Culture of drinking and driving a fatal flaw in N.D.
July 9, 2012 at 2:50 pm in Grand Forks Herald
BISMARCK Days after a West Fargo family was killed in an alcohol-related crash, officials debated Monday how to address North Dakota’s growing problem of drunken driving with some blaming society’s lax attitudes and others pushing for tougher state laws.
Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said last week one of his biggest concerns is the increasing number of arrests for driving under the influence in North Dakota. There were 6,600 DUI arrests reported last year, the highest in a decade and 22.6 percent of all arrests in the state.
Continue Reading
So if you’re serious about this, unlike ND judges have been forever. First DUI, $5000 fine and 1 year suspended license. Second offense, $50,000 fine and 5 years in prison. Enough of the psychological tests, $100 and time served.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
63 
9
Completely agree. As I have said many times this state enables behavior that is completely unacceptable. Do you realize we were one of the last states to adopt a no tolerance domestic violence policy? When I first moved to ND the woman (or man) had to press charges. In every other state the state did it for you, regardless of whether you wanted them to or not.
I took care of a gay man who was beat to crap & sodomized against his will by his boyfriend & the cops took a short form report (means nothing will be done, they are just justifying their time on the call) & refused to investigate. No pictures, no rape kit, nothing.
ND really is 1956. I am glad the authorities are finally waking up
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
45 
18
We agree on everything but the year. But you know that already.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
2
Drunk driving or suicide??? Easy way to get a suicide not called a suicide, drink some alcohol then head on some poor innocent. These accidents need to be investigated very carefully.
Hot debate. What do you think?
21 
10
You lost me Glen. I agree many accidents in ND are probably suicide: lost control on a flat stretch of road & hit the only tree in 50 miles, but what are you trying to say? Is DUI more acceptable than suicide?
Like or Dislike:
19 
7
With the stigma attached to mental illness.. I would say yes.
Like or Dislike:
17 
4
Not at all I am saying that drinking and having an intentional “accident” to kill yourself is different from getting drunk and having a unintentional accident. The statistics on the two should be kept separate when possible because the cause is different. One the alcohol impairment in the deciding factor the other the intent to suicide is.
Like or Dislike:
9 
7
As several of us have commented before, binge drinking and alcoholism is an accepted way of life in this region. Thus DUIs get a slap on the wrist. It’s what got a South Dakota bigwig off with murder, after a previous list of arrests. My bet is the acceptance of it outweighs the consequences, and this poor family will simply be one in a line of victims of those who should have been locked up long before.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
2
Completely agree
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
6
I despise terms like negligent homicide or vehicular homicide or involuntary manslaughter. If you drink, drive, & kill someone it is murder. Plain & simple.
If you voluntarily get in a car with a drunk driver, that is suicide.
Choices have consequences.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
13
I agree. Thing is, people DUI think they have control, and it is their right to drive in that condition. So much so, they drive even though their license was suspended afetr the, what?, fourth time? This latest tragedy will generate discussion for a while, then fade into the mist of time. Even here, change is anathema.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
1
I have lived this! My brother was killed by negligence and the offender had priors. Negligent Homicide is 1-5 and he got 1 yr. Up for parole in 6 months.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19 
3
I am sorry for your loss. Your scenario is exactly what we are talking about.
Way back when (1981) I was a freshly minted EMT. One of my first big, bad, nasty, remember till the day you die calls was very similar to the one we are commenting on. A young family (Mom, Dad, and 2 kids under 5) were killed by a drunk driver going the wrong way down the highway. He was drunk, obnoxious, and trying to fight the cops. This was way before tazers so the popo dealt with it in a very old fashioned way.
It may be completely unprofessional, but I cannot say I felt sorry for him.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
2
Curious part about this discussion is the fact that our society is riddled with laws and regulations…and yet somehow, someway, these tragedies keep occuring. Laws don’t change behavior, they just allow society to react when something occurs. Make a super strict law like “first offense, automatic jail time” and see how long it is before someone starts crying about how the person convicted “just made a mistake”. How many have gotten off lightly with their first offense because they sob storied some judge? Problem is if they do it once, they’re prone to doing it again, drunk drivers that is. And the more they do it, the more likely they’ll hurt someone in the process. How about..first offense, confiscation of vehicle, year in jail, and call it a felony? That way, at least society is safer for a year after the conviction…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
6
I agree with confiscating the vehicle. Hunters face this scenario. They can get their vehicle and their guns taken away from them for breaking the law.
