How do you feel about DUI laws? Is it OK to be convicted for statistical risk if you have done no harm?

Question

I keep getting moralizing responses, or ones that do not address the issue at all, and many tries to get the answered have been deleted.

This is a societal question.

If you have committed no moving violation, do you feel society has probable cause to search your breath and body fluids for drugs and alcohol?

It is common for DUI's to be issued on the strength of mechanical violations, like tail lights, and I think this is an unreasonable intrusion.

How loose are we going to allow probablt cause to get? What affect on our lives will it have?

Answer 1

I completly agree with you. While it is breaking the law to drink and drive, I don't think they should be able to do what they do, like you said if you have a tail light out. Weaving and swerving is one thing, but a head light out, then you get pulled over, they look at you and want you to take a sobriety test. No way. That is not right.

I think this plays more than DUI's though. Lets say someone has tint and rims on their car. Many times cops assume they have drugs. They pull them over for some bs reason and search their car. Even if they do have drugs, that is unacceptable.

Bottom line. I don't like cops. They have too much power. I don't respect them either. I have been done dirty by them. Respect is earned not given. They chose their profession, not me. They are doing me no duty what so ever. However, with that being said. I stay on the safe side. I don't drink and drive, carry drugs etc. In the end the good ole boy system will win and you will lose. As long as they got that badge, they got us I guess. At least I know I make a lot more than them!!!!

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

If you are stopped for a mechanical defect (i.e. tail light), there's no probable cause problem with the stop, because it is an observed defect.

If during the course of that stop you then give the officer probable cause to suspect you have been drinking (smell of alcohol, slurred speech, pupil movement, etc.), then that is a seperate and individually sustainable probable cause for the DUI charge.

And yes, I think it's morally and ethicaly acceptable given (1) the deliberate nature of the act (both the choice to drink and the choice to drive, (2) that it is done in public, (3) on the street (noting that government shave heightened police powers when it comes to avenues of transportation and commerce) and (4) given the real connection between auto related accidents and fatalities and drinking.

And note - in many jurisdictions, you can get a "reasonable suspicion" stop (aka a Terry top) for something less than probable cause. (e.g. coming out of a bar at 2 am and getting directly into your car...there is a reasonable suspicion you may be over the limit, even if your actions have not yet mounted to "probable cause".)

Answer 4

Some might; however. you are under no obligation to tell a prospective employer about a past discretion. I have known several very good men that had the misfortune to get caught driving under the influence. If you are hired and do a good job and then get exposed as not being entirely candid on your application, they would have to resolve your dilemma then instead of before you are hired. If every person that drank over the limit were caught and convicted the courts would be bogged down to the frame. I once knew a man that had his "release from prison paper" framed and hung it beside his diploma on his office wall; however, I wouldn't suggest you go this far. Good luck! Addition 080908: Since background checks cost money, all companies don't do them. If you are an alcoholic you should quit, join AA and be able to prove it. If you continue to "over indulge" you will get caught again. If you manage to get a job and show up for work drunk or hungover your job could be in jeopardy. Don't stop off at a bar after work to unwind. Good Luck again.

Answer 5

Say you've drank 1 beer and you BAL is high enough. Say you get into a wreck w/ another car (wreck that's NOT your fault) and someone is killed. That's manslaughter. I think that is wrong if it's not your fault.
I recieved a DUI because my ex-bf (thank god) beat the crap out of me and I left. I was running for my life! And what did he get? NOTHING. He got to drive 75 miles home and was about as drunk as I was! I'm still pissed.
Anyways, if someone pulls you over for ANYTHING THAT THEY WOULD NORMALLY PULL YOU OVER FOR and you appear drunk or have alcohol on your breath, then YES they should test you.
However, if you don't appear/smell intoxicated then they shouldn't pry. Sometimes cops seem like they're just out to get someone! Cops in my town are trying to get their name built up and do illegal stuff like pull people over for no reason to look for drugs/alcohol.
To get a DUI for a no moving violation is ridiculous. A PI (Public Intoxication) is more realistic.

Answer 6

in missouri you lose your lisence for refusing a breathalyzer. When in fact if your legally drunk than it is unconstitutional to make you provide evidence against yourself,also your .08 may differ from someone who drinks everyday's .08

Answer 7

No one is pulled over for mechanical violations unless the violations themselves are an immediate danger. If you were pulled over for a tail light, I promise your driving was erratic. That is what got you pulled over. The tail light is just easier to prove.

Answer 8

I was an ER nurse for 15 years. My family was also seriously injured by an 18 year old drunk driver. There is no reason to drive drunk. You are a 7,000 pound loaded gun. So what if you get pulled over for a taillight, you still are driving drunk and deserve to be prosecuted. I have seen to many people killed by drunk drivers. I have a 22 year old who has been involved in several drunk driving accidents, I have no pity for her and let her work out her own legal troubles. Don't drink and drive but designate a driver. How would you feel if you killed someone.

Answer 9

If you are driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, I don't want you on the same road I am on. The law is for those who are too dumb to realize they should not drive while impaired or they don't care. If you want to do your drugs or alcohol, then get a designated sober driving to drive you.

Answer 10

well, I agree with mr. happy..

ok, just because you have gotten drunk and drove 50 times in the past, how do you know that on the 51st time, you will be decieved by your judgement and kill a family on the highway..

I am not against drinking, and I am not against driving..
I am against drinking and driving..