I just don’t understand drinking and driving

@BillRM,

DAVID wrote:

Then, u 'd agree with a DWI law against 3.5 bac, right ?

BillRM wrote:

Let see being of an engineering mind set allowing a safety margin between being drunk at say 1.4 and 1.5 is ok with me.

So a BAC of 1.0 is enough of a impairment to have that as the standard cut off point however I would not have a problem with even a slightly higher BAC of 1.1 for example.

A BAC of only .08 let alone .05 or even lower is getting on the silly side to me however.

DAVID wrote:

It does great violence to LOGIC
to assert that any human being is harmed by having a picture of him or her LOOKED AT.

BillRM wrote:

Well Dave such pictures of children is an invasion of their privacy at the very least and there also is some slight merit to the argument that having an on going trade promote more abused of children in order to get more pictures.

I am for punishment for such traders but not years in prison except for the worst of the worst.

So, u accept the philosophy that
a naked rape of the citizens' constitutional freedom
by a power grab is OK if "the end justifies the means" right ???????

If Pat Robertson became President
and he thought that it is for our own good to go to Church
and that end justifies it, then its OK to have the US Army marching behind u
on Sunday mornings to make sure that u get to Church on time,
because that goal is WORTH so much, right ?

Explain something to me, if u don 't mind
(preferably without the mistakes, so I can read it):
speaking as a person whose privacy was invaded in 2005,
by having my hind end fotografed by surprize in a hospital,
I do not understand HOW this adversely affects me,
i.e., I do not understand the reason that I shud give
even a minute's attention to it. I coud make jokes about it.
That 's about all.

If the same thing had happened to me
when I was 17, or 10 or 5 or 1 year old: what the hell DIFFERENCE does it make??
This is like the Twilight Zone. I just don't get it.
I see American freedom of the Individual crumbling in front of me,
with approximately O complaint, and I just don't get it! I find this very sad.

David

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Quote:

Have you followed any of the links in regard to the effects of driving under the influence provided on this thread?

Sure and the amount of impairment of low BAC level is similar to the impairment of talking to a passenger or on a cell phone or being tired and at .08 the decrease of skill levels in driving is similar to being up for 20 hours.

A hell of a lot of things we all do decrease driving abilities to some extend but accident cause by DUI or drivers pull over by police because of poor driving average out at 1.7 not .08.

Quote:

links confirming that inattentive/distracted driving also results in charges in a multiplicity of jurisdictions?

Rarely if ever does that occur as proving a driver was doing something that distracted him or her is one hell of a lot harder then a breathe test!

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Sure and the amount of impairment of low BAC level is similar to the impairment of talking to a passenger or on a cell phone or being tired and at .08 the decrease of skill levels in driving is similar to being up for 20 hours.

No, the impairing effects of alcohol are not similar to the things you describe. You are just plain ignorant.

A central nervous system depressant, like alcohol, has quite different physiological and neurological effects on the body, and on driving abilities, than fatigue from lack or sleep. And comparing the effects of alcohol to engaging in a distracting task is absurd. Your thinking is overly simplistic.

The goal is to reduce automobile accidents, injuries, deaths, and property damage, from all causes. For most people, but apparently not you, education of drivers helps to move toward that goal.

A BAC level of .08 is not low. A 175 pound man won't generally go over that level until he has had more than 4 drinks.
You seem to be promoting not only an increase in the legal BAC level, beyond .08, but also binge drinking and frank alcohol abuse.
Drunk driving laws cannot be set at a higher BAC level to accommodate those who are problem drinkers to protect them from arrest, which appears to be your line of reasoning.
Drunk driving laws cannot be set at a BAC level at which most deadly crashes occur because that would make drinking to that level permissible for everyone, which will result in more deadly crashes. Your reasoning lacks any logic.

You are abysmally ignorant and closed-minded.

Despite your denials, excessive alcohol consumption appears extremely important to you. The idea of restricting alcohol consumption before you get behind the wheel of a car seems abhorrent to you. You claim you cannot recognize impairments from alcohol even at twice the current legal limit, and that probably includes the case of yourself. You are disregarding information and empirical data to such an extent that it reflects massive denial on your part.

When virtually the entire world has set the legal BAC limit at .08 or below, you really should give the matter considerably more serious consideration and re-evaluate your thinking, although you show no ability to be able to do that. The need to establish a baseline, at which impairments in driving skills can be demonstrated, is the basis for those legal BAC limits. The aim is to have drivers as minimally chemically impaired as possibly when they get behind the wheel of a car. The aim is to promote safe and responsible driving.

If getting drunk, extremely drunk, is so important to you, then go right ahead and pickle your brain and destroy your liver, but don't get behind the wheel of a car.

The world-wide drunk driving laws will not go in the direction you advocate. Most people are considerably more intelligent and responsible than you are in addressing the problem of drinking and driving.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

In other words, you have not followed the links.

0 Replies

@jcboy,

Hello gorgous! hot as usual!

0 Replies

The state of Florida is going for the maximum penalty for Thom. The victim Barry Lancaster’s mother was in one of the court proceedings, haven’t heard much other then that. Will follow this case though.

1 Reply

@EqualityFLSTPete,

Quote:

The state of Florida is going for the maximum penalty for Thom

What a SHOCK!

They will let him plead, but he will have to bite at something like 13 years in prison.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Nope he’s looking at 15 years, the state is asking for the maximum.

1 Reply

@EqualityFLSTPete,

EqualityFLSTPete wrote:

Nope he’s looking at 15 years, and the state is asking for the maximum.

Unless they dropped the fleeing charge he is looking at 30 years. Where do you get your 15 years from?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

I heard something to that effect about fleeing being dropped, and if he gets 15 years according to his attorney he will do about a third of the time.

