 |
The Public Opinion Soapbox
Welcome to the Public Opinion's community message board. You must be registered to post, and all posts are subject to moderation by our staff.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Coppy
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 2663
Location: Chambersburg
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:21 pm Post subject: Article: DUI arrests on the increase |
 |
|
| Keith Paradise wrote: | Lieutenant Jim Scott has seen driving under the influence evolve from an offered ride to an arrestable offense in his 32 years with the Pennsylvania State Police.
When Scott, now the barracks commander in Chambersburg, used to stop a driver who had been drinking, the driver had the option of leaving the vehicle and being driven home by the trooper, or continuing to drive and being arrested.
"I drove a lot more people home than I ever arrested," Scott said.
Now, DUI charges are more serious with harsher fines and consequences. Yet DUI arrests seem to be going anywhere but down.
Scott said that Franklin County is one of the top three for State Police DUI arrests, behind Westmoreland and Delaware County. Through August, the State Police have arrested 518 people for driving under the influence. Last year, State Troopers arrested 708 motorists; 905 were apprehended in 2005.
"Franklin County does seem to have a lot of people that seem to like having a few drinks and then driving," Scott said.
Scott credits the high number of arrests to an aggressive group of troopers that are aware of the warning signs that someone is impaired behind the wheel: the vehicle swerving, speeding or not obeying traffic signals. The Chambersburg barracks also has one of the top troopers in the state in regards to DUI arrested. Trooper Craig Finkle received the "Top Gun" Award from 2003 through 2006, which is awarded to the top state and municipal police officers for catching drunk drivers.
For police, the problem is as much about changing perception as much as habits. Drinking and driving were more socially acceptable in the 70s and early 80s. Perceptions began changing in 1980 when Mothers Against Drunk Driving was formed. DUI laws weren't amended to be harsher until 1983. Scott equated drinking and driving with how prevalent cigarette smoking was in office buildings and other public places.
"Even as late as the early 1990s, drinking and driving was more acceptable than what we are willing to accept now," Scott said.
Chambersburg Police Chief Michael DeFrank, who will have 40 years in law enforcement next year, concurs with Scott's recollection of how drunken driving used to be treated. Borough police arrested 146 drivers for DUI last year and have arrested 121 through October of this year. DeFrank also said that officers go through extensive training on how to spot a potential drunk driver.
Not only were police more lenient with drunk drivers just a couple of decades ago, the punishment was also less severe. Scott recalled an accident that he responded to in the early 1970s where a drunk driver killed three people in another part of the state. The driver had gotten off of work at 7 p.m., drove to a bar and left at 11 p.m. The drunk driver was sentenced to a $300 fine and a six-month driver's license suspension.
Now, drivers face a $300 fine and possible probation time for their first offense. According to a statement from the Southcentral Pa. DUI Task Force, motorists who are arrested for a second or subsequent DUI offense are now required to install an ignition interlock system in their vehicle for one year after a one-year suspension of license is completed. The interlock costs $1,000 - paid for by the driver -- and requires them to blow into the device to start the vehicle. If the device detects alcohol, it will not allow the vehicle to start.
Washington Township police chief Barry Keller is also seeing an increase in DUI arrests, with 90 people arrested so far this year over 66 last year. Keller serves as a sobriety checkpoint coordinator for Franklin County and said that although the offense isn't as acceptable as it once was, a group of drivers still perceive it to be.
"It's an activity that sill has an element of being legal because drinking is legal and driving is legal," Keller said.
A significant portion of drivers arrested for DUI aren't even old enough to drink legally, Scott said. Of those arrested in 2005 by the State Police, 110, or about 12 percent, were under the age of 21. In 2006, 12.28 percent were underage and so far this year the number is 15 percent.
DeFrank would like to see better education on the consequences for younger drivers on the dangers of driving while impaired, in hopes that they understand the damage that can be caused.
"I don't believe young people really have a handle on how severe this is," DeFrank said. |
So why are they on the increase? Today's PO poll asks:
Franklin County is among the leaders in DUI arrests in Pennsylvania. Does this surprise you?
Yes: 17%
No : 83%
So why isn't anyone surprised? And why are there so many drunk drivers in Franklin County? It's not JUST about excellent enforcement; there must be a lot of DUI's on the road at any given time, particularly the swerving drivers who are the greatest danger on the road. Questions to ask are how many of these posed a danger? How many blew over a .10, which was the legal limit up until just a few years ago? How many were otherwise obeying traffic laws and happened to have a light out?
This debate can probably go in several directions. First of all, is .08% a reasonable limit? They say this is about a 3 or 4 beers, but I don't about any of you, but if I have just two beers, I become the world's greatest driver. I go the speed limit, come to complete stops and religiously use my turn signals. I know I'm probably not near the limit, but better safe than sorry, even after one drink. But I'm more afraid of getting caught.
I think a lot of drivers are like that; responsibly not going over the line and then carefully driving home. I don't see how someone with a couple beers in them could be worse than, say, a 70 year old driving with cataracts.
