3 DUIs in 3 Days
Ottoman Umpire ·
Jun 1, 2011 at 12:40am
How does this happen?
On May 18, McGowan, 50, tried to enter a closed bank and drove off while drunk in San Rafael, police say.
On May 19, he was arrested for drunken driving in San Francisco.
On May 20, he got busted in Novato after he was spotted staggering near his Volkswagen Beetle, asking a woman for a ride to Burger King and then getting into his car and making a wide right turn in front of police, authorities say.
I always assumed that a single DUI would get your license suspended, if not land you in jail. Guess not.
- Comment (12)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Apr '11
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
I read a story recently about a guy up in Vermont who was arrested for his ninth DUI, and one of his previous ones resulted in a fatality.
If these people still have a car, there's not really, much a suspended license can do to prevent a drunk driver form getting back in his car and doing it again. I think most repeat offenders are driving with a suspended or revoked license.
Jul '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
I read the article and nowhere in there does it state His actions damaged any property, injured or killed another. He did not infringe on anyone's Rights.
So, what's the problem?
May '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
Jimmy Carter: I read the article and nowhere in there does it state His actions damaged any property, injured or killed another. He did not infringe on anyone's Rights.
So, what's the problem? · May 31 at 6:23pm
The problem is that driving while drunk has a tendency to get someone else killed. That's why we have laws against it, and those laws should be enforced. This guy sounded, and tested, drunk.
You could make a similar argument about pilots flying planes while drunk, right? If they haven't killed anybody, what's the problem?
Now, I personally see nothing inherently wrong with tipping back a beer while driving, as long as it doesn't cause a real impairment. In fact, it's probably safer than sipping 3000-degree McDonald's coffee. But I don't do it because there are laws against it and I don't want to get arrested.
Edited on May 31, 2011 at 7:39pmJul '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
'This guy sounded, and tested, drunk"
Please describe symptoms.
May '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
Jimmy Carter: 'This guy sounded, and tested, drunk"
Please describe symptoms. · May 31 at 7:47pm
The linked-to article said he his blood alcohol level was "more than 0.15 percent." Other symptoms include "staggering," lapses in cognition, loss of inhibition, poor judgment, and what sounds like bad driving.
Is this a trick question?
Edited on May 31, 2011 at 9:39pmJul '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
"Other symptoms include "staggering," lapses in cognition, loss of inhibition, poor judgment, and what sounds like bad driving."
Sounds like a number of Senior Citizens and teenagers. Should They All be arrested and have Their licenses suspended?
May '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
Never drink and drive. You might spill some.
May '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
Jimmy Carter: "Other symptoms include "staggering," lapses in cognition, loss of inhibition, poor judgment, and what sounds like bad driving."
Sounds like a number of Senior Citizens and teenagers. Should They All be arrested and have Their licenses suspended? · Jun 1 at 3:32am
Yes, if they also light up a breathalyzer.
Are you saying that people should be able to drive drunk? Seriously?
Nov '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
DUI laws in this country are fairly uniform and they are a travesty. I couldn’t possibly explain why in this limited space, but here is one thing you can take to the bank: DUI laws and their enforcement are not about getting drunks off the road and they are not about saving lives. If they were there wouldn’t be so many drunks on the road and there wouldn’t be so many people getting killed by drunk drivers.
The main culprit in creating this mess is none other than Mothers Against Drunk Driving. I know that’s contrary to all that most people are conditioned to believe. Nevertheless, anyone without an axe to grind that invests the time and effort to study it will eventually come to the same conclusion. The current system focuses too heavily on getting convictions of social drinkers who pose no danger to anyone and too little on the real recidivist drunks who are killing people. My advice to anyone wanting to educate themselves on this matter is to follow the money to those who benefit from the current system, and the naivete of those who suffer under it.
Edited on Jun 1, 2011 at 11:52amApr '11
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
In no way do I condone drunk driving or excuse the guy in this story. But since the topic has spread to drunk driving and enforcement in general let me say this. A lot of enforcement seems to be about racking up fines, not safety. Lowering the definition of drunk from .1 to .08, for instance. In the days of .1, just how many times has a cop pulled somebody over for erratic driving, tested them, had to let them go because they only blew a .08 or .09, then saw that driver crash into somebody? Is there any proof that there is less drunk driving as a result of this change in the law? Meanwhile, the people who are convicted of driving drunk and even crashing, don't necessarily do jail time unless someone was killed. Jail time costs money, fines bring it in.
Jul '10
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
"Are you saying that people should be able to drive drunk? Seriously"
I'm saying I oppose laws arresting and/or fining Citizens for doing no harm to anyone else and/or Their property. Yes, that includes running stop signs. Seriously.
Apr '11
Re: 3 DUIs in 3 Days
Mr. President, by this line of reasoning, most traffic laws would seem to go out the window, as long as no one gets hurt. Want to run a red light? No problem, if no one's coming the other way! Feel like going 110 mph on a residential street? Be my guest as long as you're able to swerve in time to miss the children!
Is there something I'm missing?