Article: Ban drunk drivers for life: IFP

[Crowley]

People make mistakes, but if you repeat those mistakes you should be punished more harshly.

Driving after drinking is not a mistake. Take their licences away I say.

 

[2026]

Driving after drinking is not a mistake. Take their licences away I say.

Well, depends on how drunk you are... if you are smashed - then sure. But a little over the limit because you lost some weight over December (lol...)?

 

[Drunkard #1]

I am going to disagree with your example, someone that caused an accident rarely does so because of an act on his/her behalf that they control: An animal/pedestrian walks in front of them, they are momentarily distracted by something at the worst possible moment, a tire bursts, any number of reasons why someone might cause an accident.

There are a few things that can cause an accident that you can argue is the persons fault:

• speeding
• using cellphones other electronic devices in such away that they do not pay attention to the road
• driving a car that is not roadworthy
• driving after taking heavy medicine or drugs
• driving while intoxicated

In my opinion repeat offenders of the last category should all have their drivers licenses banned for life! (and with speeding I mean extreme speeding, not driving 20 or 30 over the limit, but **** like over 120 in a heavily populated area, etc)

There is simply NO EXCUSE to drive while drunk. The problem is defining "drunk". Most people feel they can "handle a few drinks", but where do you draw the line? At the point where you kill an entire family because you lost control of your car?

So what about our rights to not have to worry about drunken drivers killing our friends and families? I agree a lifetime ban is a bit harsh, I would propose a two stage system: First time will land you a one year ban, second time a lifetime ban. If caught DUI while under said ban, 1 year in prison.

No, with most accidents, someone is to blame. Whether it's due to negligent poor maintenance (burst tire) or irresponsible driving (drunk driving), most accidents are preventable, so the law must apply equally to all. Whether you hit someone due to being on a phone or being drunk, you should suffer the same punishment. Both are a concious decision, both are equally dangerous, and both have been proven to cause accidents and loss of life. So if you want drunk drivers to be banned after 2 offences, then that penalty should also apply to cell phone users.

Which just shows how disproportionate the penalty is. If everyone I see using a cell phone on the road was banned, well, lets just say that traffic wouldn't be a problem any more. Also, the economy would disintegrate and the country would grind to a halt. Taking anyone's license away has serious repercussions and thankfully sanity prevails most of the time. Except in threads like this, where tearful idiots make unworkable demands on the basis of emotion and revenge rather than fact and logic.

 

[Cloudster]

No, with most accidents, someone is to blame. Whether it's due to negligent poor maintenance (burst tire) or irresponsible driving (drunk driving), most accidents are preventable, so the law must apply equally to all. Whether you hit someone due to being on a phone or being drunk, you should suffer the same punishment. Both are a concious decision, both are equally dangerous, and both have been proven to cause accidents and loss of life. So if you want drunk drivers to be banned after 2 offences, then that penalty should also apply to cell phone users.

Sounds fair to me, if this is implemented I can guarantee you that both offenses will go down significantly.

Which just shows how disproportionate the penalty is. If everyone I see using a cell phone on the road was banned, well, lets just say that traffic wouldn't be a problem any more. Also, the economy would disintegrate and the country would grind to a halt. Taking anyone's license away has serious repercussions and thankfully sanity prevails most of the time. Except in threads like this, where tearful idiots make unworkable demands on the basis of emotion and revenge rather than fact and logic.

Judging from your nickname.... nevermind, let's not go there.

Dude, you don't get the point do you? Perhaps we should personalise this a bit. If a very close member of your family were to be killed by a drunk driver, would you still feel the same way?

If the public is aware of the fact that you will have your license revoked if you are caught driving while you are drunk, I can guarantee you that most would stop altogether. Heck last year I drove while drunk at least twice, you think I'd do it if I ran at the risk of having my license taken away?

It is just a fact, people change their behaviour once the penalty becomes more severe.

 

[Arthur]

Sidebar comment not worth commenting on:

I find it dismaying how quickly and cavalierly people call for banning and lifetime punishments for technical infringements. Laws! Laws! Laws! Ban! Ban! Ban!
Of course justice demands that the consequences for perpetrators should be proportional to the actual harm suffered by a victim, dependants, and society, making suitable allowance for intention and negligence.

There are other ways of addressing the problem. For instance, a spot of radical thinking will quickly show there is no per se requirement for laws on drunk driving or even speed limits -- provided everyone is fully and fairly held accountable for their delicts and crimes.

 

[marine1]

Then move to a police state. I suggest Aus.

Here in the civilised world, we weigh up the negative effects of emotionally-justified-but-idiotic ideas against the net cost of implementing them. We have a constitution that guarantees everyone's rights, and keeps a check on stupid laws.

civilised world??? Are you joking? You think SA is part of the civilised world? wahahahahah

 

[Nick333]

Sounds fair to me, if this is implemented I can guarantee you that both offenses will go down significantly.



Judging from your nickname.... nevermind, let's not go there.

Dude, you don't get the point do you? Perhaps we should personalise this a bit. If a very close member of your family were to be killed by a drunk driver, would you still feel the same way?

