| Hit and Runs and Impaired Driving
Just My Opinion
There are some things that you learn when your life
is forever scarred due to someone else's choices that directly affect your life.
There are some things that I have personally learned since the death of my
son that I would rather have not learned in the way that I did. Because of the
fact some things in this life are just very hard to understand.
As you may or may not know depending on how many of my article's you have
read, my son was killed due to a person who chose to go to a bar to have a meal,
and drink a few beers with friends, none of who cared enough about this person
to even suggest that he should reconsider whether or not he should drive after
having consumed the amount of alcohol that he had consumed.
Not only was that choice made, but the added choice to speed. The first
estimate of this person speed was at least 75 in a 45 which, was later changed
to 65 in a 45. I am not really sure how the police came up with this estimate to
begin with. But apparently the speeding and the alcoholic beverages is less of a
concern than the fact that this person left the scene after having hit our son
with his car.
Now I learned that just because the police believe he was drunk, with good
reason, and even though the police believe he was speeding. This person is not
charged with drinking and driving, he is further not charged with speeding.
The only charges that this man faces are second degree involuntary
manslaughter, and felony hit and run. Now I know adding the charge of speeding
or "driving while impaired "is not going to change anything, but it is my
opinion that these charges should of not been overlooked.
And I have a
reason which I believe makes sense.
I also believe that the punishment for these types of crimes should be more
serious. I mean when the maximum charge will lead to maybe six months in jail
and probation if that, something is wrong.
And further when someone else notices
that someone else did not really face any major consequences for their actions,
it is not a deterrent from someone else doing the same crime due to a similar
lifestyle.
In my opinion if at any time it can be proven someone has been drinking
immediately before any crime that leads to a serious injury or death, the
expected punishment should be something that would be a real deterrent to
other's who lead a similar lifestyle.
Now I am not saying there needs to be a total ban on drinking because I know
that is something that is very unlikely for the police to enforce in any real
way.
However I do believe there should be zero tolerance for anyone to have any
alcohol in their system at all when driving or operating something that could
cause injury or death if operated by someone who is intoxicated.
Some
punishments for anyone caught drinking and driving that I can think of that
would be a real deterrent are as follows.
First offense, A thousand dollar fine, and their vehicle impounded for a min.
of one month. Also if speeding add to that 90 days in the county jail house,
with no plea bargaining allowed.
But if someone has been injured, but not killed the fine could be increased
to ten thousand dollars, and the vehicle in question sold at auction regardless
of who owns the vehicle.
*This would make someone less likely to allow someone to drive their vehicle
drunk, also in the case that someone takes the car without permission it would
have to be proven by way of a police report that someone had taken the vehicle
without permission.
Now if someone is killed, and it is because someone is behind the wheel
drunk, or intoxicated, then the fine should be a min of one hundred thousand
dollars, and fifteen to twenty years in prison, plus all vehicles and property
in that person's name sold.
Further if the car belongs to someone else, (a friend, or family member or
co-worker who has not filed a report prior to any accident) then the vehicle and
property of that person sold in addition to the property of the person who
actually committed the crime. The reason why is because this would make someone
who may otherwise not think twice about allowing someone to borrow their car to
make a very real effort to make sure no one who had been drinking got behind the
wheel of their car.
Now if someone is a repeat offender if no one has been killed or seriously
injured, then the punishment should be double what I mentioned above for a first
offense.
A third offense even if no one is hurt or killed should be a min of five
years in prison. And their vehicle sold.
Then if it is a repeat offender and they have killed or injured someone then
all punishments should be doubled. And the offender should have all driving
privileges lost never to be restored.
In addition to that if the vehicle belongs to someone other than the driver,
then that person should also be made to pay a fine of at least ten thousand, and
lose their vehicle, and even lose their license for a min. of five years.
Now this may seem extreme, but if the punishment for driving drunk, allowing
a drunk to drive your vehicle, or even not reporting that someone who may be
drunk has your vehicle and is driving had very real and very serious
implications, then there are very few if any who would continue to drink and
drive.
Instead people would be more likely to stay at home to drink, or call a cab
or walk home or take a bus, or just stay put until their drunkenness wore
off.
Punishments like I mentioned above would save lives, because fewer people
would trust themselves to drive after drinking, or trust others to drive after
having consuming alcoholic beverages.
These punishments are not all that bad considering even the worst punishment
is not taking away the life of the person who has taken the life of someone
else. Their crime has taken away someone's life.
Punishment's like I mentioned would likely wipe out the majority of drunk
drivers, especially if these punishments were widely published. This would
promote a high level of accountability.
As I stated at the head of this article I have learned a lot about the laws
regarding drunk driving, hit and runs, and the court system that is very
slow.
It is because that the punishments for these crimes can be plea bargained
down, and the punishments do not affect the lives of the ones who commit these
types of crimes to the same degree as someone who has a family member seriously
injured or killed due to someone who made the choice to drive after consuming
any amount of alcoholic beverage.
Think about it, the person who is seriously injured or killed may have had
plans other than being seriously injured, or killed.
Some things may indeed be "accidents" but it is my personal opinion that a
crime ceases to be an accident when someone has consumed alcohol or drugs (any
drug that is known to cause serious impairment) decides to drive. Then further
decides to drive away from the scene after having inflicting serious injury to
someone else.
The reason I don't believe it is an accident is because someone has to make a
"choice" to consume alcohol and then drive.
Many choices that someone makes do not really affect others, but some do. It
is those choices that affect others in life altering ways that need to be well
thought out before that choice is made.
And sometimes people just need to be reminded that their free choice to drink
and drive can and often does cause grief to others. That is totally uncalled
for.
Laws made and punishments may never totally prevent someone from drinking and
driving, but when the consequences are very severe it is more likely some will
think twice and again, before driving after consuming any amount of alcohol.
I mean seriously if you knew you would lose your transportation, property,
home, and face fines and jail time would you not seriously think twice before
you decided to drink and drive. Or allow someone to drive your vehicle after
drinking.
If you are truthful you would indeed think twice about how your actions may
affect someone else.
People who decide to drink and drive are not very wise. Drivers who leave the
scene don't need vehicles or licenses at all in my personal opinion. It would be
better for all if they instead had to walk everywhere they went or depend on
public transportation services. This would lead to fewer drunks on the road in
my personal opinion.
There is NO excuse for drunk driving at all, none.
Drunk driving is a choice. There is no reason that justifies someone driving
drunk. If there is I for one cannot think of one at all.
If you would like to know what the laws are concerning hit and run drivers
you can click on the link below to begin looking into these laws.
Also something to note, it is believed that in the greater majority of cases
those who commit crimes such as "Hit & Runs" are also guilty of some other
crime, such as drunk driving.
One last thought it should be a requirement that any place that sells
alcoholic beverages be made by law to have a device for consumer's to blow into
both before they are allowed to order any alcoholic beverage. If it shows the
customer has already been drinking then the establishment should by law not be
allowed to sell alcohol to that person.
Further a standard limit should be in place, so that it would be less likely
for someone to leave an establishment drunk.
It is my personal opinion one alcoholic drink is a plenty. If someone wants
more than that then they should just go home. And stay off the roads, so they
don't risk lives. Both their own and others.
. |
No comments:
Post a Comment