Is DWI the worst crime in the world?

[DisGirlAllie]

Well then by statistics, cell phone use while driving should be outlawed today and enforced with the same vigor as DUI. We need to set up check points looking for cell phone use.

....That's what we have where I live.

 

[MinnieFlute]

I think that example is a bit over the top.

Until recently DUI started at a 0.1. Now many (most?, all?) States are 0.08. In the grand scheme of things why is a 0.08 less safe than a 0.07? Or why was a few years ago 0.09 OK?

I personally think the enforcement of DUI has moved from a true public safety issue to become a money making scheme. It is also one of those "third rail" political issues that no one dares risk voting against tougher DUI laws.

I am ALL for individual liberties until you're in a position where you can hurt someone. The law is there to protect not just the person driving, but the OTHER people on the road, and that is where I am coming from. I am not sure why the change from .10 to .08 but you have to set the limit somewhere. I think for a person of about my build, that's about 3 drinks or so. I know I'm NOT comfortable driving after 3 drinks, so I'd imagine I'm not the only one. Some people are perfectly comfortable after that amount, but as I said, you have to set it somewhere.

A car IS a deadly weapon - my little scion weighs about 2300 pounds and it is a tiny car. Being hit by something that weighs over a ton could kill you - so really, I think my analogy is fair. I was on the phone one time and almost changed lanes into someone. I could have hurt them and myself very badly. Lesson learned - drive only when you can concentrate on the road. NOTHING is SO important that you HAVE risk your life and others'.

No, it is not the worst crime in the world, but it seems that people like to look the other way because people get away with it so often.

 

[Liberty Belle]

Well then by statistics, cell phone use while driving should be outlawed today and enforced with the same vigor as DUI. We need to set up check points looking for cell phone use.

Do you have those statistics handy? I find it hard to believe. While I disagree with cell phone use combined with driving, I find driving while intoxicated much more dangerous.

It almost seems like you're saying DUI should be excused.

 

[bicker]

No, it is not the worst crime in the world, but it seems that people like to look the other way because people get away with it so often.

That's not my experience. However, regardless, my concern isn't really how DWI is addressed, but rather how so many other transgressions, similar in context with regard to intention and potential for harm, are not given the same level of attention; how transgressors (though I suppose that I can't even call them that, really, until society recognizes the harm they cause and put laws in place to address their actions) are not punished in a comparably harsh manner.

 

[Liberty Belle]

This isn't a thread about generalized attempted murder. It is about DWI, specifically, and how treatment of DWI should or should not be treated like someone who planned and plotted to kill someone else with a gun, took the shot at them, but missed the heart. The question this thread is raising is whether someone committing DWI should be treated just the same as the shooter.

And I don't really see a problem with taking the position that they should be treated the same. I do see a problem taking the position that no reasonable could possibly disagree.

Yes, you are definitely missing something. Read over the comments made, again. I'm sure you'll realize that no one has said anything even remotely close to what you're asserting you've read.

That a DUI is no big deal? That's what I'm seeing, as well.

 

[hentob]

That a DUI is no big deal? That's what I'm seeing, as well.

Agreed. Comparing DUI to smoking while driving? Oh please

 

[dejr_8]

Do you have those statistics handy? I find it hard to believe. While I disagree with cell phone use combined with driving, I find driving while intoxicated much more dangerous.

It almost seems like you're saying DUI should be excused.

A 2008 study published in Journal of Experimental Psychology compared the effects of driver conversations with a passenger to driver conversations on a cell phone. Researchers tested 96 adults operating a driving simulator with different types of distractions. They found that drivers speaking on their cell phones – even using a hands-free device – were four times more likely to fail at the driving tasks presented to them than those engaging in passenger conversation. Specifically, drivers conversing on a cell phone performed worse at critical safety tasks, such as exiting and staying in their lane. Conversations with passengers, by contrast, were found to aid in navigation and even in supporting the driver.

