Suspend ALL DUI offenders from the roads for life! Crimes & Incidents, posted by Anna, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 10, 2006 at 12:55 am
The tragic loss of an innocent biker the other day - killed by a driver under the influence - is yet another reminder that the roads are dangerous.
When will our legislators demand ZERO tolerance for alchohol on the road?
Any first offense for DUI should be an AUTOMATIC 5-year suspension of one's license, with jail time for violating the suspension. All violaters should be required to wear remote monitoring devices for 5 years, so they can be tracked while being transporting, so that thier means of transport can be randomly checked.
After that, a second offense should mean LIFETIME suspension, with SEVERE jail time for violating the suspension.
Posted by Anna, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 11, 2006 at 1:12 pm
It'sa revelation to see the reaction to making someone who, prior to getting into a 2+ ton hunk of metal, and has knowingly ingested a substance known to alter consciousness, who then goes on to kill or maim others, should somehow be permitted to drive again, ever.
Why do we permit this travesty?
I wonder how these people would feel if the victim was their child, or a good friend.
Apparently, our DUI laws and punishments are not a sufficient deterrent, so people continue to be killed.
When are we going to take this seriously, for the real crime that it is?
Posted by Anna, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 11, 2006 at 4:15 pm
I think our local newspapers can help by PROMINENTLY listing the names of ALL individuals convicted of DUI. Our community (and others) should know who among them so disregard the lives of them, their children, and their friends.
Those names should be put on a CUMULATIVE LIST, so that if someone is convicted of DUI, their name lives in the newspaper, under "DUI convistions" for at least a year.
There should be a SIGNIFICANT degree of public shame and humiliation for anyone with a DUI conviction. IN addition to that, ANYONE with a DUI conviction should be REQUIRED, by law, to go into counseling for substance abuse.
Posted by Mike, a resident of another community, on Sep 11, 2006 at 4:31 pm
One witness at the scene stated that when the "alleged" drunk driver climbed out of his car at the bottom of a ditch, he polished off a bottle of malt liquor before climbing up to the road. Gotta go with Anna on this one. Hopefully he hasn't bonded out of jail yet.
Posted by Moe, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Sep 11, 2006 at 4:48 pm
Anna wrote: "I think our local newspapers can help by PROMINENTLY listing the names of ALL individuals convicted of DUI. Our community (and others) should know who among them so disregard the lives of them, their children, and their friends."
Why don't we extend that to all the careless drivers who drive while yakking on their cell phones or fiddle with the car radio while driving?
Posted by Anna, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 11, 2006 at 6:38 pm
In fact, there are MANY activities that people engage in on the road that are unsafe - cell phone use, applying makeup, reading (ride the LA freeways as drivers have their nose in "People Magazine"), tuning the radio, interruption by passengers (especiallychildren, driving while unduly fatigued, roadrage, testosterone display by teenagers (including female teens), etc. etc.
Yes, these are ALL unsafe behaviors. Nevertheless, there is a way to PROVE, without a shadow of a doubt, that someone who has ingested drugs or alcohol IN VIOLATION OF LAW, has caused a fatal accident, or ANY accident while DUI.
The current deterrence is NOT working. 1/3 of all deaths on the road are DUI related - that's THOUSANDS of deaths yearly, caused mby people who BROKE THE LAW.
When hands-free laws are passed, I woudl expect the SAME or similar kinds of enforcement.
Take the scofflaws OFF the road for FIVE years, with STRICT enforcement. PUBLIC HUMILIATION via printed lists in newspapers, and other social deterrents would also work. We have to so something to STOP this unnecessary carnage once and for all.
I'm not sure, but printing the names of those who are convicted of DUI is public information and available for reproduction by ANYONE. So, I may start taking ads out in this and other newspapers with the names of locals who are convicted of DUI, prominently pubishing them in a cumulative list for a year, until people start getting the message that driving DUI is a DANGEROUS crime that NO community will tolerate.
Posted by Richard, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 11, 2006 at 9:24 pm
Public shaming may work in some communities and for some offenders, but not for all. Hard-core alcoholics who have been repeatedly convicted of DUI don't care who knows. Often their family members know their situation but do nothing to stop it, for one reason or another.
I agree that we need conviction with TEETH to keep people from continuing to drive after their license is suspended or revoked. Driving is a privilege that should be denied to those who abuse it, even if it causes them personal hardship. The friends and families of victims of these horrible crashes suffer far more hardship than not being able to drive to work.
In the World Trade Center attack there were 3,000 people killed. In the 5 years since then we have spent over $180 billion on homeland security, and another $320 billion on the war in Iraq. In those same 5 years 210,000 Americans have died in car crashes, and the fedreal government has spent only about $4 billion on highway safety! We are not putting our money where it will do the most to protect us from the biggest dangers we face. People are far more afraid of terrorists than car crashes, but this is emotion and not logic. If politicians were logical we would be spending 100 times as much as we are on creating safer roads and better drivers.
Posted by Alan, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2006 at 10:08 pm
What I find most distubing about this, is after the driver of a car hits a bicyclist they often just drive away. This also happened to the bicyclist killed last year at the intersection of Charleston and Wilke Way (if I recall correctly). The bicyclist in that incident was a Stanford employee biking to work and was hit by a drunk real estate agent.
I know the driver the in that case was going to trial for manslaughter. Does anyone know the final outcome of that trial? I would like to know if that person is in jail right now. Also, the first thing to do is make sure when a bicyclist is hit that the trial get covered, and does not get ignored.
I personally think that the punishment for leaving the scene of an accident involving a pedestrian or bicyclist needs to be sever. Perhaps upgrading manslaughter to murder.
Posted by Alan, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2006 at 10:30 pm
This is the story regarding the case driver that killed the bicyclist on Charleston last year. The driver was Craig Borlik and he didn't bother to stop after dragging the victum 40 feet under his SUV. What happened to this case?
Also, I forgot about the case when a six year old girl riding to school was hit by a High school student driving to Gunn in 2003. The her name was Amy Malzbender and she would have been 9 years old this year.
In all of these cases the driver of the car just kept going after hitting the bicyclist.
Posted by another Paly mom, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2006 at 3:02 pm
It is time to actually get tough on drunken drivers. This guy appeared to be arrogant about striking and killing the bicyclist on Old Palo Alto Rd. It's really scary that these people are out there driving these massive vehicles - they should be off the road.
Posted by unknown, a resident of another community, on Mar 30, 2008 at 1:54 pm
advice for those cyclists :get a car?
yeah stupid idea, bad for the environment, and who is to say if those cyclists start driving they may become under the influence?
and as for posting the names of impaired drivers on websites i agree with it but seriously not many people are going to read about it, other than noisy people who want to know everything about everyone and most likely those impaired drivers arent going to go look up themselves and say wow my name is on a website that most people in my community are not going to read....im never going to drink and drive again....
and isn't one assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law? and they are placing these names in before these people are convicted?
but ty, these comments are helping with my school project =P let me know your opinion on my questions to help furthermore...ty