Is DWI the worst crime in the world?

[dejr_8]

When was DWI/DUI raised to the severity of a crime such that it requires people to resign from jobs?

 

[Kimberly]

Background?

 

[lovemygoofy]

When the person is someone of influence, particularly impressionable college age students, yes that man has no choice but resign.

 

[MinnieFlute]

When was DWI/DUI raised to the severity of a crime such that it requires people to resign from jobs?

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.

I'm a big University of Texas baseball fan and was royally PO'd at Augie Garrido when he got busted last year and would not have blamed the University if they had chosen to fire him. They did not, however.

 

[elbowglitter]

As someone who lost a dear friend and nearly lost two family members due to the actions of a drunk driver, I say yes. Why? Publicize those penalties. Give people every incentive to call a cab or call a friend instead of getting behind the wheel.

 

[clh2]

When was DWI/DUI raised to the severity of a crime such that it requires people to resign from jobs?

Is it possible that the person you are referring to had a "behavior clause" in their contract?

Related..but not related... at my DD's high school - anyone in a co-cirricular activity (sports, cheerleading, poms, any academic clubs etc) the students sign a contract, that basically outlines all the infractions, and the penalties. It is clear in this agreement that your behavior off the field, and outside of school property counts. When my DD was a freshman, the best 5 or 6 football players were "benched" for most of the season because they had been a party where alcohol was being served. Now - some had been drinking, others had not. But in the contract - you can't even be at a party where it is served. Penalties get stronger if it is a 2nd or third time you get caught, if you are the host of the party, if you "blow" on the breathalyzer and you have alcohol on your breath, etc.

 

[NHdisneylover]

It was pointed out in the other thread about this that the calls for resignation were not happening when the first reports (about DWI) came out--only after the reports that a young woman and possible affair were involved. (disclaimer--I have not followed the case and do not know if this is accurate or not).

Personally I feel that DWI and DUIs are much bigger deals because they risk so MANY lives. I think these should be prosecuted much more heavily than they are and should be totally unacceptable socially and legally.

However, as I said in the other thread, I do not think people should lose their jobs over things that happen on personal time and do not involve the job/company in any way. So, if the woman involved was a student, the car a company (okay--university) provided vehicle, or the person's jail time prevented them from doing their job, etc THEN I think a forced resignation makes sense, but otherwise it is none of the employer's business for the current job. I can see noticing it and not liking the character of the person and that could factor into possible new jobs, promotions, etc.

 

[SplashMtnCrew]

OP in my DH's company, in which they issue the majority of employees a company vehicle, they allow 3 infractions within 3 yrs. On the 3rd infraction the employee is given the option to take a driving class to remove some of the points off their record, if they choose not to DH must fire them. This is b/c of insurance requirements. Any DWI/DUI will immediately result in termination, even if it occured in your own vehicle, again b/c of insurance maintained by the company. DH must do driver's license background checks, which have nothing to do with the standard background check. If a potential employee has had a DUI/DWI at any time, they will not be hired, again it's b/c of insurance.

This is becoming a more standard practice within businesses, not just the ones in which people drive company issued vehichles. These rules at DH's company apply to everyone, even those who do not drive a company vehicle, such as secretaries and other office workers.

 

[golfgal]

I think the "resignation' had more to do with the woman who was not his wife and the "panties" then the DWI.

 

[nile455]

As he said himself, when you drink and drive, you lose.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BEW6PHMXWk

 

[bicker]

When was DWI/DUI raised to the severity of a crime such that it requires people to resign from jobs?

I think a lot of transgressions are placed out of reasonable order in our society's collective mind-set, often as a reflection of the effect of sensationalistic media. I find it abhorrent to place any kind of accidental transgression over a transgression of neglect that leads to similar harm, and abhorrent to place any kind of transgression of neglect over a transgression of intent that leads to similar harm. This situation you're referring to basically commits the institution to firing everyone who ever engages in similar neglect that leads to comparable harm. I wonder to what extent they're going to be consistent and honorable in that regard.

The Constitution calls for equal justice under the law. AFAIC, that leaves no room for making an example of any specific individual. Make an example of everyone doing anything comparable, or don't make any example at all.

 

[Jennasis]

It's not the worst crime in the world, but it IS a crime, and one that endangers many lives.

 

[dejr_8]

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.

I'm a big University of Texas baseball fan and was royally PO'd at Augie Garrido when he got busted last year and would not have blamed the University if they had chosen to fire him. They did not, however.

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.

 

[DisGirlAllie]

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.

Well not really because a drunk driver doesn't have complete control over what they're doing and they're driving. Something you need to be focused and controlled while doing. You're basically a loaded gun, ready to hit someone at any second.

 

[dejr_8]

Well not really because a drunk driver doesn't have complete control over what they're doing and they're driving. Something you need to be focused and controlled while doing. You're basically a loaded gun, ready to hit someone at any second.

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.

 

[bicker]

Be careful, because this is the top of a slipper slope that would lead to banning of cosmetics, hair brushes, and perhaps even misbehaving children from moving vehicles.

 

[dejr_8]

Be careful, because this is the top of a slipper slope that would lead to banning of cosmetics, hair brushes, and perhaps even misbehaving children from moving vehicles.

Absolutely correct. Many many in-car activities are as bad as DUI. How about driving with a dog in your lap? Eating? Smoking?

 

[okeydokey]

IS DWI the WORST crime in the world, no I think there are worse. Does it require a severe punishment? Yes it does. You can ask my best friend who lost her 12 year old brother when she was 11 to a drunk driver. It pretty much destroyed her Mom's life and still effects the whole family 25 years later.

 

[hentob]

Um, attempted murder is pretty bad in my book I liken DWI to attempting to kill yourself or others.

I am wondering if this thread is a joke? Am I missing something here? So many of you seem to think driving while drunk is no big deal.

That is pathetic.

 

[bicker]

Um, attempted murder is pretty bad in my book

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.

I am wondering if this thread is a joke? Am I missing something here? So many of you seem driving while drunk is no big deal.

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.