This same study cites the level of impairment from cell phone distraction as comparable to having a blood alcohol level of .08 – in other words, it’s comparable to the legal measurement of being intoxicated.

http://www.parenthood.com/article-t...while_driving_another_kind_of_dui.html/page/2

 

[bicker]

That a DUI is no big deal? That's what I'm seeing, as well.

Please be specific. Who said that? What words did they use?

Again, I don't see anyone saying that.

Agreed. Comparing DUI to smoking while driving? Oh please

While I don't agree with the implication that smoking while driving is "too" dangerous, it is dangerous. It is dangerous. And so the poster who wrote that is saying something far different from what you're asserting that poster said.

 

[MoniqueU]

I think that example is a bit over the top.

Until recently DUI started at a 0.1. Now many (most?, all?) States are 0.08. In the grand scheme of things why is a 0.08 less safe than a 0.07? Or why was a few years ago 0.09 OK?

I personally think the enforcement of DUI has moved from a true public safety issue to become a money making scheme. It is also one of those "third rail" political issues that no one dares risk voting against tougher DUI laws.

I agree with this. Back when I did drive 2 glasses of wine would put me over the legal limit. I can guarantee you that driving with my 3 kids in the car was far more dangerous then 2 glasses of wine. I think the limits are absurd. That being said I don't have a license now (medical issues, I have never gotten a DUI) and we plan ahead when we are drinking and have my son pick us up the 2 times a month we go out drinking. We also have to watch out for another friend of ours and get him to drive sober to one friends house and then catch a ride with us or he will drive drunk and we want no part of that. There is a huge difference to me about having a couple of glasses of wine and doing multiple shots at a bar. I think the limits are off as they stand now.

 

[Liberty Belle]

http://www.parenthood.com/article-t...while_driving_another_kind_of_dui.html/page/2

Hmm...interesting. Well, if other studies back this up, shouldn't you be calling for stricter laws on cell phone use and not leniency in DUIs?

 

[bicker]

That would make sense to me.

 

[Liberty Belle]

Please be specific. Who said that? What words did they use?

Again, I don't see anyone saying that.

While I don't agree with the implication that smoking while driving is "too" dangerous, it is dangerous. It is dangerous. And so the poster who wrote that is saying something far different from what you're asserting that poster said.

The OP's attitude on DUI seems to convey that. In almost all the words he's used here on this thread.

 

[bicker]

The OP's attitude on DUI seems to convey that.

However, you're trying to read "attitude" on the Internet, and you're necessarily having to inject meaning into words that aren't there without your interference. That's not fair to the OP. It's safer to take what is posted at face value, and not read into it.

 

[dejr_8]

Hmm...interesting. Well, if other studies back this up, shouldn't you be calling for stricter laws on cell phone use and not leniency in DUIs?

I am not necessarily calling for leniency for DUI from a criminal standpoint but I am question why it has become for some a career ending event. There seems to be no forgiveness.

Is getting a DUI at 0.08 sufficient cause for someone to have to quit a job? If so, why? Why is it so newsworthy?

 

[MrsPete]

I would equate it to bringing a loaded gun into a room full of people and waving it around erratically, knowing full well it could go off and hurt anyone at any moment. In regards to the job situation, I would say if the authorities at work don't want to put up with people who do that (even once) then they sure don't have to. More than once? PLEASE fire them.

This is a good analogy. A drunk driver doesn't know or care whom he might hurt, just as a person waving a gun around doesn't know or care whom he might hurt.

I wouldn't say that DUI is the worst crime in the world -- certainly other crimes are equally horrible, but I do think it's in the top 10. I do think it's entirely appropriate that society shun people who commit this crime, and that could certainly involve loss of a job and social status, as well as public shame. Especially if it's a repeat-offense.

 

[MrsPete]

Is getting a DUI at 0.08 sufficient cause for someone to have to quit a job? If so, why? Why is it so newsworthy?

It shows a serious lack of judgement and a lack of respect for other human beings as well as the law. Do you really want to work with that person? Have him represent your company?

