this law works?

Question

When an individual is intoxicated, and is operating a moving vehicle, the officer must assist the intoxicated individual to their home or place of stay. After assisting the intoxicated individual to their place of stay, the officer must give a precinct card, that shows the precinct number and the officers names, to the individual they assisted for a safe return. Notice of the assistance will be printed and shown to the public, with the names of the officer and individual (individuals) they assisted. Furthermore, it is optional for the individual/s they assisted to donate to the precinct of the officers that helped.If the donation is made it will be printed and shown to the public.

Furthermore,individuals who notice another who is incapable to operate a moving vehicle may call on the officers to assist in aiding an intoxicated individual back to their place of stay as well.And the individual who called the officers to assist will be given the option to donate to the officer's precinct.

tax could be lower.

This way the police will be more active with the people and form a bond as a community especially in towns cities it maybe different. Taxes and others will work their way around and lower.

This solves the problem for wreck less people whose problems out weight their common sense. I mean sometimes you too tend to lose your common sense. And "it doesn't matter how much you lose, you still lose." We are the same and we are not, the only difference is the perspective.

And it is important for the police to help because they need to know the community, otherwise they will seem separate from the whole community and enforce unnecessary violations and patrolling, when in actuality they can assist and solve problems besides taking responsibility. Maybe the individual has a problem, it maybe chronic, it maybe a bad time in his/her life. This is where the officer will use their experience in helping others to ease the individual to find his/her solution on their own, the officer will help guide the clouded individual. Thus the individual will return to their duties and help the community.
Furthermore, this will raise the level of the officer's critical analysis, awareness and observation skills.

In terms of funding, taxes can be lowered depending on the donations a precinct receives. If taxes remains the same the excess funds could be used for something else to help the community, from building parks to helping a school, the community choses, a vote.

Answer 1

No, the person who is stupid enough to not find himself a ride home and reckless enough to get behind the wheel of a vehicle that could kill an innocent person should be locked up.

First of all, we cant simply say "oh I'll drive home and maybe an officer will help me". that will be taking the responsibility away from the driver and putting it on the police, where it shouldnt be. it will also take up a ridiculous amount of man hours, which the police already dont have enough of.

Its a stupid, stupid idea that will make people think they arent responsible for themselves.


EDIT: The police's first priority is to protect the public. Second comes getting to know them. Those who are stupid enough to drink and drive do not deserve to be babied, they deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law. It is ones own responsibility to know your limits and not drive drunk, not the officers. Also, those who do it habitually will not be as afraid to do it, as they know they wont get in trouble, but just a ride home and someone to coddle them. It may have a chance in working in a town with a population of less than a thousand, but your major metropolitan areas? forget it. again, stupid idea.

Answer 2

I don't know where you live, but in my city and state officers arrest the drunk individual. Arrest and conviction is the only law I will support.
BB

Edit: Is this a real law or just a hypothetical one? It never works when you have officers helping criminals break the law and yes drunk driving is a criminal offence which must be enforced with jail time. If you drive drunk the you are a criminal.

People who get behind the wheel and drive are not some poor lost souls who need help but criminals who endanger themselves and the public. Drunk drivers kill people.

I hope this is just a hypothetical question because I would fear any city or state government that would allow a law like this.

I am an ex alcoholic and have not drank in over 15 years, but even in my darkest hour I never, never, never drove drunk except for 2 instances and those two I was in fear of getting stopped, but those two times I was forced to and both times most drunk drivers I know would not have considered themselves drunk.

The first time I had three beers and had a buzz going just barely and my boss called me and forced me to come in to work on my day off or get fired and he did not care that I had drank three beers, then several years later I had just sat down and drank two 16 ounce beers when my wife went into labor, but other than those two instances I never drove under the influence.

Contrary to popular belief being drunk does not make you choose to do things like drive. You still have the ability to know right from wrong . There is no excuse whatsoever for driving under the influence.

What I should have done was refused to work even if I did get fired and I should have called an ambulance for my wife. I never should have driven either time. But like I said most of my friends who drive and drink would have thought they were still sober if they had had just three beers or two 16 oz.

Answer 3

This is your perfect world. In the past the police did assist drunk drivers to get home, about 50 years ago.
Not so now, over the limit is just that and a penalty is due.
right so, do you want your loved ones killed?
Some drunk drivers are not taken off the road at the time of incident, wander on down the road into another township etc, and arrested again.
What gets me is they can buy their way out of a DUI.
And where are these officers coming from, that you seem to think are on every block, some areas are so stress for help, the calls are prioritized according to severity?

Answer 4

The police arrest helps the community more. People who operate any vehicle on the street while intoxicated need to be punished, not babysat. An arrest leads to court fines and punishment. The fault with your concept is there is no deterant to people driving under the influence. Sure, they get their name in the paper, but they usually do anyway when jail time or a fine greater than $500 is involved.

To be honest, most cab companies are doing what you envision; with the exception of publishing their client list. Not only do they keep the streets safer, they are making a profit while doing so.

Answer 5

Even if it will work, I dont like it.

First of all, the police becomes uniformed babysitters for intoxicated individuals who should know better than to drive a motor vehicle.

As a taxpayer, I will be paying for this service for dangerous drunk drivers? I would rather have the police call an auxillary organization for this , who will bill the offender a few hundred dollars (500 dollars minimum) to drive him home, along with his car (that will take a second driver), with a citation for a DUI. The guy will then perform community service in the next week, his car will be immobilized with a tirelocking mechanism.

Wouldnt that be better?

Answer 6

Driving while being under the influence of alcohol is a crime. Police officer shouldn't help this person home, he should be put behind bars(jail). Also, not to mention that the municipality is opening themselves up for frivolous lawsuits and opening the officers up for civil suits. This is an awful idea. Police officer can bound with the community in many other ways except for this one--unacceptable.

Answer 7

Where does this apply? In most states here, the police will assist you to the nearest jail. As for donations, the only option will be a hefty fine , and that will not be optional.

Answer 8

Huh? Is this an actual law or your desire of liberalistic ideals?