Isaacs man blows over twice

Choices:- 1. Leave your vehicle at the venue. 2. Catch a taxi. 3. Catch the midnight bus service 4. Have a designated driver planned at the beginning of the evening 4. Call Dial a driver to get both you and your vehicle home safely 5. Be caught by AFP, spend the night in Watch House, appear in Court, run the risk of loss of licence, employment, relationship, and end up with a hefty fine. There is no excuse. Be considerate to other users of the ACT roads, and be responsible. Could YOU live the rest of your life, knowing that you’re the cause of an innocent persons loss of life? Is it really worth it???

Yeah, but how many times is a drink driver released, only to go out and get someone killed several days, weeks or months later? The problem in releasing people several hours later is they get the distinct impression, often psychologically and unconsciously, that drink driving is a slap-on-the-wrist transgression. For all the ad talk of drink driving being “bloody stupid”, we sure as hell treat it as the adult equivalent of making out with your high school sweetheart behind the gym against school rules. One or two hour detention and then you’re off on your merry way (with an inconsequential good behaviour bond issued five months later).

You seem to be confusing being detained by police, with punishment by the court. Being arrested is not meant to be the punishment for the offence; there are a number of criteria for arresting someone – punishment is not one of those criteria.

When a drink driver fronts up to court in a nice suit, a fistful of character references, a bit of a sob story and previously clean record, the Magistrates are sucked right in. There are people who blow over twice the limit and are given non-conviction orders, which -in my opinion- is a disgrace.

Don’t even get me started on the soft sentences for repeat offenders.

incredulousandridiculous said :

Tooks said :

bundah said :

Tooks said :

bundah said :

p1 said :

What a complete retard.

What’s even more retarded is that they don’t detain them until they’re under the limit!

Well that would be illegal of course, but even if they were allowed to, do you really want police tied up babysitting idiots until they blow 0.00?

Well he was taken to the Watch House after they arrested him the second time so why not do that after the initial arrest to absolutely ensure that there is no opportunity of further stupidity.Besides could you imagine a scenario where upon releasing the idiot who is still well over the limit and he runs into an innocent person killing them in the process? Imagine the public outcry.

Because they couldn’t arrest him the first time as they had no grounds. When you blow over on the roadside, you are detained for the purpose of breath analysis (arrested in effect, but not really). Once the test is complete, the person is generally free to go unless there are grounds for arrest (confused?).

He was arrested on the second occasion for repetition of the offence. Also, most people who are done for PCA, aren’t drunk per se, so their release isn’t an issue. Given no drink driver – to my knowledge anyway – has ever died immediately after being released from custody, it’s probably not something to lose sleep over.

Yeah, but how many times is a drink driver released, only to go out and get someone killed several days, weeks or months later? The problem in releasing people several hours later is they get the distinct impression, often psychologically and unconsciously, that drink driving is a slap-on-the-wrist transgression. For all the ad talk of drink driving being “bloody stupid”, we sure as hell treat it as the adult equivalent of making out with your high school sweetheart behind the gym against school rules. One or two hour detention and then you’re off on your merry way (with an inconsequential good behaviour bond issued five months later).

Exactly and when one sees them walking out of the courthouse with a grin from ear to ear after they’ve been given yet another slap on the wrist for the umpteenth time then you know the judiciary is not just an absolute joke but imo culpable.

Tooks said :

bundah said :

Tooks said :

bundah said :

p1 said :

What a complete retard.

What’s even more retarded is that they don’t detain them until they’re under the limit!

Well that would be illegal of course, but even if they were allowed to, do you really want police tied up babysitting idiots until they blow 0.00?

Well he was taken to the Watch House after they arrested him the second time so why not do that after the initial arrest to absolutely ensure that there is no opportunity of further stupidity.Besides could you imagine a scenario where upon releasing the idiot who is still well over the limit and he runs into an innocent person killing them in the process? Imagine the public outcry.

Because they couldn’t arrest him the first time as they had no grounds. When you blow over on the roadside, you are detained for the purpose of breath analysis (arrested in effect, but not really). Once the test is complete, the person is generally free to go unless there are grounds for arrest (confused?).

He was arrested on the second occasion for repetition of the offence. Also, most people who are done for PCA, aren’t drunk per se, so their release isn’t an issue. Given no drink driver – to my knowledge anyway – has ever died immediately after being released from custody, it’s probably not something to lose sleep over.

Yeah, but how many times is a drink driver released, only to go out and get someone killed several days, weeks or months later? The problem in releasing people several hours later is they get the distinct impression, often psychologically and unconsciously, that drink driving is a slap-on-the-wrist transgression. For all the ad talk of drink driving being “bloody stupid”, we sure as hell treat it as the adult equivalent of making out with your high school sweetheart behind the gym against school rules. One or two hour detention and then you’re off on your merry way (with an inconsequential good behaviour bond issued five months later).