DUI is also 100% preventable. It's awfully easy to find a way to get home without driving.

 

[dejr_8]

This is a good analogy. A drunk driver doesn't know or care whom he might hurt, just as a person waving a gun around doesn't know or care whom he might hurt.

I wouldn't say that DUI is the worst crime in the world -- certainly other crimes are equally horrible, but I do think it's in the top 10. I do think it's entirely appropriate that society shun people who commit this crime, and that could certainly involve loss of a job and social status, as well as public shame. Especially if it's a repeat-offense.

But IF in-car cell-phone use is as bad as a blood alcohol level of 0.08 (the DUI limit) should we have public shaming of cell phone users?

 

[bicker]

I am not necessarily calling for leniency for DUI from a criminal standpoint but I am question why it has become for some a career ending event. There seems to be no forgiveness.

I suppose a big part of the question is where on the scale - from intention to neglect to accident - that you think DUI falls. I think most people would label it somewhere around the neglect point of the scale. So it would be useful to draw comparison to other transgressions of neglect, and how society treats/considers such transgressors, by comparison. Perhaps the prototypical example is a parent who leaves a child locked in a car, with the windows all rolled up, on a hot day, while going into a store. Surely a transgressor would have that child taken away (at least I'd hope), but would that person (let's say an employee of a college, as in this case) lose their job as a result?

But your example of how in-car hand-held cell phone use is very compelling. It is arguably just as valid a candidate to be a transgression of neglect, and as you say just as dangerous as DUI (and just as preventable btw).

Is getting a DUI at 0.08 sufficient cause for someone to have to quit a job? If so, why? Why is it so newsworthy?

Now you've hit on a real problem here: The news media always distorts the importance of salacious events. It is to their benefit to do so. The question is, will we fall for it?

 

[dejr_8]

Agreed. Comparing DUI to smoking while driving? Oh please

Smoking while driving and its consequences on road safety]
[Article in Italian]

Mangiaracina G, Palumbo L.

Scuola di Specializzazione in Igiene e Medicina Preventiva, 2 Facoltà di Medicina, Dipartimento di Scienze di Sanità Pubblica, Sapienza Università di Roma. info@tabaccologia.it
Abstract
The study was focused on the risk assessment of distraction of smoking habits while driving vehicles. We have compared the results with the data about driving distraction using mobile phone without voice devices. We video-recorded 10 smokers, 4 male and 6 female, smoking while driving a car The average of measured driving distraction of smokers is about 12 seconds. It means to cover a distance of 160 metres with a speed of 50 Km/h. Comparing to the use of mobile phone, the data of driving distraction show a duration of 10.6 seconds, that means to cover a distance of 150 metres at the speed of 50 Km/h. This result suggest that cigarette smoking produces a remarkable risk for road safety, more than the mobile phone use. In addiction to the conditions that produce a considerable driving distraction of smokers, we underline a demonstrated shortage of oxygen, the presence of carbon monoxide and hight concentration offine particulate in the air breathed inside the vehicle. We also consider another aspect related to smoking habits while driving vehicles: the environmental damage. In fact throwing cigarette outside, while the vehicle is moving, is the prevalent reason of setting fire to the edge of the road. This study proposes to make changes in the laws and regulation on road safety in order to fine smokers behaviour during vehicle driving. Furthermore it seems necessary to promote public information about those risks among people.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17658112

 

[LuvCuteBoys]

I am not necessarily calling for leniency for DUI from a criminal standpoint but I am question why it has become for some a career ending event. There seems to be no forgiveness.

Is getting a DUI at 0.08 sufficient cause for someone to have to quit a job? If so, why? Why is it so newsworthy?

I think the majority of the time, it's because it was known going into the job that such behavior would result in dismissal. I don't think having a sexual relatinship with a coworker when neither person is married is a terrible crime either, but some jobs forbid that, and you know it going into it.

I don't believe that the DUI/DWI laws need to be more lenient... but I also think that good people make mistakes and I do not feel, as someone else mentioned, that those people should be shunned by society.