I'd be very interested to see if any of the pro-sledgehammer crowd have a rational opinion on some of the legal minutiae entailed by the bulldozer we are currently parading around in the disguise of fair, strategic, effective DUI laws.
It's a simplistic knee jerk reaction to callously forward the idea that 'drinking and driving is bad' so any extreme, reactive measure must be 'good'.
Let's focus on second offense laws
: "A second DUI in Wisconsin with a blood alcohol level under .08 is considered a misdemeanor.
Four or more OWI/DUI offenses with a BAC of .02 or more is considered a felony in Wisconsin. The state will seize your car after a fourth offense."Administrative Penalties
- A second DUI/OWI conviction in Wisconsin will cause a 12 to 18 month license revocation.
A person convicted of a second DUI/OWE may face:
- Fines ranging from $350.00 to $1,100, plus court costs. There is also a surge fine of $355.00. Penalty guidelines vary by county.
- Minimum five days to maximum six months jail time
- Mandatory attendance of an alcohol treatment program
- Installation of an ignition interlock device (IID) for 12 to 18 months
I realize that if your only tool is a sledgehammer you tend to see every problem as as a cinder block, but I'm asking the sledgehammer gang to use their sledgehammer brains. Clear your mind of the stereotypical image of the extremely inebriated 0.283% BAC problem alcoholic swerving all over the road, drooling barely able to stay awake "drunk driver".
Picture a person who barely drinks at all, maybe once or twice every three months. A person who is not legally drunk - a person with a 0.01% BAC. However this person had one solitary DUI maybe ten, twenty-five, thirty years ago. Therefore when a police officer in the sticks of small town, no-other-revenue-in-the-county
Wisconsin just happens to pull this person over for the only ticket they've had the chance to administer in three days, having every financial incentive to demand the frivolous breathalyzer test, the cop must arrest
this person right then and there.
Thenceforward this otherwise productive member of society:
is in JAIL, loses their license for a year, pays a combined $1,500 fine, has to pay $300 for an alcohol assessment, pay for and take time out of their lives and their work to go to an alcohol 'treatment' program. Also, they could end up in jail for SIX MONTHS during this time, pay the state to install a breathalyzer machine into their own car (technology known to be faulty), AND be on PROBATION.
Show me that your rationale is more than just an authority fetish: do what you want with the drunken boozer with the 0.283% BAC. But is this what you call a just sentence to the individual with a zero point zero one, legal blood alcahol level?