DUI ? Time to stop drinking

[minkydog]

My brother is an alcoholic. Thankfully he does not drive.
He goes to work, he comes home, he starts in, he goes to bed.
I don't understand it, I don't know why he won't seek help and I know he is killing himself slowly. However, I am thankful every single day that while he may be irresponsible with himself, he is responsible enough to not get behind the wheel and endanger someone else.

If a person gets a DUI IMO it is not something that would make them stop drinking but I really do wish our DUI laws were much tougher so that even the drunks who don't give a fig would think twice before driving.

Because alcoholism is a disease that tells them that nothing is wrong. Until they have a defining moment in which they realize that their disease is lying to them and ruining their life, nothing will change. My brother is the same way. His wife is Budweiser. His lover is Miller. And his real wife knows that she's in third place position.

Here in Georgia the DUI/DWI laws are pretty strict. If you get 2 DUIs in 10 years it's an automatic trip to jail. Three DUIs and you're looking at prison. BUt people keep drinking and driving becuase they really DON"T think they have a problem with alcohol. IMO, if you drink and then start making risky decisions, like driving under the influence, then you have an alcohol problem.
Unfortunately, most alcoholics will not seek treatment until they have lost so much their lives become unbearable OR the courts get involved.

 

[FireDancer]

But the statistical reality is that most alcohol-related fatalities involve drivers who are 2-3 times the legal limit (assuming a.08 limit), not the social drinker who didn't let enough time elapse between her second glass of wine and her drive home.

Exactly. There is a big difference between the person who had one too many and is legally drunk but not fall over drunk and the idiot who drinks a bottle of Everclear and drives the wrong way down the road. This is why there are different levels of punishment for what the person actually did as opposed to a one size fits all (which nothing does) punishment.

I think a person who gets pulled over for a burnt out headlight and blows a .081 should get a different punishment that someone with a .2 who blacks out and hits a van filled with 10 people head on.

Personally, I feel safer with someone slightly over the limit on the road then someone who is texting while driving.

 

[eliza61]

First let me say, my neighbor across the street and good friend lost her husband and her baby daughter to a teenage drinker. He T-boned their car at 75 mph on a 40 mph zone. He had 3 previous DUI.
This was 2 summers ago and Sarah and her remaining kids are still trying to put their lives back together.
In no way am I ever an objective person on this subject

So imo yep, if you can't take enough responsibility to not drink and drive, it's time to stop.

 

[castleview]

I'll preface this by saying that alcoholism is something I don't know a huge amount about, so I'd like to learn more.

Obviously, this has effected someone I know. Short version: This person has been a longtime drinker (since teens, now in 40s, never seen as a big "problem" as able to hold job, go to school, etc).

Had first DUI less than a year ago. Totalled car by blacking out at wheel and smashing into tree after leaving bar. Attended all required classes and such and had a "work license" 9-5. Continued to drink as usual. Just got license back a few weeks ago. Had another DUI last week, again after leaving bar.

I thought the first DUI would be this person's "rock bottom", but apparently it wasn't.

My question (as dumb as it may sound):

When a person is arrested for DUI, should that person stop drinking - ideally?

Or phrased another way - is it recommended by experts when a person has a DUI, that they completely stop drinking?

Yes, I believe there is a problem if it happens again. I had an alcoholic parent and it's a very selfish disease that effects the loved ones of an alcoholic as much as (I'd say even more than) the alcoholic himself. DUI is an extension of that selfishness because this person put the lives of innocent people at risk.

 

[ols386]

I have a relative who crossed over the center line on a 2-lane highway (going around 55 MPH), hit another vehicle head-on, and the guy in the other vehicle was killed. My relative was over the legal limit (not sure if she was dui or dwi), but it was her 2nd drunk driving offense (and again, not sure if the first was a dui or dwi). She was seriously injured and life-lined to the hospital, but ended up recovering, physically.