But it's so important to harshly enforce this law because of the great potential for damage; to both property and life. But it's also worth a discussion on whether or not it's fair to charge someone equally for a DUI if they get pulled over obeying all traffic laws but happen to have a taillight out and blow a .08, as opposed to a maniac on the roads with a prior conviction and a .14. I know it's not exactly prosecuted equally, but you see my point.
There's a reason this is a problem in rural areas as opposed to urban in my opinion; fewer places to drink and little or no public transportation. Even taxi service is non-existent out here. And most people probably live pretty far from the nearest watering hole. If you live up in the mountains and travel 20 miles to go to a bar, you'll probably drink more and drive a gigantic pickup truck.... not a very good combination for drunk driving.
I used to be able to walk home after visiting a local bar; now I have to drive and with little or no transportation alternatives, I really have to be careful of my consumption. And I am careful, or I opt to drink at home.
But am I off my rocker with by presumption that sometimes drivers who have had a couple of drinks are actually more careful than other drivers, particularly those with cell phones or screaming children?
I'd say a cell phone conversation puts you at about a .06.
Test messaging is a .12
Reaching around the care for something rolling around is like blowing a .20
Heck, my grandfather drives at the equivalent BAC of .50 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
.45chel
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 3093
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 4:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Coppy,
I have to ask.... Do YOU fit the profile?
Our view: Do you fit the profile?
Those arrested for drunk driving are:
-- Male: 78 percent
-- Unmarried: 50.3 percent
-- 43.1 percent are high school graduates; 28.7 percent have partial college/tech training
-- Employed: 76.2 percent
-- Average age: 34
-- Average BAC .17
-- Saturday and Sunday have the highest percentages of DUI arrests
-- Almost 60 percent of DUI arrests are between midnight and 4 a.m.
_________________
Nevermind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.45chel
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 3093
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
I had to pick on you a little. The argument that you drive better after you toss back a few (which may or may not be true) reminded me of former...ahem...associates who insisted they were the best drivers in the world after a joint or two. Best at driving 15 mph in a 55mph zone! 
I agree that driving after 2 normal sized drinks is far safer than driving while talking on the cell-phone or with cataracts. But then, my philosophy has always been, "I don't care what you do to yourself as long as you don't endanger ME or my family in the process." And when anyone is unsafe on the road and my loved ones or I are in the vicinity, they are taking our lives in their hands...And frankly, I don't know you (or them) well enough. 
No, I don't believe someone that is only caught because of a taillight should be prosecuted the same as some hell-on-wheels drunk, but they should be punished and morons who are too stupid to learn their lesson the first time should be dealt with SEVERELY. Take their car (or the car of whom so ever let them drive) take their freedom and take their money.
_________________
Nevermind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Coppy
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 2663
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, that's a great point and I agree; but I am saying that the majority of people who do drive, UNDER the legal limit after a couple of beers are actually considerably more careful drivers then a lot of people in the middle of the day and bone sober. I know the old "I'm the best driver when I'm drunk" line and it's beyond absurdity.
My main point, however, is that if they truly want to reduce DUI, they need to work on some sort of practical, transportation system. But, that, of course is impossible since I would presume a lot of DUI arrests are in more rural parts of the county where a car service could never, ever be profitable.
Anyway, I'm an unmarried, male, college graduate, employed full time, under the age of 34 and I don't think my BAC has hit .17 since I was in college. I also have trouble staying up past midnight.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.45chel
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 3093
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Coppy wrote: | | I also have trouble staying up past midnight. |
You need a designated driver for just that reason!! How do you make it to and from the night scenes you've mentioned in other posts?!
I understand some people's aversion to public transportation (not I, I used to love watching crazy people on the subway) and most P.T. doesn't run after a certain time in the evening, but a few car services in the area would be a plus! I used to frequent a few pubs that would call you a cab if you were toasted and a few car services that would just bill you (or you could even prepay) if you were drunk and didn't have the funds to pay.
There are a few units in the Army that require their soldiers to carry preprinted cards in their wallets that stated "If found incapicitated please return this soldier to (the unit's address). Transportation fees will be paid on arrival." Soldiers on shift were told how to receive the happy traveler and with what funds to pay the driver. The soldier then had to reimburse the cash box and, unless he/she had broken rules, it was dropped.
It was a good policy. It is also an example of how to keep people safe without placing unrealistic expectations on them. You cannot expect someone of legal age to not imbibe if they want to, nor can you expect someone who is drunk (impaired judgement) to make good decisions, which is why I like the idea of bartender's loading people into cabs and cab drivers putting life above immediate payment. Unfortunately, a few deadbeats spoil it for the rest and lawsuits against bars when bartenders fail to notice every drunk that's leaving make it less likely that the drinking establishments will get involved. 
_________________
Nevermind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.45chel
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 3093
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Coppy wrote: | | I also have trouble staying up past midnight. |
Yeah, I'm quoting the same sentence...Get over it!
