ethic is required as part of getting your licence back.
Every problem has a solution.

A heavy hand is whats needed, and maybe you do whats required,the system is a joke as it is
Most people who run these community service place do so voluntarily,im sure i wouldnt want to be threatened by someone when im giving my time for free
Military strict control , sounds good,but there will be plenty of doogooders claiming its unjust
Using the police, they cant do the job there paid for now
24 hours to come to a house break in , and you could walk to the cop shop in 1 hour ....
There are some who ,like myself ,do wrong, pay our dues,and get on with the community work order,i hate owing anything, go in got it done,not really hard,its not slave labour

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by falconator

One answer,obviously is the device thats fitted,that you have to blow in,etc.

We have this device for repeat offenders, and like anything theres ways around it
A repeat offender got her daughters to activate the lock ,and drunk ol mummy jumped behind the wheel
A bloke in town got done 3 times,over 3 times the limit
After that he was givin jail term,and went to the local paper kickin and screaming he was unjust,whinging he would loose his car,house and lifestyle
I dunna pulled over 3 times, lose of licence till court date every time, court hearings, getting fines, applying for a work order licence and doin that 3 times,and to whinge ,he has a label and the swear filter wont allow me to write what he is ....

[svo supporter]

Jail isn't the answer....My brother was hit by a drunk driver, driving unlicenced in an unregistered car. This twat had been out of jail for 3 months for drink driving when he hit my brother. Brother ended up with slight brain damage, and a leg busted in 3 places. He now suffers from arthritus in that leg.

It happened about 30 years ago, when all my brother was doing was riding his pushbike and got hit by this idiot driving on the wrong side of the road

So even repeat offenders jail doesn't work...Back 30 years ago, jail was tougher than it is now....

Maybe get this idiots out to crashes, where a drunk driver was involved, or even a bad crash, so these idiots can clean up the aftermath...After all, our ambos have to and they didn't cause it....They do it because they love saving human lives.

[graham7773]

Seems everybody has their own opinion on penalities and alcohol limits. Think about this for a minute. If a person goes out and is driving then drinks, that person has become a potential killer and knows it before they take the first "sip". The act of drinking is deliberate and should be treated as such. The potential to kill or maim is there from the first sip, not withstanding the attitude "2 beers will have no affect". 2 beers will have an affect, they will slow your reflexes. Deliberately drinking alcohol and driving is very similar to waving a loaded firearm around in public with the safety off! you could wound or kill anybody. Look at the number of deaths and injuries every year caused by it (DUI). And I am agreeing with the "P", truck driver, train driver, bus and pilot limits of 0.00. also. Penalties? Automatic instant loss of licence for any amount of alcohol plus fines relevant to income of the offender. Road use is a privelege, not a right regardless of what the potential DUI"s may think. Repeat offender? Automatic gaol terms. They know it's wrong but do not care.

[wrongwaynorris]

Mind numbingly and ridiculously too soft .

[93EB_SXR6]

Originally Posted by nipper575

Wasn't our limit 0.08 once upon a time?

Regardless of what the BAC is, some people are worse drivers sober than others at or slightly over 0.05. Being sleep deprived, using your mobile, eating/smoking in your car, having music too loud as to not hear a siren approaching are (imo) bigger problems than being slightly over the BAC limit. I'll add that I've never blown higher than 0.038 (6 stubbies in about as many hours), or received a single demerit/fine since I've been driving.

On the topic of smoking while driving... I often wonder how that is not illegal?
Nicotine is a psychoactive drug which has mood-altering affects.

[Olbucko]

Originally Posted by nipper575

Wasn't our limit 0.08 once upon a time?

Regardless of what the BAC is, some people are worse drivers sober than others at or slightly over 0.05. Being sleep deprived, using your mobile, eating/smoking in your car, having music too loud as to not hear a siren approaching are (imo) bigger problems than being slightly over the BAC limit. I'll add that I've never blown higher than 0.038 (6 stubbies in about as many hours), or received a single demerit/fine since I've been driving.

The limit was .08 when the breathalizer was introduced late in 1972. It was changed to .05 in midd 1982 when random breath testing was introduced.

We have come a long way since the 50s and 60s when people used to boast about how how ****ed they were when the drove home from that party.