Like or Dislike:
14 
4
When I was stationed in Germany I learned about some of the toughest laws that I had ever heard of in relation to DUI.
1) You are drunk at .051 or higher
2) Depending on if there is an accident involved or not depends on how severe they treat you.. fines vary to close to something like a months pay and a 6 month suspension to complete revocation of the license.
3) A blood test is mandatory.. They take you to the police station to test you.
4) If found drunk you loose your license and your car is sold.
Secondly, In Germany you cannot even get your drivers license until you at 18 years old and you literally pay through the nose for the privileged to drive. That is where I think we deviate.. Most Americans think that driving is a right, they view it as a privilege.
I am not saying that this would be the best way to address the situation. But when you have people like that one guy in Minnesota several months back who had received something like his 30th DUI and didn’t have a license..
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30 
2
As for Germany, you are exactly right. Nor do kids have much access to cars. In ND, driving is viewed as a right. And you can have a chronic DUI, with a suspended license, who had to surrender his plates, still end up in a car. My recipe above about a second DUI sending you automatically to prison, takes into account the fact that it will usually occur while the person is awaiting trial for the first. The ONLY way to get these people off the road is long-term incarceration. Something judges refuse to do.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
2
I thought MN had that law after they discoverd some guy had something like 35 violations related to drinking and driving or driving without a liscense.
There’s a four lane highway that runs from Jackson, MS to Gulfport, MS that has (well at least had…I haven’t been there a few years) kind of a cement high rise with an extremely banged up car sitting on top of it. There’s a big sign on both sides so everyone can read it. It says, “Sometimes it takes a family of four…To stop a drunk driver.”
I think we could use a few real hard messages like that all over the country. Maybe it will make some think and make arrangements before going out to party, but in particular it will most likely make people think about reporting people leaving parties and bars too drunk and insisting on driving….
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
2
“To make another law, a more stringent law, is not going to make any difference until we change the mood of the public,” said Lyson, who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee
I hope people were wearing hip waders when he dropped that load of crap…..If people know that the days of getting by are over and they’ll not only get substancial fines, but could do time if they drive under suspension or get a second DUI….They will take notice, but they have to be scared enough not to chance it anymore. Granted some will forget they’re scared once they’ve got liquid courage, but I think the majority will become planners for their future drinking…….Should be great for the taxi business…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
2
Maybe but do not forget most of North Dakota does NOT have taxis.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
20 
1
Actually, I think you’ve hit on part of the problem. Unless you live in a large city, you really don’t have any options for getting home. I realize that that’s is not an excuse, I’m just saying that people who get drunk in small towns do not have a transportation option that is realistic and available. People are going to get drunk. How society reacts to that determines if they will endanger the rest of us. Perhaps we need to have local efforts to get people to call a “ride home hotline” if they get hammered. It would have to be a local sort of grass roots effort with a no questions or hassles policy.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
2
Their option for getting home safely is to buy off sale and take it home to drink. The no taxi theory is just an excuse.
Like or Dislike:
19 
6
Even when people do that, drinking impedes judgement so that midnight ride to a buddy’s house sound like a good idea.
Like or Dislike:
8 
1
I agree….I know first hand how alcohol affects a person’s mind. My sister is an alocholic. She won’t drive though. At least she is smart enough to know better.
Like or Dislike:
9 
0
I would argue that a large part of the problem is how we view addiction. We classify it as a disease rather than a behavior problem. I think that is a fatal flaw.
We live in a disease happy society. If you are ill people feel sorry for you. They cut you some slack. They remove part of responsibility for your own actions.
Remember: an explanation of why someone does what they do is not always an excuse for that behavior
In the interest of full disclosure every single major medical organization disagrees with me. I am on my own on this one professionally speaking.
I do not view choices as a disease. They are simply choices. An addict stops behaving like and addict when they CHOOSE too. They make a choice to quit.
