RID partners with LegiCrawler on DWI Bills

Remove Intoxicated Drivers has signed on with LegiCrawler to receive updates and current status on all DWI related bills on a real-time basis in Florida, Kentucky, New York and Tennessee. LegiCrawler, an on-line service provider of federal and state legislative bills will allow RID to monitor and participate in the process of passing laws which are consistent with our mission statement of making the roads and highways safer for everyone.

RID will have be sent an E-mail alert when any DWI-related bill is introduced in the mentioned four states. Whenever there is any action taken on these bills, RID will be notified as it happens. The entire text of the bill as well as the bill’s sponsors are provided to help RID and its members in those state to determine which bills should be given priority to help assist in its passing into law.

Within the first week of working with LegiCrawler, RID received 20 bills related to DWI issues in FL,KY, NY & TN, including their past history. The bills are graded with a heat index which indicates their progress moving forward or if they are stagnant.

One bill that is of particular interest to RID is Assembly Bill 04369 which lowers the BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) level from .08 to .06.  also lowers the aggravated DWI threshold from a BAC of .18 to .14. The bill’s sponsor is Assemblyman Felix Ortiz of Brooklyn. RID has been advocating the lowering the BAC level for a long time. The National Traffic Safety Board conducted a comprehensive study which concluded that 800 lives could be saved annually by lowering the current BAC status. RID plans to actively support the passage of Assemblyman Ortiz’s bill. We are pleased that we now have a mechanism in place that keeps us up to speed on the legislative process and allows RID to engage our members with their elected officials who are trying to do the right thing.

 

RID honors Joan Corboy with Citizen Activist Award

Long time RID activist, Joan Corboy was recognized by RID with an Award for her tireless work in the Washington DC area, running victim impact panels, information booths and referrals. Corboy is a victim of infantile paralysis and manages to travel using public transportation and a walker. She can’t walk by herself. Corboy started the first MADD chapter in DC many years ago and switched to RID to introduce the public to victim impact panels, which she leads every month in downtown Washington, DC.

Joan Corboy won the RID national humanitarian award in recognition of her many years of volunteering to educate the public regarding the perils of drunk driving. It has been an honor to work with Joan over the these years.

 

RID Supports NTSB’s View on .05 BAC

The recent announcement that the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) supports the lowering of the legal BAC level from .08 to .05 is a critical step toward reducing DUI fatalities and injuries and not a moment to soon. Europe and Australia have already lowered their legal levels to .05 or less resulting in diminished fatalities.

Back in 1982, Surgeon General Koop held a three day public conference in Washington DC seeking the best way to reduce the DWI deaths and injuries in the US. He published the results of the conference experts in a widely distributed report calling for the lowering of the legal BAC to .04. Dr. Koop also recommended unannounced regular safety traffic stops to instill the fear to the drunk driver that they might get caught. None of Dr. Koop’s suggestions  have been put into effect to this day.

Research shows that a driver begins to lose their peripheral vision at the .04 BAC level which accounts for many deaths and injuries of innocent pedestrians and bicyclists. RID supports the NTBS in launching a reduction of the legal BAC limit from .08 to .05, increasing unannounced checkpoints and in mandating license suspensions for drunken drivers.

 

Now your in trouble. What to expect if you get a DUI

 

This may come as a surprise to you if you’ve been frozen in a block of ice for the past century, but law enforcement tends to take a negative view on driving while intoxicated. But while operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol won’t get you pulled out of your car and beaten (probably), you’ll still be in for a world of trouble should the police catch your intoxicated butt. Here’s what you can expect if you decide to get hammered in your hummer.

 

First and foremost, lets get something straight: the legal drinking age in the United States is 21. It’s not 20 and 364 days. It’s not 16 “but my dad said I could have a swig of his beer.” Its 21. That means that if you’re younger than 21 and you’re found to have any detectable amount of alcohol in your system, then you are so screwed. You see, if you’re between 17 and 21, you may not be old enough to drink, but you are old enough to be tried as an adult. And if you’re under 17, don’t think that you’re off the hook. The rules may be different, but the outcome is the same: If you drink and drive, you’re going to pay for it.

 

If you’re older than 21, then congratulations! You are allowed to have a very small amount of alcohol in your system. To be specific, if a policeman pulls you over and finds that you have a blood alcohol content (BAC) of less than .08, then no DUI for you. Of course, if you were driving badly enough to get pulled over in the first place, then the officer will probably still cite you for reckless driving. I mean, come on. This isn’t a game; if you’re dangerous behind the wheel, it’s the cop’s job to keep you away from it.

 

If, on the other hand, you have more than the legal limit (and it doesn’t take much to reach that limit), clear your calendar for a while. They’ll cuff you, put you into the back of the cruiser, and drop you off in a holding cell. See, the beautiful part is that it doesn’t matter how lucid or sober you might appear, because under the per se laws, having more than the legal BAC is all it takes to be charged with DUI. And if you think that you can schmooze the judge into letting you off the hook, you are so wrong. You may be innocent until proven guilty, but the thing is, you were proven guilty the moment you failed your BAC test. That evidence is all that the judge needs.