This song, Transfusion, sung by Nervous Norvus from 1956 more or less sums up the general attitude to road safety and drinking in the 50s and 60s in Australia.(and America) In 1970 about 1600 were killed on the road in NSW. Today with about ten times as many cars and drivers we kill about 350.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jojuP...feature=colike or this cool version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdeYZ...feature=colike

[ED Classic]

Originally Posted by Stefan

The problem is in the facvt that a judge dishes out the sentence and uses discretion and therefore the fines and sentence vary hugely.

Whilst lawers are just about blood sucking thieves, a magistrate or a judges job is to use their discretion and take all the individual facts into account. The defendent wants to get off scot free and the prosecution want to hang their own mum for jaywalking, so no its not a problem at all. They are the medium looking at both sides, sometimes you get 1 that leans slightly towards the Defence oryou might go in with a not guilty plea against 1 that loves police prosecution or was an ex prosecutor themselves or still plays golf with them. If you take that mediums discretion away because a victim somewhere wasnt happy with a sentence (yet thay have/had) the right to appeal then it wont work. Thats the reason there are minimum to maximum penaltys for the same offence. Those judges or magistrates have made it to that level because they know more about the law than you, me derryn hinch and just about the entire police force put together.

[Brazen]

I HATE mandatory sentencing, every case is different and should be treated as such.

In a lot of cases, people do ******* up and make a mistake, penalising the hell out of them doesnt help anyone.

A lot of time, people who end up in the courts for these kind of things have a lot of issues in their life and need a bit of help.

Imagine a single mum, three kids, living in the Northern suburbs of Adelaide. She has a bad day and is maybe suffering from mild depression - she goes to the local pub with a couple of girlfriends, she only intends on a couple of drinks - but her upcoming custody case or her ex not paying child support, stress of bills or being alone, she starts to get loaded up on cheap happy-hour wine.

Stupidly gets in the car and gets pulled over - she now loses her licence for 12 months and has to pay a huge fine and court costs. How does she get to work as a cleaner at the nursing home in a outer-metro area? how does she pick up her kids from school and drop them off? Already low self-esteem, feeling trapped in her life and depression is heightened with the shame of the conviction and loss of licence and the impact on her job and family. One stupid mistake and she is on the brink, and there is nothing the magistrate can do due to mandatory sentencing.

Maybe my viewpoint would change if I was impacted by a drunk driver, but the fact is in society, alcohol plays a massive part of social events, dinners, sport etc - also driving/commuting is a massive part of living in today's world. It is inevitable that these two will collide. How we deal with it is hard, but sensitivity to each individual case is vital in my opinion.

[Brazen]

deleted - multiple posting (stupid iTelephone)

[nipper575]

Originally Posted by Olbucko

The limit was .08 when the breathalizer was introduced late in 1972. It was changed to .05 in midd 1982 when random breath testing was introduced.

We have come a long way since the 50s and 60s when people used to boast about how how ****ed they were when the drove home from that party.

This song, Transfusion, sung by Nervous Norvus from 1956 more or less sums up the general attitude to road safety and drinking in the 50s and 60s in Australia.(and America) In 1970 about 1600 were killed on the road in NSW. Today with about ten times as many cars and drivers we kill about 350.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jojuP...feature=colike or this cool version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdeYZ...feature=colike

Certainly a different feel to the drink driving campaign ads we see today.

Originally Posted by Professor_Evans

On the topic of smoking while driving... I often wonder how that is not illegal?
Nicotine is a psychoactive drug which has mood-altering affects.

Well that's another good angle to look at it. I was talking more from the distraction of getting a cigarette out of the packet, rummaging around for the lighter, etc... For that matter, I've seen the way pack-a-day smokers get agitated when they need a smoke, not a particularly good state to be in whilst driving a car either.

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by Brazen

I HATE mandatory sentencing, every case is different and should be treated as such.

In a lot of cases, people do ******* up and make a mistake, penalising the hell out of them doesnt help anyone.

A lot of time, people who end up in the courts for these kind of things have a lot of issues in their life and need a bit of help.

Imagine a single mum, three kids, living in the Northern suburbs of Adelaide. She has a bad day and is maybe suffering from mild depression - she goes to the local pub with a couple of girlfriends, she only intends on a couple of drinks - but her upcoming custody case or her ex not paying child support, stress of bills or being alone, she starts to get loaded up on cheap happy-hour wine.

