New law targets repeat DUI drivers (in California)

[alp227]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

(09-27) 14:12 PDT Sacramento --

Drivers who are repeatedly caught drunk behind the wheel could lose their license for up to a decade under legislation signed by the governor today.

The measure by Assemblyman Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, allows judges to revoke a person's driver's license for up to 10 years if they have three or more convictions for driving under the influence within the prior decade. Currently, courts may only take away a repeat offender's driver's license for three years.

The law will take effect on Jan. 1, 2012.

Hill estimated that the measure could help take more than 10,000 repeat DUI offenders off the road each year.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/09/27/BA301FKDTB.DTL

---

Well here's the problem. It's easy just to suspend one's license. But how do you prevent such people from getting behind the wheel in the first place? Apparently the state prisons are so overcrowded with nonviolent drug offenders that Hill couldn't just say longer prison sentences for DUIs, a much larger threat to public safety than individual marijuana use. Not even Carlos Montano could've been prevented from doing so under this law.

[Booster]

1. "Except for Lindsey and Paris" must be in that law somewhere.

[Rhiannon12866]

2. Excellent point.

There are too many out there who have an excuse or just don't give a damn. But here in NY we have County Drug Court, which places repeat offenders in a serious treatment program instead of incarceration. It's very tough, in-patient, half-way house, outpatient treatment, supportive living, all the while having to report for random testing and meetings with a caseworker and a judge, and followed by probation, but I've seen it achieve miracles, and can keep those who belong in recovery out of the prison system... :)

[brewens]

3. I guesstimate having drove drunk around 6000 times. I was

never falling down drunk and most of those would have been just moderately over the old blood alcohol limit when it was .1%. I never had an accident, no tickets still since 1981, never was cut off or kicked out of a bar and never got in any trouble over drinking. No DUI's or domestic problems.
I will always maintain that there are a certain percentage of people that can handle alcohol, that can get a good buzz and drive and be no danger to anyone. I have no idea how you would make the DUI laws fair to those people. I always wished there were some way to stop the idiot drinkers.
I'd like to see people with drinking problems lose their right to buy alcohol before it gets to the three DUI stage. Maybe one DUI with a ridiculously high blood alcohol level should do it. When they get their license back it has a no alcohol sales stamp on it. I know that they would still get alcohol but they'd be banned from the bars at least.
I worked for a beer distributor for about 15 years. You really couldn't have one of those jobs in my area for very long if you couldn't handle drinking. We actually had expense accounts and were allowed to drink on the job. I mean out on a route driving a beer truck. The routes were set up so we delivered the stores in the morning and the bars in the afternoon. We were expected to buy a round at the bars and have a couple.
We freaked when they put in the tougher DOT regulations in the early 90's and put a stop to all the drinking. It wasn't long before every one of us was glad they did though. We all got home earlier and found out what working in the morning without a hangover was like.
When they lowered the blood alcohol limit to .08% in my state I got pissed and quit drinking. I knew there was no way I could stop off for beers and drink like I like to and not get a DUI eventually. I still think that there is no way .08% is really drunk. I'd love to pound down about four beers or so to get to just over that level and be allowed to take the driving test. I seriously know I could pass it.

[depakid]

4. .05 in Australia

and cops are well known to target the morning commute with breathalyzer checkpoints because they know that people out for a night drinking will still be above the limit.

That said- harsher and harsher penalties like this aren't going to put much of a dent in the problem- but will make the "tough on crime" crowd feel good about themselves.

[brewens]

5. I know people that go out drinking and have no intention of

driving home drunk. They get to a certain point and the alcohol takes over. They convince themselves they are ok and they'll make it. That's about how you have to be to get a third DUI. I'm not sure bumping it up to a 10 year suspension will deter those guys.
My town is full of old drunks that know they need to get their fix and get home in the afternoon. The cops don't stake out the bars in the day time like they do at night. They could make a haul if they did. A couple of cops watching our Eagles lodge parking lot about one in the afternoon couldn't miss. If they took turns following anyone that looked drunk getting into their rigs it wouldn't take long.

[Dark]

6. These laws are pointless, as you demonstrate. The only way to stop them is to seize their cars.

That's the only thing that does stop them, is taking away their cars.

[SoapBox]

7. Amazing that Ahnold signed something...