Is DWI the worst crime in the world?

[MrsPete]

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?

You're trying to confuse the issue. You initially asked about drunk driving, not about other behind-the-wheel distractions. I've not seen any reputible stats about any other driver action being as horrendous as drinking and driving. You're trying to excuse drinking and driving, which is not possible.

Now, are other distractions also bad while driving? Absolutely, but that's another topic and none are as bad as driving drunk.

 

[N&B'smom]

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 it depends on the type of job and in this case....he actually spoke out publicly about it. The PSA was played at their football games for all the kids to see. I'm guessing they expected him to talk the talk AND walk the walk.

 

[tar heel]

It's not the worst crime in the world, but your other examples are red herrings.

It is, however, something unacceptable in a university leader who likely has a behavior clause in his contract. It's not the kind of behavior a university accepts from a leader. Many universities would not keep such a person or hire them initially if that's in the background. Carolina would probably have a different basketball coach now if DWI arrests were not a dealbreaker.

 

[Buckalew11]

I'm thinking of the AD at UGA...it most definitely was a career ending choice for him. And I feel, rightly so.

 

[happygirl]

I think it a horrible crime but not the worst crime

 

[bigbabyblues]

I'm not arguing if it's right or wrong, but my DH is a full-time paramedic and a substitute school bus driver. If he were to get a DUI, he would lose both jobs along with at least the bus-driver endorsement on is CDL (not sure if he would lose the CDL altogether).

 

[bicker]

I've not seen any reputible stats about any other driver action being as horrendous as drinking and driving.

Questioning the source of statistics is a common tactic, but what, exactly, is the problem with the statistics OP provided reference to? They seemed adequately supported afaic.

You're trying to excuse drinking and driving, which is not possible.

Until the OP says, word-for-word, that the intention it to "excuse" DUI, I think it is without merit to argue against that point.

Now, are other distractions also bad while driving? Absolutely, but that's another topic and

The OP made this part of this topic, and indeed they are indivisible from this topic for very good reasons.

none are as bad as driving drunk.

That's a matter of debate.

 

[NewDCLGuy]

DWI isn't considered that big a deal. We elected a president and vice president with DWI's.

The UGA AD didn't resign due to the DUI. He was going to survive that. It was only after the police report came out with the more sordid details that his job was doomed.

I don't think DUI is the *biggest* crime in the world. But I do think it worse than having red panties in you lap.

 

[Robinrs]

DWI isn't considered that big a deal. We elected a president and vice president with DWI's.

The UGA AD didn't resign due to the DUI. He was going to survive that. It was only after the police report came out with the more sordid details that his job was doomed.

I don't think DUI is the *biggest* crime in the world. But I do think it worse than having red panties in you lap.

Okay, I put this in my orig thread about the UGA idiot...

He was stopped for the DUI

He tried to BRIBE the arresting officer.

He lied about his relationship with the woman in the car, who BTW, was arrested for going off on the officers (disorderly conduct), stating "he'll get away with it, do you know who he is?" or something like that.

He had the red panties hidden between his legs and told the officers he was "holding them" for her as he tried to take her home.

All this while being a spokeperson for "Don't Drink and Drive".

So he resigns, with over $200,000 and an angry wife. He'll survive. In less than a year he will have another 6 figure job but for now he has to deal with his bad judgment, bad choices, and bad taste.

Crying uncontrollably when arrested, I'll bet he did!

 

[cabanafrau]

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.

I won't even attempt to speak for all states, but in Michigan the law requires individualized sentencing for each defendant & offense. Part of the consideration involved is the protection of society & the deterring of others from committing like offenses.

DWI/DUI/OUIL is NOT an accidental offense. At the least it is a negligent offense.

Slightly over a year ago there was a case in the Detroit metro where four teenagers were killed by a drunk driver while they were sitting at a red light. The driver is not an evil woman. She has many problems & was told not to drive. She did & four kids are gone.

Sensationalized media? I don't think so.

I believe the Constitution is one of the most precious things Americans are privileged to have. I think it entitles everyone to drive about & sit at red lights w/o worrying about whether or not other drivers are using alcohol legally & responsibly.

Shame on anyone who attempts to defend drunk or impaired driving by hiding behind the Constitution!

 

[islandmum]

I'm radical - I think there should be a zero alcohol policy when it comes to driving.

 

[bicker]

DWI/DUI/OUIL is NOT an accidental offense. At the least it is a negligent offense.

And negligence is not limited to DUI. Lots of negligence out there that is going unpunished. That's bad.

Sensationalized media? I don't think so.

Sorry, but you're wrong about that, in the generalized context I expressed it. The media does focus unduly on salacious issues. It does distort its coverage prompting too much of some things and too little of other things. And we, the general public, allow this to go on, and reward it. To the detriment of fairness and justice.

Shame on anyone who attempts to defend drunk or impaired driving by hiding behind the Constitution!

Shame on anyone who introduces red herrings into the discussion instead of replying to what is actually being said.

 

[islandmum]

While I don't agree with the implication that smoking while driving is "too" dangerous, it is dangerous. It is dangerous. .

less dangerous than adjusting climate controls, having a passenger or changing your music track according to the Driving Standards Agency .....