Stupidly gets in the car and gets pulled over - she now loses her licence for 12 months and has to pay a huge fine and court costs. How does she get to work as a cleaner at the nursing home in a outer-metro area? how does she pick up her kids from school and drop them off? Already low self-esteem, feeling trapped in her life and depression is heightened with the shame of the conviction and loss of licence and the impact on her job and family. One stupid mistake and she is on the brink, and there is nothing the magistrate can do due to mandatory sentencing.

Maybe my viewpoint would change if I was impacted by a drunk driver, but the fact is in society, alcohol plays a massive part of social events, dinners, sport etc - also driving/commuting is a massive part of living in today's world. It is inevitable that these two will collide. How we deal with it is hard, but sensitivity to each individual case is vital in my opinion.

I'm of a different viewpoint.....Doesn't matter how stressed you are, it's no excuse to drink and jump behind the wheel....If I was to loose my licence for DUI, I loose my lively hood...I can whinge and whine as much as possible to the judge, but the outcome is still going to be the same....Stiff fine and working for Miss Gillard.

IMA, I have been through family court over guardian ship issues, working in a stressful environment, lived in the Northern Burbs of Radelaide at the time yet I didn't turn to the bottle and grab my keys in the process, because I knew if caught, I'd be stuffed.

These principal could be applied to stealing a car....I was stressed, so I decided to blow off some steam by nicking some poor buggers car....What sort of reaction would be had on this forum over that?????

People need to think about the consequences of their actions...Not hope to hell you'll get a smack on the wrist

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by nipper575

Well that's another good angle to look at it. I was talking more from the distraction of getting a cigarette out of the packet, rummaging around for the lighter, etc... For that matter, I've seen the way pack-a-day smokers get agitated when they need a smoke, not a particularly good state to be in whilst driving a car either.

Technically, doing this sort of thing driving is an offense. Looking for the smokes and/or lighter whilst driving means you're not paying attention to the road....Driving without due care and attention.

Having a bite to eat, or a coffee/soft drink whilst driving...Not in full control of the car....Rules state, must have both hands on the steering wheel at all times (exception when changing gear in a manual, or manually changing an auto) Even after you have selected the next gear, the hands must be back on the steering wheel...(That's how I was taught when I got my licence)

The problem with all this is, the uproar the general public would have against the boys in blue, should they enforce these rules.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

I'm of a different viewpoint.....Doesn't matter how stressed you are, it's no excuse to drink and jump behind the wheel....If I was to loose my licence for DUI, I loose my lively hood...I can whinge and whine as much as possible to the judge, but the outcome is still going to be the same....Stiff fine and working for Miss Gillard.

IMA, I have been through family court over guardian ship issues, working in a stressful environment, lived in the Northern Burbs of Radelaide at the time yet I didn't turn to the bottle and grab my keys in the process, because I knew if caught, I'd be stuffed.

I agree there is no excuse to drink-drive, but as a society we really have to look at what is happening.

There are more to drink drivers than just the stupid party animal teen.

In our local community centre we meet twice a month with locals to go through issues like depression and mental illness, it is mostly farmers who are dragged there by the kids or the local church. The issues facing them are usually divorce or financial (often both). In 100% of the cases, I would say they hit the bottle pretty hard. Good people too who just are at an all time low, these people self-medicate with alcohol and end up doing stupid things which could of been avoided if they got help. I remember at one point we had 3 guys on drink driving charges (out of 3 people attending). These people who have never been in trouble in their life, helped in bushfires and floods but just couldnt handle losing their family or going bankrupt and resorted to booze. Losing their licence has massive consequences out here.

Looking at many drink driving stories, it is often an issue with alcohol that as a community we pretend doesnt exist. Millions of people drink a day, millions of people have alcohol and depression problems and millions of people drive each day, yet we all act outraged when the drinking and driving come together.

According to UK research 70% of drink drivers are one-time only offenders. Meaning the vast majority wake-up and realise they need help or they need to smarten up and never do it again. For these people to be treated worse than child abusers is just a convenient way for us as a community to ignore the problems that alcohol and mental illness can cause.