 

So you get to appear in court (and pay all of the court expenses, we might add) even though there’s no way that you can get out of being convicted. After that, you’ll be slapped with a fine, lose your license, and possibly get to spend some time in prison (unless this is your second DUI, in which case the whole prison thing becomes a lot more certain). You’ll also get to pay higher insurance bills, because insurance providers will see you as a risky investment. But then, you’ll only have to worry about that if you can get your license back, and that isn’t easy either.

 

To have your license reissued, you’ll need to meet with a counselor who will determine whether or not you have an alcohol problem. If it is decided that you do, then they will make some recommendations such as having you attend Alcoholics Anonymous or even rehab. But don’t worry, any suggestions that the counselor makes are strictly voluntary. Of course, you’ll never get your license back if you don’t follow the recommendations, but the choice is still yours.

 

You’ll also have to attend DUI school and possibly take a <a href=“http://www.defensivedriving.com”>defensive driving course</a>

 

 

If it looks like you’ve got a serious problem, then the judge can even go so far as to order the installation of a special ignition interlock system in your car. These ingenious devices essentially require you to pass a breath-test before you can start your engine. Of course, they also mean that you need to put you mouth around part of your car every time you want to go somewhere, but whatever. Oh, and the judge might also put you on probation.

 

Naturally, individual states will have different specific laws. But whether you chose to endanger lives in Alabama or Wyoming, New York or California, the consequences of your actions are going to be expensive, time consuming, and justifiably harsh. So do everybody—including yourself—a favor and be responsible. Otherwise, you might find yourself wishing that you’d choked on the olive in your martini.

 

John Carver is a freelance writer for DefensiveDriving.com. He spends his free time working on his cars and coming up with new ways to pester his wife.

 

 

 

 

 

 

CA bill to extend alcohol sales is dangerous

The Bill, SB635 by California Sen. Mark Leno to extend serving alcohol until 4a.m. puts profits for bars ahead of potential lives lost due to DWIs. Sen. Leno claims his bill “imposes nothing on anybody; it merely authorizes the opportunity.” The Senator is unaware of all the alcohol related problems London, England experienced after that city raised its closing hours from midnight to 4a.m.

Here in New YorkState, in towns and cities that have a 4a.m. closing policy there are endless stories in the media involving alcohol-related crimes after the bars close. Those municipalities have decided
to continue this destructive policy despite the enormous costs to society. If this bill passes, good luck with getting it repealed. If Sen. Leno is serious about the safety of his constituents, he should include a provision which would evaluate the 4a.m. policy to analyze the cost and impact onSan Francisco.

One of the reasons New York City manages its 4a.m. bar closing policy is that it has the infrastructure to offer transportation all over the city. Another amendment to this bill should be an increase to the public transportation hours to handle people coming out of the
bars at that hour.

Sen. Leno’s bill has to address the larger implications and issues beyond creating jobs and profits for businesses. There is plenty of data to suggestion that extending the hours of alcohol sales results in an increase in assaults and DWIs. There need to be some safe guards included to reduce the negative consequences of SB635. Without them this is a dangerous proposition for all Californians.

 

NFL Commissioner drops the Ball on DWI

NFL commisioner Roger Goodell has earned respect around the league as a no-nonsense, law and order type guy. Upon his arrival to the position, he immediately established himself as the new sheriff  in town by taking action against Michael Vick for brutalizing dogs  and suspending Vick for a long time. He dished out harsh punishments for NFL players who violated the personal conduct clause in their contract.

However, apparently there is no penalty for NFL players who engaged in the crime of DWI. Even though, there is a clause that reads: “Conduct that imposes inherent danger to the safety and well being of another person.” as a violation of the policy. During the 2008 NFL season, Goodell permitted New York Giant Offensive Tackle Kareem McKenzie to play in a NFL game immediately following his arrest for DWI. There was no penalty at all for McKenzie. Goodell has a lot on his plate, however he needs to be educated about the enormous problem DWI is in this country and a large part of that problem is that the public still doesn’t treat DWI as a criminal matter, but more like a traffic ticket. Goodell’s lack of interest and action in this area prepeptuates the public’s apathy toward DWI.

There are NFL players  who have killed innocent people while committing the crime of DWI and they are currently playing football. Goodell’s brand of justice reflects thinking that an NFL player caught with a little bit of marijuana is a much more serious offense than a player who engages in drunk driving. A player with a second offense for marijuana is automatically dealt a four game suspension that could cost the player millions of dollars.

With the recent DWI arrest of the Detriot Lion’s Nick Fairley, Goodell has another opportunity to right the ship. I urge all those who care about the passive nature in which we as a society treat this plague, to contact Goodell’s office and ask him to explain his lenient attitude toward this criminal offense that is responsible for thousands of deaths every year. You can reach him at this number: (212) 450-2000