28 July 2011

Ninth time lucky for DUI?

28 July 2011 | By johnboy

A 37-year-old Wamboin (NSW) man is expected to be summonsed to face the ACT Magistrates Court after being caught drink driving for the ninth time.

Around 11.50pm last Saturday (July 23), the man was caught speeding in his Holden Caprice at 98km/h along Hindmarsh Drive, an 80km/h zone. The man undertook a roadside breath test, which returned a positive result.

The man was taken to Woden Police Station, where he returned an Alcohol Content (AC) reading of 0.136. As a disqualified driver, he is subject to a zero blood alcohol level.

Last week (July 17-24), ACT Policing caught a total of 32 drink-drivers, 11 of whom were repeat offenders. Eight of the drivers were holders of restricted licences, which carry a zero blood alcohol requirement.

Sergeant Jeff Knight, Officer in Charge of Traffic Operations said it was disappointing to see that people are continuing to drink and drive, putting other road user’s lives at risk.

“We know that alcohol impairs one’s ability to drive safely, and for so many drivers to continue drink driving despite being previously caught is appalling,” Sergeant Knight said.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

Join the conversation

All Comments

All Comments
Website Comments
Facebook Comments

LatestOldest

Hosinator11:15 pm 28 Jul 11

dungfungus said :

Summary roadside execution would solve a lot of problems for serial drunk drivers and the public would benefit. Other drunks may start to get the message then.

+1000.

I’d vote for you dungfungus.

farnarkler9:16 pm 28 Jul 11

Don’t you just love a free spirit. Here’s a bloke who’s said to himself I have no respect for the law and no fear of the courts as I’m going to get nothing more than a fine and told not to drive………….yet again.

Being in front of a magistrate on a DUI charge 19 years ago sure scared the sh*t out of me. Why does it not scare these repeat offenders???

dungfungus8:40 pm 28 Jul 11

Summary roadside execution would solve a lot of problems for serial drunk drivers and the public would benefit. Other drunks may start to get the message then.

dpm5:46 pm 28 Jul 11

..”. As a disqualified driver, he is subject to a zero blood alcohol level…”

But doesn’t being a disqualified driver mean he shouldn’t even be driving in the first place? Strange that there is then a zero limit specified for the illegal act? Are there also laws mandating reduced speed limits for disqualified drivers? (You’re disqualified from driving, but if you DO drive you can’t exceed 40kph!) 😉

Let’s face it, this release shows the drink driving message just isn’t getting thru. A third of those caught were repeat offenders?!?!? Yikes!

Classified4:55 pm 28 Jul 11

p1 said :

I am against mandatory sentencing, because I feel it takes away from the “case by case” attention and “judgement” I think magistrates should be able to apply.

I am close to changing my mind in respect to repeat drink drivers.

I’m a supporter of mandatory sentencing, provided some sensible control are put in place (e.g. crime type, number of occasions, period of time, etc), and this seems like a good example of where it could be used.

p14:50 pm 28 Jul 11

I am against mandatory sentencing, because I feel it takes away from the “case by case” attention and “judgement” I think magistrates should be able to apply.

I am close to changing my mind in respect to repeat drink drivers.

Erg04:38 pm 28 Jul 11

As a disqualified driver, he is subject to a zero blood alcohol level.

Mind = blown.

basketcase4:10 pm 28 Jul 11

Nine times is amazingly stupid. In my taxi driving days, one Qbn passenger had been done twice and was promised Goulburn for a third offense. Even in his paralytic state he knew what that meant.

Maybe a bit of time in the Canberra luxury hotel for wayward souls will let him dry out( or is grog provided there as well)