12 step programs have one simple goal: put the plug in the jug. If an addict (alcohol, bath salts, Oxycontin, meth, cocaine…. name your poison) stops using, and they have not destroyed a critical mass of brain cells, their lives will improve. If they do nothing else they will stop acting psychotic and be able to carry of with life. If they do nothing other than stop. No AA,no therapy, no drugs. Nothing.
All of those other interventions are designed to help keep the plug in the jug. That is what makes them better. The rest is just window dressing.
The catch is the user has to decide to stop. No external force can make them do that. It has to come from them.
It is not a disease if you hold the cure in your hand.
Again, 99% of medicine disagrees with me, so take it for what it is worth.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
6
You could say the same thing for other diseases like diabetes. Some people with that disease could be bascially cured if they just lost weight and didn’t eat themselves into a stupor every day. Same thing with certain types of heart disease. Stop eating salt, fat, etc. So your analogy that if you hold the cure in your own hands, it isn’t a disease doesn’t hold up. I do think you are underestimating the power of addiction that will cause a person to literally, in the case of alcohol, drink themselves to death. Addiction to ingested substances has a biological basis, not a psychological one. Studies with rats have shown that they will drink themsevles to death if they have a genetic variant that alters their body chemistry. It’s all about how certain substances are metabolized by some people so that they cause dopamine receptors to go wild. This becomes irresistible thereby creating the addiction. If recovery from addictions were as simple as coming to the realization that bad stuff was going to happen to a person, there wouldn’t be nearly as many addicted people around. Addiction is complex and requires that society respond with appropriate treatment options because left to their own devices, addicts of all stripe can not usually pull themselves out of their situations by themselves.
Like or Dislike:
19 
5
Realist: your claim that addiction is biologically based is only partially correct. There are genetic predispositions, that is very clear. What makes these predispositions different from other disease states is they must be acted upon.
A person with a predisposition to addiction will never become an addict if they do not use. The choice to start … and stop … Lies with the patient.
What makes alcohol different from diabetes & heart disease is both of those are much more biologically mediated. Your average overweight Type II diabetic can influence their disease if they drop 50-100 pounds. A Type I juvenile onset diabetic cannot. They will be a diabetic for life.
The same with heart disease. If you quit smoking, keep you’re cholesterol in check, & exercise, you will increase your chance of survival. If you are Jim Fix (The Joy of Running) you will die because your genetic makeup is against you.
Again, labeling something as a disease takes away part of the blame. It enables people to live in denial. It allows lawyers to create reasonable doubt. It does nothing to help the person take control of their life
Like or Dislike:
11 
9
You’re right about the idea that you have to use a substance to get addicted. But usually that happens during the course of what for others would be normal behavior. The addiction part of this is what makes it almost impossible to just stop the behavior without intervention.
Like or Dislike:
6 
6
You argue addiction is complex & society must offer appropriate treatment options. You also downplay the role of education.
I am interested in what treatment options you are referring to? We have no pill. Our only options are drying them out – without replacing one addiction for another – then therapy to try & keep them dry long enough to teach them new habits.
We fail over 90% of the time.
If you had cancer & were looking at death in the face (addiction is very lethal); how would you feel if the MD told you the only treatment we have fails 9/10?
The medical model is completely inadequate for this condition.
Like or Dislike:
8 
4
I don’t think I downplayed education; don’t think I mentioned it actually, but your numbers (90% failure rate) for treatment of addiction is a little on the high side. If treatment is adequate, meaning long enough, the rate is around 65% depending on what addiction we’re talking about. Is that good? No, but it’s better than dying from a preventable condition. Very few people achieve long-term recovery after being jailed. Prisons are dope factories, if you haven’t been lately. Society has been remiss in treating addiction. The Affordable Care Act will help to get more people the help they need because they remove the lifetime cap on addiction treament. If this were easy, it would be solved by now, but it’s a very difficult problem with no easy answers.
Like or Dislike:
7 
6
I admire your willingness to try. I freely admit that my biggest problem is I have been dealing with this problem for so long that I am jaded (to put it politely).
I am for whatever works. Most alcoholics go through rehab at least twice, and often times many more times before they make the necessary changes. Even then there is no guarantees.
When I worked detox you were there for 30 days. The cost was astronomical and the relapse rate mirrored the national numbers (we were no better or no worse than anyone else).