If the public is aware of the fact that you will have your license revoked if you are caught driving while you are drunk, I can guarantee you that most would stop altogether. Heck last year I drove while drunk at least twice, you think I'd do it if I ran at the risk of having my license taken away?

It is just a fact, people change their behaviour once the penalty becomes more severe.

Right, because there are no murders in countries that have the death penalty.

 

[marine1]

Right, because there are no murders in countries that have the death penalty.

Typical comment, look at places like Texas, Saudi, etc etc just to name a few, crime rate and murder rate is the lowest. Argue all you want, it works
I am waiting for all the pro abolish death penalty links........

 

[Nick333]

Typical comment, look at places like Texas, Saudi, etc etc just to name a few, crime rate and murder rate is the lowest. Argue all you want, it works
I am waiting for all the pro abolish death penalty links........

The murder rate in Texas is about average in the context of the US national rate. Crime has been in decline across the US for decades. Clearly the national decline is not related to the death penalty in Texas.

 

[marine1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

 

[Nick333]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

Should we read the whole article and guess what point you're trying to make with it.

 

[noxibox]

I say ZERO tolerance to all crimes

Reminds me of a little guy with a short moustache.

 

[noxibox]

It is just a fact, people change their behaviour once the penalty becomes more severe.

And yet you can buy illegal drugs in China.

 

[lucifir]

I dont see the correlation with drunk driving and the death toll on the roads ... surely not every accident was the cause of drunk driving?? would be nice to have solid figures about the number of accidents related to drunk driving, before trying to pass laws that would have no effect on the death toll

 

[supersunbird]

I dont see the correlation with drunk driving and the death toll on the roads ... surely not every accident was the cause of drunk driving?? would be nice to have solid figures about the number of accidents related to drunk driving, before trying to pass laws that would have no effect on the death toll

http://www.sadd.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=72&Itemid=30

Road Traffic Management Corporations @TrafficRTMC Tweets July 2012

On weekends 65% fatal crashes attributed 2 alcohol abuse by drivers & pedestrians

http://www.arrivealive.co.za/pages.aspx?i=1259

Drunk Driving and Road Safety

Drunk Driving is one of the biggest threats to Road Safety in South Africa. Research indicates that 50% of people who die on the roads have a blood alcohol concentration above 0.05 gram per 100 millilitres.

EDIT: Happy?

 

[Sherbang]

Typical comment, look at places like Texas, Saudi, etc etc just to name a few, crime rate and murder rate is the lowest. Argue all you want, it works
I am waiting for all the pro abolish death penalty links........

Here you go then...
http://fullfact.org/blog/death_penalty_homicide_rates-2905

This means that there is some correlation between imposing the death penalty and having higher homicide rates, but this correlation is in fact weak to bordering on insignificance.

So it seems that those using global homicide rates to support either side of the death penalty debate need to justify why their findings are statistically significant. Our calculations suggest there isn't enough proof that capital punishment is or isn't an effective deterrent to murder.

 

[Kornhub]

Quick question You get drunk driving and DUI in South Africa right? Like driving drunk is more serious charge than dui ?

 

[lucifir]

http://www.sadd.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=72&Itemid=30




http://www.arrivealive.co.za/pages.aspx?i=1259



EDIT: Happy?

not really ... would like proper reports/studies to back it up ... not tweets and 1 liners ...
dont get me wrong here, I do not think any1 should be driving drunk .... but I believe more accidents are caused by reckless and bad driving than those caused under the influence of alcohol .... and it seems they using alcohol as the quick fix to score brownie points, but will really have no or a very negligible effect on the actual death toll ...

would rather have them do proper policing ... as this year I think I saw the least amount of road blocks,speed traps and traffic cops on the road than I have seen in the past few years ... I believe that is the more likely cause of the increase in road deaths than alcohol .... but this is all hearsay and a proper study would really be good

 

[supersunbird]

not really ... would like proper reports/studies to back it up ... not tweets and 1 liners ...
dont get me wrong here, I do not think any1 should be driving drunk .... but I believe more accidents are caused by reckless and bad driving than those caused under the influence of alcohol .... and it seems they using alcohol as the quick fix to score brownie points, but will really have no or a very negligible effect on the actual death toll ...

would rather have them do proper policing ... as this year I think I saw the least amount of road blocks,speed traps and traffic cops on the road than I have seen in the past few years ... I believe that is the more likely cause of the increase in road deaths than alcohol .... but this is all hearsay and a proper study would really be good

Hard to find SA stats or studies published online.

Here is something more solid stats wise:

http://www.health24.com/Man/Safety_Security/748-765,25658.asp

And I assume if one contacts the Medical Research Council one might be able to get the stats in a proper fashion.

And "40% of drivers who die on the road have alcohol levels in excess of .08gms/100ml" is pretty damning. If one can take care of that and sort out the pedestrains then you will probably lower the death toll on SA roads by 50% quick quick.

 

[daveza]

Just make it a charge of murder when a death is caused by drunk driving.

As in the case of Humphries and Jub Jub - dolus eventualis says if you are aware of the danger and choose to ignore it then murder is the correct charge, not culpable homicide or manslaughter.