Suspected drunk driver kills 6 in wrong-way crash in Diamond Bar

[mp170.6]

I wish people who drink regularly would see the bigger picture.  The technology already exists in other countries to detect weaving cars, driving on the wrong side of the road, excessive speed, etc thanks to the accuracy of a GPS device embedded into the car.  Any deviation from the law sends a wireless alert to the cops.  This also means the government can track your car at all times. 

 

That's the direction we're headed in this country. 

[Blarg]

Top Gear UK did a piece on this where they developed a car that would react if you went the wrong way down a one way street. Start watching at 6:15.

 

[Tank]

Call me crazy but the drunk person has the ethical duty to not get behind the wheel.

 

can a drunk person make that kind of responsible decision? i've never been drunk so i don't really know what drunk people are or are not capable of doing.

 

in many ways it seems like it would be impossible for someone to be both drunk and responsible for their actions.

[yk9001]

can a drunk person make that kind of responsible decision? i've never been drunk so i don't really know what drunk people are or are not capable of doing.

 

in many ways it seems like it would be impossible for someone to be both drunk and responsible for their actions.

 

 

They do it in japan.

 

Of course drunk people can make those decisions.  It just sounds like more excuse making.

 

If it were my world, this chick would be in the landfill.

[Adam]

I don't know what can be done. I think the best thing would be much stricter 1st offense penalties. Lose your license for 10 years. Not allowed in bars or liquor stores - conditions of probation. 

[mtangelsfan]

I agree Adam, I think it really has to hurt bad to get caught.  Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.

[Adam]

Yep. When the worst thing that happens is you're out a few grand, or in the case of most kids - mom and dad are out a few grand, that isn't enough to deter a lot of people from taking the risk. 

[Caralho]

I get why you would want such punitive penalties but especially in SoCal, if you take away a license for such a long period, that probably means they won't have a job. Which just means they are more likely to get into crime because if they don't have a good support system, well people gotta eat. Isn't the average DUI around 10k already? You could always throw them in jail for longer but the prisons are overcrowded already. I'm not really sure what the solution is here,

[HaloFan85]

I had been wondering why the sister and/or the other passenger had evidently not attempted to stop the driver on her fairly lengthy trip down the 57 and the 60 on the wrong way. At least they could have warned her in plenty of time, and she could have pulled over to the shoulder. I'm speculating here a bit, of course, but the question bothered me. If all three of them were drunk out of their minds, that would explain a lot. The other two could have been asleep, being that it was 4:40 in the morning.

That's my problem, that no one knows at the moment and they're already dragging the dead sister's name through the mud.  For all we know, they were passed out at a friend's until the driver woke up and remembered she had to be at work in 2 hours and was somehow able to get her sister into the car without her realizing the situation or able to realize her sister's driving condition.

 

All I'm saying is people shouldn't judge before knowing all the facts.  And I'm only referring to the dead sister, not the driver.

[mtangelsfan]

You allow them to drive to and from work and that is it.  No other driving is allowed.  Not to mention there are other modes of transportation.  There is carpooling and also living closer to work.

 

I will say this.  Drunk driving fatalities have been reduced by half since 1982.  That is a plus, but in 2010 over 10,000 people still died at the hands of impaired drivers.

[Lhalo]

It's too bad the oil unions took down the Pacific Electric cars. SoCal could have had one of the best public transportation systems in the world and DUI's probably wouldn't be so frequent. Still no excuses though.

[Adam]

Tattoo "I'm a Drunk Driver" on their foreheads

[Lhalo]

Sadly there would be so many people with their heads tattooed it would be commonplace.

[Blarg]

Or put in one year of community service at YKs landfill.

[mp170.6]

I get why you would want such punitive penalties but especially in SoCal, if you take away a license for such a long period, that probably means they won't have a job. Which just means they are more likely to get into crime because if they don't have a good support system, well people gotta eat. Isn't the average DUI around 10k already? You could always throw them in jail for longer but the prisons are overcrowded already. I'm not really sure what the solution is here,

 

I think I used $25,000 as an example of a fine -- payable in cash or community service hours. 

 

The idea isn't to make somebody homeless or fall into crime, but make them accountable.  That's OK if you don't have the cash, keep working at your job and then on your days off, be assigned to clean up trash, mow lawns, prune shrubs, remove graffiti, etc at government-owned properties for the equivalent of $10/hour for time worked.  That's 2500 hours of work to pay the $25,000 fine.  Yep, that will take years to complete but it's better than jail. 