The specific sources of distraction among distracted drivers were, in order of frequency:

Specific distraction % of drivers
Outside person, object, or event 29.4%
Adjusting radio/cassette/CD 11.4%
Other occupant 10.9%
Unknown distraction 8.6%
Moving object in vehicle 4.3%
Other device/object 2.9%
Adjusting vehicle/climate controls 2.8%
Eating and/or drinking 1.7%
Using/dialing cell phone 1.5%
Smoking related 0.9%
Other distractions 25.6%

but as the report rightly says - the people who want smoking banned in cars are non-smokers with an anti-smoking agenda ........... if they used the official stats as above as reasoning for banning dangerous distractions in cars you would see the results as follows ...

we'd be unable to look out of the windscreen or windows, in silence, with no radio/music, alone with no passengers, boiling hot or freezing cold, hungry and thirsty, non-communicating BUT in a smoke free environment ... YIPEEE!

 

[FireDancer]

In regards to the OP, it depends on the situation. No one at my office who has had a DUI has had to resign. As long as what you do happens outside of work and doesn't involve theft or fraud it isn't our business (we are a financial institution so can't have thieves working for us). It isn't attempted murder (as there is no intent), it isn't the worst crime in the world (premeditated murder and child molestation are for me), and it isn't even always clear cut (people have gotten DUI for intending to drive without actually getting in the car and doing it).

I could understand a job that requires driving (truck driver, auto transport, etc) forcing you to resign but I personally don't think anyone should have to resign for a DUI in a job like management, retail, education, or anything like that unless the offense happened at a work event or on the way to or from one. Your responsibility to work ends when you punch out as far as I'm concerned as long as your crime doesn't directly relate to your job. I don't buy the "you are a bad example" argument because you don't have to be a good example 24/7, only while on the clock.

If it has become a pattern then the circumstances change and punishment should also. This is of course assuming you didn't kill anyone since at that time it would change from DUI to some other crime depending on jurisdiction. Once someone is dead the circumstances also change.

I don't think it is something that can have a blanked policy, it needs to be a decision based on the circumstances of the particular incident. The courts should definitely punish the DUI since it is wrong, illegal, and dangerous but work doesn't have to get involved in most cases. Let the courts do their job and administer justice.

 

[Sparx]

I'm currently working towards a BSW degree and the CSWE states that we have to have something like 600 hours of internships in two separate agencies before I can get my degree. Last semester the head of the intership program had two students who had, within the last year, gotten a DUI. She was completely 100% unable to place them in an internship. None of the agencies wanted these students working with the clients who sometimes have to be transported. All the agencies my school is affiliated with does extensive background checks on any student placed in a job, and DUIs are making it unable to place students. Its a very serious crime, as well I think it should be.

 

[eliza61]

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

Depends on where standing when you look at it.

When you start killing innocent people because for some reason you think you can handle a 3000 lb instrument while drunk. Good friend of mine lost her husband and 8 year old daughter from a drunk driver. So I guess she would say it's pretty horrible.

You knowingly drink and then drive, you take the consequences whether they are harsher or not.

And lastly people tend to judge you harsher when they find out your a hypocrite. You make a public service announcement on drunk driving then get busted for drunk driving, I personally think you should get an extra 2 years for stupidity.

 

[Robinrs]

less dangerous than adjusting climate controls, having a passenger or changing your music track according to the Driving Standards Agency .....

The specific sources of distraction among distracted drivers were, in order of frequency:

Specific distraction % of drivers
Outside person, object, or event 29.4%
Adjusting radio/cassette/CD 11.4%
Other occupant 10.9%
Unknown distraction 8.6%
Moving object in vehicle 4.3%
Other device/object 2.9%
Adjusting vehicle/climate controls 2.8%
Eating and/or drinking 1.7%
Using/dialing cell phone 1.5%
Smoking related 0.9%
Other distractions 25.6%

but as the report rightly says - the people who want smoking banned in cars are non-smokers with an anti-smoking agenda ........... if they used the official stats as above as reasoning for banning dangerous distractions in cars you would see the results as follows ...

we'd be unable to look out of the windscreen or windows, in silence, with no radio/music, alone with no passengers, boiling hot or freezing cold, hungry and thirsty, non-communicating BUT in a smoke free environment ... YIPEEE!

As my old professor used to say, there are lies, then there are bigger lies... then there are statistics...

 

[quentina]

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

I agree....he should be forced to resign. In addition, look at the company handbook....all the rules and regulations will be in there.

If they are not a person of influence, check the handbook for the guidelines. I work for a company that has thousands of managers, if any of our managers are fined for anything related to money, they will be suspended pending the final disposition of charges. This can include writing excessive bad checks, forgery, theft etc.

 

[Sparx]

As my old professor used to say, there are lies, then there are bigger lies... then there are statistics...

Definitely. There are few things that I take LESS seriously at face value than statistical data. You have so many things to look at with it before you can validate/invalidate it and most people simply won't go through the trouble. Graphs and statistics are one of the biggest ways to manipulate an undecided group into agreeing/disagreeing with what someone is saying. We're programmed to "believe" numbers.

 

[arminnie]

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.

Yeah it's pretty bad. I don't see any point in arguing about what offense is the worse. It is just bad period. Can people get away with it and not automatically cause harm - sure. But it is an unacceptable risk.

27 years ago my sister and sister-in-law were in a stopped car when hit by a drunk driver. They were literally on a three block trip. My sister has had multiple facial plastic surgeries to repair the damage and has been in pain for decades - but she is the lucky one.

My sister-in-law is on a feeding tube, incontinent, unable to walk or sit up, and probably has the mental ability of a two year old. This was a vibrant young college graduate who should have had a future. She is not in a coma - I just pray she does not inside know what has happened to her body. There are things worse than death.

The drunk driver - a young man who had just found out that day he'd been diagnosed with AIDS so he went out and got drunk. Might have even been a little on the suicidal side. He's long gone, but his last years were haunted by the harm he had caused. Not a good outcome for anyone. So not worth the risk.