Tooks said :

bundah said :

Tooks said :

bundah said :

p1 said :

What a complete retard.

What’s even more retarded is that they don’t detain them until they’re under the limit!

Well that would be illegal of course, but even if they were allowed to, do you really want police tied up babysitting idiots until they blow 0.00?

Well he was taken to the Watch House after they arrested him the second time so why not do that after the initial arrest to absolutely ensure that there is no opportunity of further stupidity.Besides could you imagine a scenario where upon releasing the idiot who is still well over the limit and he runs into an innocent person killing them in the process? Imagine the public outcry.

Because they couldn’t arrest him the first time as they had no grounds. When you blow over on the roadside, you are detained for the purpose of breath analysis (arrested in effect, but not really). Once the test is complete, the person is generally free to go unless there are grounds for arrest (confused?).

He was arrested on the second occasion for repetition of the offence. Also, most people who are done for PCA, aren’t drunk per se, so their release isn’t an issue. Given no drink driver – to my knowledge anyway – has ever died immediately after being released from custody, it’s probably not something to lose sleep over.

Drunks dying shortly after release from custody is not unknown in other jurisdictions mainly in NT and Qld from memory, sometimes hit by cars while walking long distance home from the police station. Whether they were drink drivers or not I cant recall.

IP

bundah said :

Tooks said :

bundah said :

p1 said :

What a complete retard.

What’s even more retarded is that they don’t detain them until they’re under the limit!

Well that would be illegal of course, but even if they were allowed to, do you really want police tied up babysitting idiots until they blow 0.00?

Well he was taken to the Watch House after they arrested him the second time so why not do that after the initial arrest to absolutely ensure that there is no opportunity of further stupidity.Besides could you imagine a scenario where upon releasing the idiot who is still well over the limit and he runs into an innocent person killing them in the process? Imagine the public outcry.

Because they couldn’t arrest him the first time as they had no grounds. When you blow over on the roadside, you are detained for the purpose of breath analysis (arrested in effect, but not really). Once the test is complete, the person is generally free to go unless there are grounds for arrest (confused?).

He was arrested on the second occasion for repetition of the offence. Also, most people who are done for PCA, aren’t drunk per se, so their release isn’t an issue. Given no drink driver – to my knowledge anyway – has ever died immediately after being released from custody, it’s probably not something to lose sleep over.

Tooks said :

bundah said :

p1 said :

What a complete retard.

What’s even more retarded is that they don’t detain them until they’re under the limit!

Well that would be illegal of course, but even if they were allowed to, do you really want police tied up babysitting idiots until they blow 0.00?

Well he was taken to the Watch House after they arrested him the second time so why not do that after the initial arrest to absolutely ensure that there is no opportunity of further stupidity.Besides could you imagine a scenario where upon releasing the idiot who is still well over the limit and he runs into an innocent person killing them in the process? Imagine the public outcry.

bundah said :

p1 said :

What a complete retard.

What’s even more retarded is that they don’t detain them until they’re under the limit!

Well that would be illegal of course, but even if they were allowed to, do you really want police tied up babysitting idiots until they blow 0.00?

incredulousandridiculous said :

Jailing or public shaming then. I think if we had billboards with the photograph of serious drink-driving offenders saying “I could have killed someone; I didn’t care. I decided to drink and drive.”, we’d eliminate half the problem overnight.

Unfortunately no. The sad truth is, the vast majority of people in the population who are motivated by social norms/shame/intrinsic moral motivations (variously described in the literature) are also the ones who tend to obey the law.
The repeat offenders are not motivated by the risk of killing people. This is because in their internal cost/benefit analysis, the risk is of getting caught by roadside breath testing- not of killing someone. they tend to view it as a regulatory infraction, with the fine being merely the price of the illegal act which on average they are willing to pay (i.e. given they will get caught only a fraction of the time).
Of course the problem is compounded by the inherent reduction in rationality caused by intoxication during the decision-making process of whether to commit the crime.

One solution would be an attempt to appeal to the more rational self (i.e commitment mechanisms – getting people to leave the car at home when they’re sober and thinking properly). I also think that viable public transport options could help – for some people the prospect of saving $50 or more in cab fares is too tempting for their nearsighted selves (sad I know).

What’s more i’ve been told by a lawyer that it’s well know in legal circles that any number of professionals ie. politicians,doctors,lawyers and even some magistrates and judges have been known to get behind the wheel after having had quite a few bevies.

Hardly surprisng therefore that drink driving isn’t taken that seriously particularly when one looks at the sentences that have been handed out