When she went to her preliminary hearing a few weeks later, the judge ordered her directly to jail. Said she was a menace to society, at that point in time. Her actual trial didn't come up until almost a year later, and she spent every day in jail up until the trial. After the trial she served 3 years in prison. She's out now, but it not only screwed up her life, but obviously the life of the man who was killed, AND his family. She has a son who is now around 10 years old, and when she was in prison he was around 3 or 4, so she missed out on basically 4 years of his life. She can't get any kind of financial loans for anything, car, house, etc. She is fortunate enough that her parents found a house for she and her son to live in, and she was fortunate to find a decent-paying job. Even though it happened several years ago, her life isn't the same, will never be. The lives of the family of the man who was killed, will never be the same either. It affected so many different people in so many different ways, and none of them was affected in a positive way.

Just thought I'd share that story.

 

[ols386]

Exactly. There is a big difference between the person who had one too many and is legally drunk but not fall over drunk and the idiot who drinks a bottle of Everclear and drives the wrong way down the road. This is why there are different levels of punishment for what the person actually did as opposed to a one size fits all (which nothing does) punishment.

I think a person who gets pulled over for a burnt out headlight and blows a .081 should get a different punishment that someone with a .2 who blacks out and hits a van filled with 10 people head on.

Personally, I feel safer with someone slightly over the limit on the road then someone who is texting while driving.

Texting while driving is probably as dangerous as someone who is drunk driving.

Sorry, but I don't want to be on the road with someone who is even slightly over the legal limit. But that's just me.

 

[pattiteach]

K, I too am in recovery. I drove many a times drunk and thankfully nothing happened. That being said, what I got out of your story was that they "blacked out" that is sign of alcoholism. Nobody should drink and drive, but their are social drinkers who can just be over the legal limit. It's not right, but that alone doesn't prove a problem, the blacking out does.

 

[*Fantasia*]

Texting while driving is probably as dangerous as someone who is drunk driving.

Sorry, but I don't want to be on the road with someone who is even slightly over the legal limit. But that's just me.

Agree! Texting while driving impairs you to drive. Accidents can happen in a split of a second..

 

[SandrA9810]

California seems to be pretty laid back on it's drunk drivers. From the courts "sorry, the state doesn't have enough money to throw you in jail. So have a nice day".

Does any one think that the penalty should be greater for an underage drinker??

 

[Polyluvr]

California seems to be pretty laid back on it's drunk drivers. From the courts "sorry, the state doesn't have enough money to throw you in jail. So have a nice day".

Does any one think that the penalty should be greater for an underage drinker??

I don't think the penalty should be any harsher-unless they're under 18-yes, I know illegal-but if you can die for your country @ 18; then you should be able to drink... but that's another topic...

and there was a study done that txting while driving is just as and if not more dangerous then driving drunk-at least the drunk is trying to concentrate on the road- I would think; while the txter is looking at their stupid phone- I love my blackberry but not enough to take my eyes off the road...

But I guess that's not what we're discussing here

 

[SandrA9810]

I don't think the penalty should be any harsher-unless they're under 18-yes, I know illegal-but if you can die for your country @ 18; then you should be able to drink... but that's another topic...
:

I have my opinions on the 21 age limit too. However, it's easy enough for most kids to get across a border where the drinking age is 18. I had my first drinks in Canada at 18, but I still kept to the US law and didn't have a drink here until after 21.

As it stands, a law is a law, and 21 is the legal age. I would think imposing harsher penalties to underage drunk drivers might help them get help before it's too late and they really have to hit rock bottom, like some of the other stories.

 

[amberjoe]

I'll preface this by saying that alcoholism is something I don't know a huge amount about, so I'd like to learn more.

Obviously, this has effected someone I know. Short version: This person has been a longtime drinker (since teens, now in 40s, never seen as a big "problem" as able to hold job, go to school, etc).

Had first DUI less than a year ago. Totalled car by blacking out at wheel and smashing into tree after leaving bar. Attended all required classes and such and had a "work license" 9-5. Continued to drink as usual. Just got license back a few weeks ago. Had another DUI last week, again after leaving bar.

I thought the first DUI would be this person's "rock bottom", but apparently it wasn't.

My question (as dumb as it may sound):

When a person is arrested for DUI, should that person stop drinking - ideally?

Or phrased another way - is it recommended by experts when a person has a DUI, that they completely stop drinking?

Well it is always better to leave alcohol. DUI convicts must avoid drinking because after every DUI , driving license gets sacked and if the number of DUI convictions increase beyond a limit there is every chance that license could be terminated.