1 Reply

@EqualityFLSTPete,

EqualityFLSTPete wrote:

I heard something to that effect about fleeing being dropped, and if he gets 15 years according to his attorney he will do about a third of the time.

You best check your information, because the documentation we have in this thread is that he is up for 30 years and has a mandatory min of 7 years. The idea that he will end up with only 5 is unrealistic. It could happen in theory though.

I wonder is the St Pete scene is assuming that the state will drop the fleeing the scene charge. I see no reason to think that they will.

3 Replies

@hawkeye10,

I heard something to the effect it would be 30 years but since one of the charges would be dropped it would reduce the sentence to 15 years. I just assumed it would be five years because an attorney friend of mine said they usually do about a third of the time behind bars and the rest of the time probation.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

The fleeing charge was likely part of the overcharging used to pressure him not to have a jury trial and reach a plea deal.

I had been betting that they would be willing to drop that charge if he roll over on the other charges.

Love our so call justice system where they overcharge to force a plea bargain out of you and no one care if you are innocence or guilty in this system of our.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

I wish we had a Florida legal expert...my understanding of how the sentencing worksheet works is that Thom will get a double whack because Barry died, that he will gets the points for death added onto both charges, which means that if he goes to trial and losses that he will be facing a sentence north of 20 years. It is because of this that we can assume that Thom will agree to 13 years in return for dropping the fleeing charge. The state will drop it, but only if he agrees to do almost all of the max on the other charge.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

I wish we had a Florida legal expert...

Do you consider a Florida attorney a legal expert? This is from one such Web site.

Quote:

Florida judges have discretion in the sentencing of it's DUI offenders. Even where the law mandates a minimum amount of jail time, judges in Florida may substitute jail with confinement via house arrest, work release, or time spent in a residential alcohol or drug abuse treatment center.
http://www.duiattorney.com/florida/fl-dui-penalties

So, just because the state requests the maximum, does not mean the judge will go along with that.

Quote:

There is no double jeopardy prohibition against convictions for both DUI manslaughter and leaving the scene of a fatal accident. See Kelly v. State, 987 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Here, however, the defendant’s DUI manslaughter conviction was enhanced from a second-degree felony to a first-degree felony because he left the scene of the fatal accident. Therefore, a separate conviction for leaving the scene of a fatal accident constitutes a double penalty, and violates double jeopardy. See Cleveland v. State, 587 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1991).
http://www.miami-criminal-lawyer.net/caselaw/2010/10/29/mark-david-ivey-appellant-v-the-state-of-florida-appellee-no-3d08-1640-lower-tribunal-no-06-2197/

So, Swift's attorney may be successfully able to argue that the separate, additional charge for failing to render aid is an instance of double jeopardy, since such behavior is already covered by the DUI manslaughter/leaving the scene charge, and get that second charge dismissed.

Then any plea negotiations would involve only the DUI manslaughter/leaving the scene charge.

This may have already taken place, or be in the works, which is why EqualityFLSTPete said

Quote:

I heard something to that effect about fleeing being dropped...

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Second-Degree Felony: A DUI charge involving an accident in which someone was killed (called “DUI manslaughter”) may be elevated to a second-degree felony, which is even more serious than a DUI involving serious bodily injury. A second-degree felony is punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

First-Degree Felony: If you leave the scene or you fail to render assistance after the accident, it becomes a first-degree felony, for which you could be sentenced to as many as 30 years in prison.

Minimum Sentence: A recent Florida statute makes prison time mandatory for anyone who is convicted of DUI manslaughter. As of 2009, a DUI manslaughter conviction in Florida will result in a minimum sentence of four years in prison. And Florida is one of the few states in the U.S. to impose a mandatory jail sentence for a DUI conviction.
http://www.musillawfirm.com/2011/01/03/dui-penalties-in-florida-cocoa-fl-dui-attorney-lawyer-melbourne-f/

Leaving the scene can add 2 years to that 4 year minimum, for a total of 6 years.

Rather than a negotiated plea deal, where sentencing has been worked out and agreed to by both sides, a defendant may choose an "open plea", and, in that case, a judge could sentence as he or she saw fit. This is sometimes done when the state refuses to reduce charges in a plea deal. The judge in those instances can sentence outside of the guidelines if they can legally justify their decision.

There are too many unknowns in this situation to guess at a possible sentence in this particular case.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

A mandatory sentence does not mean that he stays in prison for the entire time.

If he's sentenced to 15 years, he's likely to actually serve much less. Not all time is straight time.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

A mandatory sentence does not mean that he stays in prison for the entire time

And the maximum sentence which can be imposed (which, in this case, is 30 years) is quite different than the mandatory minimum sentence (which, in Florida, for DUI manslaughter, is 4 years, and leaving the scene is a mandatory two years with a DUI manslaughter conviction--and these can be served concurrently).

So, a possible sentence could be anywhere between 4-30 years.

Quote:

If he's sentenced to 15 years, he's likely to actually serve much less

Generally, only about 2/3 is served, if the person doesn't lose good time for infractions while incarcerated.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

So, a possible sentence could be anywhere between 4-30 years.

There is some ability to go lower than the mandatory min in Florida, but it is a process and the judge must justify it. There is zero chance that will happen here.

Quote:

Generally, only about 2/3 is served, if the person doesn't lose good time for infractions while incarcerated

Which means Thom will do 8 plus some change......with lots of loss of freedom for another 4+ years.

0 Replies

Personally I don’t give a ratz azz what happens with Thom. He drove home drunk three nights a week! And he could have walked! He killed a man and doesn’t deserve his freedom while his victim is buried six feet under! He took away someone’s son, two children’s father!

1 Reply

I just don’t understand drinking and driving

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know