Use bail to hold DUI defendants accountable

Mothers Against Drunk Driving was founded in 1980 in response to one woman's loss of her daughter to a drunken driver.

[Lee the Slush]

Would this rule include twice convicted DUI offender Senator Lee "The Slush" Constantine?
Here's a man who could have killed more than once - not only out of jail - but being lauded by this rag of a paper for being a leader.
He should be in jail not in public office.

[hmmmm]

This article lacks common sense and logic. All it says is that people accused of DUI should be required to go through a bonds bail agency. The Slantinel should at least inevstigate the authors ties to bail bonds agancy/lobbist before letting itself to be manipulted so easily, lol.

[gil]

I haven't looked, is there any bail bonding companies advertising in the slantinel? If the law is changed the number of advertisers should increase. Aw well!, business is business.

[mike2315]

All i have to say is stop worrying so much about drunk driving and focus on violent crime which seems to be running wild. 17,000 fatalities related to alcohol? Even if this figure is not skewed in some way which they are usually....that's a very very small percentage of the driving population. How many murders were there last year? How many rapes, armed robberies, home invasions...etc. This DUI thing is out of control. Its a huge money maker for our local governments and this is probably why so much attention is paid to it. Is it tragic that these 17,000 died? Of course, but we dont need new DUI policies, there are other things we should focus on more.

[just saying]

We already jail too many people. We have 1% of our population in prison. Most are not violent criminals offenders (drug possesion, DUI, petty crimes) who end up in "Crime College" and learn how to become real criminals when they get out. We need to keep the violent people in jail (murderers, rapists, etc) and fine the heck out of non violent offenders.

[slipnot]

The reality is your locking up a drunk who probably doesn't have enough money to post bail. They need the room for really bad folks not people who's riding lawn mower went off of private property in front of a cop while sipping a beer on a hot day and the cop has a quota for DUI's to appease MADD mothers for that day. Now I'm against taxes to lock up drunks or cutting lose a rapist. I think MADD mothers should be taxed at higher rate than everybody else. Didn't your president get arrested for DUI?

[just saying]

Sorry for that assualt on the English language

[Glasnos]

Ramiro Gallegos was in trouble long before his pickup struck Mr.
Gardner's car. His record includes five driving while impaired charges
in five years, including one previous head-on collision. Despite that,
he was still on the road, thanks to glaring failures in communication,
record-keeping and enforcement among police, courts and immigration
officials. An innocent family paid a horrible price for the state's
neglect.

If we can't enforce our laws any better than this for someone who is here ILLEGALLY, what chance do we have?
His first DUI should have been severe. Give him 10 year prison sentence, suspended, and deport him. If he returns, he will go straight to jail for 10 years.... Let hm drink and drive in Mexico.

[Horrified]

Innocent until proven guilty? Why would anyone be willing to sacrifice their constitutional rights to save tax money? The idea is preposterous and the article short-sighted.-Attorney and mother of 4.

[DAMM]

Oh please. So we should mandate monetary-based releases for persons arrested for suspicion of DUI, tying up bed-space in already overcrowded conditions.
Pray tell- why do you think these suspected offenders are being released without monetary agreements. Perhaps the judicial process is trying to make more room for serious offendors.. let me think... armed robbery, kidnapping, homicide.
Perhaps we should post a no-bond requirement on jaywalking, littering, and oh.... watering your lawn on no watering-days!
Please continue with your Draconian 'unbiased' reporting... I kinda get a kick out of it!

[Yourpapersplease]

MADD's goal is Prohibition, plain and simple. They lie, twist and inflate stats,anything they need to do to get them there,as they hide behind "drunk driving".Visit www.RIDL.us and learn the TRUTH. Better wake up America,before MADD shreds our Constitution to bits.

[Money for freedom]

It is apparent that the writer of this editorial is a proponent of a person's economic status determining their freedom prior to being convicted. Are we as American's comfortable with a private entity like Bail Bondsman determining who is free pending adjudication? When a monetary bail is set then it is a persons ability to pay that is the detrmining factor. Over 50% of those incarcerated in Florida being those awaiting trial with a monetary bond is apalling! should freedom be based on money. Kentucky says no and Bail Bondsman are illegal in that State. Pretrial Service Agencies protect the rights of Americans from remaining in jail just because they are unable to pay. Bail Bondsman as "for profit businessmen" care nothing about that issue.

[skeppie]

<blockquote>mike2315 #4
...17,000 fatalities related to alcohol? Even if this figure is not skewed in some way which they are usually...</blockquote>

The numbers are skewed. Note that it's alcohol related, not alcohol caused. The NHTSA derives this figure by including any passenger or pedestrian who has any detectable (not just above 0.08) amount of alcohol. So, if a driver is completely sober, and a passenger has had any alcohol at all, it's counted. Even if another sober driver causes the accident. You're the designated driver for your drinking friend and another sober driver hits you? A drunk person walks in front of your car and you hit them? Yep, "alcohol related."
Good sources for more information about how the NHTSA derives these figures:

www.ridl.us
www.duiblog.com

[DanR57]

Here's another one of MADD's favorite devices to try to deceive the public into believing the "Drunk Driving problem" is actually as severe as they say, which is is not by any means: The first misrepresentation of the stats:

"According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, an estimated 17,602 people died in alcohol-related traffic crashes in 2006 -- an average of one every 30 minutes."

Another favorite misrepresentation:

"About one-third of all drivers arrested or convicted of DUI are repeat offenders. In Florida, 29 percent of all traffic fatalities in 2006 involved a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher."

Neither one of these sytatements means A DAMN THING.
MADD & NHTSA deliberately use loose, non-specific terms like
"alcohol related" and
"involved a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher."

Neither one of hese statements truly SAY anything, But MADD and their ilk will portray ALL of these as "caused by a dsrunk driver".
If a passenger is over .01 BAC, it becomes "alcohol related".
If he's over .07 the acident "INVOLVES a blood-alcohol concentration of .08 or higher.
If a pedestrian is over .01(even if he stepped in front of a moving car), it becomes "alcohol related"
If another (or the same)pedestrian is over .07 it becomes "INVOLVED a blood-alcohol concentration of .08 or higher"
If a drug-addled bum steps in front of a moving car, it is lumped in with "alcohol related"--Yep, drug incidents are lumped in with "alcohol related".
Each one of these, if they become a fatality will be counted as an "alcohol related fatality";but, when MADD or NHTSA ticks of these phony, inflated statistics, they will make statements like these are "victims" of drunk drivers.
They'll also cite each fatality as a "drunk driving accident, eventhough a pedestrian or a passenger could NOT have been driving.
Another is to represent every fatality as a separate "drunk driving accident". An accident involving 2,3,or 4 fatalities magically become 2,3,or 4 "drunk driving accidents" as if each was a separate event, and each fatality was a "drunk driver".

[DanR57]

To provide this service and this misrepresentation of the purported "facts", MADD gets a tax-free status, even though no
501(c)3 "non-profit" is allowed to lobby legislators--as a condition of their tax exempt status. And we give millions of taxpayer dollars to NHTSA, many of which they promptly turn over to MADD. If any private, for-profit corporation (which MADD is, but will not admit,and so is not constrained by such limitations as other private corporations)perpetrated fraud on as grand a scale as MADD, and NHTSA's directors, they would promptly be locked up tighter than a drum.