 

[jodifla]

I didn't say that there weren't other dangerous drivers other than someone who is driving drunk. If you run a stop sign/light, hit another vehicle and kill the driver or one of their passengers, you're going to get more than a $50 ticket. You're likely to be charged with manslaughter (or involuntary manslaughter), or something along those lines. You're not walking away with a $50 fine, in a situation like that.

Oh really. What happened to Laura Bush??? She pretty much skated.

 

[jodifla]

But the statistical reality is that most alcohol-related fatalities involve drivers who are 2-3 times the legal limit (assuming a.08 limit), not the social drinker who didn't let enough time elapse between her second glass of wine and her drive home. Which isn't to excuse the latter or say that driving home at/near the limit is okay, but the previous poster is right - a social drinker getting a DUI for being just barely over the limit isn't the end of the world.

I think the penalties and logical consequences to a DUI depend on the severity of the offense; someone who misjudged how much he had to drink and drove with a .081BAC doesn't commit the same crime as someone who closed down the bar and then tried to drive home stumbling drunk with a .27. One is clearly an indicator of a major problem, while the other is an error in judgment. We don't penalize drag racing the same as doing 5 over on the interstate, and we shouldn't penalize driving hammered as the same as driving slightly impaired.

ITA!

The stats have shown that most people who blow an .08 weren't in any type of accident. Instead they were caught at traffic stops or stopped for some other infraction (like the headlight mentioned.)

Meanwhile, the state is spending all their resources on this, while those who are truly a menace are still out their drinking and driving. In all the stories I've handled with horrific accidents, the drunk drivers are at double or more the .08.

 

[LuvOrlando]

I'm not big on drinking so there is a peculiarity I notice in people when it comes to this sort of thing. For some reason there are distinctions made in substance use/abuse that are somehow supposed to make a difference. I've heard many people say, "It's just wine" or "It's just beer" or "It's just pot" as if somehow they are less wasted. To me drunk is drunk and under the influence is under the influence, what difference does it make what was used to get you that way There aren't special beer fairies or pot fairies which make an alcoholic who drinks beer or a pot user less likely to do damage than a crack user because they sprinkle pixie dust on innocent victims keeping them out of harms way. The language is soooo enabling I don't much care what people do or don't do but I hate when they lie to themselves about it.

If someone is wasted they shouldn't get behind the wheel no matter what their drug of choice might be, DUI or not. There is just too much on the line and no-body has the right to endanger other people knowingly. This sort of thing always gets me mad

 

[jodifla]

I'm not big on drinking so there is a peculiarity I notice in people when it comes to this sort of thing. For some reason there are distinctions made in substance use/abuse that are somehow supposed to make a difference. I've heard many people say, "It's just wine" or "It's just beer" or "It's just pot" as if somehow they are less wasted. To me drunk is drunk and under the influence is under the influence, what difference does it make what was used to get you that way There aren't special beer fairies or pot fairies which make an alcoholic who drinks beer or a pot user less likely to do damage than a crack user. The language is soooo enabling I don't much care what people do or don't do but I hate when they lie to themselves about it.

If someone is wasted they shouldn't get behind the wheel no matter what their drug of choice might be, DUI or not.

Well I don't know about pot, but the thing with wine and beer is that they are a lot less potent than many mixed drinks. A glass of wine doesn't have near the alcohol content of a manhattan, for example, which is basically 3 or 4 shots of liquor in one drink.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Well I don't know about pot, but the thing with wine and beer is that they are a lot less potent than many mixed drinks. A glass of wine doesn't have near the alcohol content of a manhattan, for example, which is basically 3 or 4 shots of liquor in one drink.

Absolutely true, but once a person goes over that one portion line they are under the influence. I just don't see how it makes a difference if this takes the form of a little more than a shot of Tequila or 2 glasses of wine or beer. It's just some kind of socially acceptable code to me and it means nothing to a family who has to bury a loved one because of it

I have nothing but compassion for people who struggle with dependencies but once they endanger other people that all goes out the window.

 

[okeydokey]

Weird bump for a post that is month's old.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Maybe with New Years around the corner drinking and driving is on people's minds. The accidents start to mount as we get closer to Christmas