 

The fact we don't already use a system like this in more places completely boggles my mind.  Why is the government employing unskilled labor for $30/hour in wages and benefits when non-violent criminals could do it for much less?

Edited February 11, 2014 by mp170.6

[yk9001]

I think I used $25,000 as an example of a fine -- payable in cash or community service hours. 

 

The idea isn't to make somebody homeless or fall into crime, but make them accountable.  That's OK if you don't have the cash, keep working at your job and then on your days off, be assigned to clean up trash, mow lawns, prune shrubs, remove graffiti, etc at government-owned properties for the equivalent of $10/hour for time worked.  That's 2500 hours of work to pay the $25,000 fine.  Yep, that will take years to complete but it's better than jail. 

 

The fact we don't already use a system like this in more places completely boggles my mind.  Why is the government employing unskilled labor for $30/hour in wages and benefits when non-violent criminals could do it for much less?

 

 

excellent points

[Caralho]

Probably because those non-violent criminals would do a crappy job and you have to account for security too. 

[yk9001]

Probably because those non-violent criminals would do a crappy job and you have to account for security too. 

 

You've done a pretty good job on this thread of rationalizing any way punishment for these people. 

[mp170.6]

Probably because those non-violent criminals would do a crappy job and you have to account for security too. 

 

Why would security necessarily be a problem?  We're talking about people convicted of DUI's. 

 

They could even use incentives to ensure a good job.  Let an impartial third party decide if the work is above par -- if so, make the hours worked worth $15 instead of $10/hour.  This isn't rocket science. 

[Caralho]

Why would security necessarily be a problem?  We're talking about people convicted of DUI's. 

 

They could even use incentives to ensure a good job.  Let an impartial third party decide if the work is above par -- if so, make the hours worked worth $15 instead of $10/hour.  This isn't rocket science. 

 

Because the end result of this is a bad incentive to arrest people (like asset forfeiture in drug cases) so they can do menial work and it would probably displace some of those city workers. Breathalyzers aren't exactly the most accurate indicators either. As for Culbreath, she can go to prison for a long, long time and I wouldn't care. But if we are talking about 25k for someone who gets a DUI and didn't cause an accident or otherwise drive recklessly, I think that's probably too punitive for me. 

[Blarg]

It seems the less punitive measures were not a deterrent for these family members.

[GoodTimesGoneBad]

If you haven't figured it out by now, the government doesn't really want to stop drunk driving. All those mandatory classes and fees are good for keeping the government in the black. That's why you see people with multiple DUIs continue to get their license back. If they really wanted to end drunk driving the first offense would be a lifetime loss of license.

[Blarg]

Loss of a drivers license didn't hinder Gallo from killing three people while driving drunk.

But three lifetime prison sentences seems to have solved his problem.

Edited February 12, 2014 by Eric Notti

[mancini79]

Taking someone's license won't prevent them from driving. Lifetime bans will drastically increase uninsured drivers, ill-equipped people getting back on the road without taking any classes, less people paying for registration (thus increasing registration for everyone else) and I'm sure other repercussions. People need to make money and will drive to work to make ends meet. The current system uses the driver's license as leverage for a person to take classes so they understand the evils of DUI. Jail time and $$ are the deterrents, not a banned DL license.

[mp170.6]

Because the end result of this is a bad incentive to arrest people (like asset forfeiture in drug cases) so they can do menial work and it would probably displace some of those city workers. Breathalyzers aren't exactly the most accurate indicators either. As for Culbreath, she can go to prison for a long, long time and I wouldn't care. But if we are talking about 25k for someone who gets a DUI and didn't cause an accident or otherwise drive recklessly, I think that's probably too punitive for me. 

 

Punishments for crimes shouldn't depend on how the innocent victim is affected.  A DUI is a DUI.  Just because you didn't kill somebody while driving drunk doesn't make you any less negligent.  That's the problem I have with our criminal justice system. 

 

Attempted Murder:  10 to life

2nd Degree Murder:  15 to life

1st Degree Murder:  25 to life or death

 

DUI, nobody injured:  <$1000 in fines, probation, little to no jail, rehab, license revoked 

DUI, injury (Felony):  up to 10 years in prison, with enhancements based on number of people injured and severity, up to another 6 years per person.  

 

See the glaring inconsistency there?