I admit the 90% failure rate is an old number (10-15 years ago) but it was accurate. That was the five year clean/sober rate. Very few people actually reached it.
The cost and the lack of concrete success is what allowed most insurance companies to drop any form of inpatient detox — or restrict it to a 3-5 day dry out visit which is next to useless.
That is for alcohol which is fairly treatable. When you get to cocaine and meth, the success rate is darn near zero.
Since you obviously work in the field you know why. Alcohol and opiates change your software. Cocaine, and meth and other stimulants literally change your hardware. They alter the pathways in your brain permanently, making successful rehab almost a pipe dream.
Some meth heads recover but the vast, vast majority (75% or more) will die of either their addiction or the lifestyle associated with it (violent death or AIDS, etc).
I am very non politically correct about this because in a very real sense I am the social safety net. Being in emergency services these are the guys I take care of over and over and over again until they die. Or I take care of them after they are shot in a drug deal gone bad.
I agree that locking them up is next to useless as far as breaking the addiction, but we as a society have very few options. We simply do not have a therapy that works.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1
You’re partially right, but your oversimplification of 12 step programs makes it appear that you don’t really have a very clear understanding about the two related to these problems AA, and NA. Although the goal is what is referred to as “Recovery” that is far more complex than just “Putting the cork in the bottle.” It basically is about first admitting there’s a problem, then surrendering and turning your problem over to a power grater than yourself (Which most use their version of a diety, but whatever one chooses is up to them), then taking inventory of your life and sharing it openly with another, then making amends, then working on ways to build a new life from that cleansing and new found knowledge. All the while growing to trust others who have encouraged and supported yuou along the way.
It’s a far cry from putting the “Cork in the bottle.” I know what I speak, because I’ve beeen clean since 2/24/80, but that was after about three years of trying to clean up on my own and a couple more of on again and off again through AA. After a couple years there I discovered NA and helped get it to western ND.
My point is that even though in later years I’ve come to wonder about the disease concept I do understand that compulsive bahavior can take over all your free will. Once a person is under the grip of compulsive behavior it is extremely difficult to just stop by will power alone. Without help and support from others (And it’s still a daunting task) it’s near impossible to quit on your own. Yes there’s the ocassional person who white knuckles it because there’s an overwhelming reason to stop that they can force the will power, but that is a rare individual indeed.
Often those who do eventually find themselves many years later picking up where they left off because years have gone by and family grew up, the career is either where they wanted it to be or they’re retired, and then they get the idea that after all that time they could handle a beer or maybe a joint…….I’ve been clean and sober for 32 years now and I have no illusions…..There’s no such thing as having a beer or a joint for me….That five year span of trying to quit mostly on my own proved that I can never have a controlled usage like some can….There’s an old saying ….I’m sure I have another drunk in me, but I’m not too sure I have another sobering up in me…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
1
Congratulations on your success. I do not mean to sound derogatory to AA, it is the best we have at the moment, but I am a far cry from naive. I used to work detox. I still have a copy of the Big Book even though I have never drank (I respect my bad gene pool).
When I say it is about keeping the plug in the jug, in order to get passed step 1-3 you have to be clean & sober.
I am not talking relapse, but you have to be clean before your brain starts working again. 4-12 try to keep you clean & then get you out of between your own ears so you can help others.
To me, moving the focus from self to others is where the real progress is made. When addicts do that, they are much more likely to enjoy long term success.
Again I congratulate you. I also reaffirm that I am a heretic in the medical community on this issue.
I honestly believe that part of the reason medicine has failed so miserably in this area is because it is not a medical problem.
There is mounting evidence that certain forms of antisocial behavior – pedophilia, sociopaths, etc. – are more genetically based than previously thought.
Does this make them medical conditions? Of course not. They are behavioral disorders that respond to incarceration much better than hospitalization (sociopaths thrive in jail. Structured environment with immediate consequences.).
Like or Dislike:
11 
1
I did leave out a huge part that doese go along with getting otu to others, and that’s amking the amends for your actions that effected others. What’s so important with that is first you have to humble yourself to attone for your wrongs, and then when you’re done you have a clean slate that you really don’t want to get marks on ever again. I try hardnot to do anything that wrongs someone else, and if I should somehow by over sight do so I fix it as soon as possible. That alone makes you live better with others…
Like or Dislike:
8 
1
“Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said last week one of his biggest concerns is the increasing number of arrests for driving under the influence in North Dakota. There were 6,600 DUI arrests reported last year, the highest in a decade and 22.6 percent of all arrests in the state.”