I've decided that since I occasionally have insomnia, especially of late, you must learn to stay up because I get rather bored and you must post comments to help keep me entertained. Otherwise, I will have to use my powers for evil and go work for Cheney. 'Kay? 
_________________
Nevermind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Talking Horse
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 143
Location: Cove Gap
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Does this make sense to anyone...
I have a friend - wrecked his car...he was drunk. He was badly injured. No one else involved. This was his first and only DUI
He has completed all the usual DUI stuff...but - he claims the judge ordered that he pay his hospital bill (about 8 grand) - before he gets his license back.
This guy is poor - and has no real family.
How do you get to work - to pay back the 8 grand?
So - now - he's on welfare and food stamps...and - they give him a prescription for Xanax - that more or less leaves him a stone junkie!
***??? All that for 1 DUI????
We've recently talked him out of the Xanax - he clearly didn't need it AT ALL!!! I consider it criminal for the state to keep this guy stoned. (who - yes - had a history of drug abuse)
Is there any oversight for this stuff?
Can the public object?
_________________
Do everything that's in you, you feel to be your part... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZiggyStardust
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 62
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm from Virginia where DUI/driving laws are brutal at best.
My brother has a slew of DUIs and you can't imagine the condition of his license/legal status. While I believe people are responsible for their own actions, I also don't think that some of the things the states do with these types of violations are conducive to rehabilitating a person to being an upstanding, non-drinking citizen. If you take someone's license so that it's nearly impossible for them to get to work but then make them pay exorbitant fees, how do you expect them to make up for their mistakes? In the case of my brother it caused him to plunge further into alcoholism. He now drives illegally to get to his job. We just hope he doesn't get caught because if he so much as gets seen driving a car he's in jail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
me
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:48 am Post subject: DUI |
|
|
Horse,
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the Judge can NOT keep him from getting his license. That's PennDots authority.
He can however keep him on Probation till all fines, costs and restitution are satisfied.
If your friend did not have insurance, then who is responsible to pay that $8000 hospital bill, not us?!?!?!?!?!?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Talking Horse
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 143
Location: Cove Gap
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:02 am Post subject: Re: DUI |
|
|
| me wrote: | Horse,
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the Judge can NOT keep him from getting his license. That's PennDots authority.
He can however keep him on Probation till all fines, costs and restitution are satisfied.
If your friend did not have insurance, then who is responsible to pay that $8000 hospital bill, not us?!?!?!?!?!?! |
You prefer to pay for his food stamps? his Xanax? YOU ARE!
No one is saying he is NOT responsible...He wants to pay it.
But how??? when you can't drive and the state is keeping you in drug-induced stupor?
He claims he was sentenced under Act 21 or something...??
We've been thinking of getting him a lawyer to take a look at his situation.
He's a decent fellow - but not his own best advocate.
_________________
Do everything that's in you, you feel to be your part... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
me
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 119
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:16 pm Post subject: DUI |
|
|
Well it was HIS decision, so it's his responsiblity to pay HIS debt.'
If what you're being told by him is correct, I would suggest speaking with an attorney, outside of C-burg. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Talking Horse
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 143
Location: Cove Gap
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:51 pm Post subject: Re: DUI |
|
|
| me wrote: | Well it was HIS decision, so it's his responsiblity to pay HIS debt.'
If what you're being told by him is correct, I would suggest speaking with an attorney, outside of C-burg. |
Shouldn't we all pay the same price for the same crime?
If he was a rich man with health insurance...he would have his drivers license back already because he wouldn't have the debt. The "crime" would be the SAME!
So if you purchase a certain product (health insurance) you are immune from further social punishment??? Pay tribute to one Lord for protection from another? Its becoming like the Feudal system!!!
Prolonging poverty doesnt seem like the best way to collect debt...how much will we spend on welfare for this guy????!!!
_________________
Do everything that's in you, you feel to be your part... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.45chel
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 3093
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How the heck do they make him take Xanax? Do probation officers or judges have power to write prescriptions and give counseling now? I don't think your buddy is telling you everything. You said yourself he is not his best advocate so maybe he is getting some things confused? Perhaps he misunderstood.
I would definitely get him some legal advice. He should get his license back, if for no other reason than to pay his bills. Make sure he has a copy of the judge's orders when he visits his legal counsel so that he can point out the section that is preventing him from his driving priviledges.
_________________
Nevermind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BadKarma42
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 133
Location: Chambersburg aka Little Mexico
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps this may help the understanding...the Courts don't take the license or suspend it...PennDot does.
PennDot has their own rules about how and when someone can get their license back. I haven't looked but it may be on their website.
Or, if you have a spare 13 hours you could call them and ask! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.45chel
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 3093
Location: Chambersburg
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BadKarma42 wrote: |
Or, if you have a spare 13 hours you could call them and ask! |
Ummm, That's okay...it's Horse's friend>>> Make Horse call!
_________________
Nevermind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