From the sounds of the article and from Stenehjem’s statement, it would seem that things are getting worse. Arrests for DUI are up, so there must be more drinking. Could it be that increased enforcement, rather than increased drinking and driving, is the reason?
Many years ago I bartended while in college. I do not ever remember a group of guys drinking together and one of them drinking only soda because he was a designated driver. After college I worked for a private security company for a time and was often on the streets afte bar closing time. There were countless erratic drivers every night. Both situations have changed dramatically for the better.
Almost always when I observe a few people drinking together, one of them is the designated driver…and the very few times I am on the street late at night, I seldom see the type of driving I saw years ago.
Twice I have been stopped in Grand Forks myself while driving late at night. After being asked several questions by the officers (to determine whether I had been drinking…I hadn’t had a drop.), I was let go with verbal warnings to wash my license plates so the registration tabs could show. (Any of you ever committed the offense of driving with a dirty license plate?)
Progress is being made in reducing drunk driving. Here is a link that shows the dramatic improvement.
http://report.nih.gov/nihfactsheets/ViewFactSheet.aspx?csid=24
I realize, though, that no statistics are comforting to someone who has lost a loved one to a drunk driver.
Like or Dislike:
14 
0
I am curious as to the breakdown of how many of these dui arrests are from out-of-state people? While I dont expect it to be much, out-of-state people contribute to the arrest numbers.
I read, somewhere above, lack of options to get home in small communities. I dont think the state should change the laws until help give these people options. I grew up in small town ND, you really dont have options if you had too much to drink. What kind of program/funding could we set up to help taxi these people home? I think after we have come up with a program or better way to get home, then the laws can be changed. I think a person needs to be responsible when drinking, but sometimes it happens where you have had too much. There will be no 100% deterent of drinking and driving.
Like or Dislike:
2 
11
They live in a small town, they can walk home. If they live in the country, they need to either find a place in town to stay or not drink until they’re drunk. It’s not that hard.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
20 
2
I agree with Hugo…It all boils down to personal responsibility regardless where they live. If we waited until there were systems in place for all small communities…You might as well say nothing will be done about it….The majority of the state is small communities
Like or Dislike:
14 
1
In the oil patch your number argument may be true. Everywhere else not so much. It is not like we are Daytona Beach on Spring break
Like or Dislike:
12 
1
I don’t think that anyone should get a pass or consideration here. Oil patch, small town or downtown Fargo.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Drunk driving has been an accepted practice in North Dakota for as long as I can remember. If you get caught, you hire a lawyer and your fingers get slapped. Until North Dakota passes stricter laws nothing will change, it’s too easy to be let go or get off in this state. I like the example given of Germany, you get caught you lose your vehicle. That right there would wake a bunch of people up.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
0
Why wasn’t this multiple offender taken off of the road and/or put in jail? What is the key to the authorities making this happen? More new laws that are not enforced? VA recently passsed a law that after the first DUI that your car will have an ignition device keyed to a breath analysis system and if it registers a certain range, it will not allow the car to start! Easy to get around if you use another car, make the punishment for doing so appropriate. Who is liable if you let a guy like this drive your car? Interesting thought!
Like or Dislike:
14 
0
A few years ago there was a guy who I think was from MN who had around 25 incidents between MN, SD, and ND relating either to DUI or driving under suspension. I think the outrage from that one made MN pass tougher laws so people couldn’t just keep going through the system like that, and I think that person finally did some years in prison. Hopefully the pressure will be strong enough to get ND and SD to follow suit.
Like or Dislike:
11 
1
Because alcoholism and DUIs are as acceptable in ND as lutefisk, lefse, and UND hockey. It’s da vay vee do tings here. And if you don’t like it you can leave, and don’t let da door hit your a$$ on da vay out. Sound familiar?
Like or Dislike:
14 
1
Ufda! Reminds me of a photo I saw with two guys holding signs at the same protest that said, “Guns cause crime” and the other “Spoons made me fat”.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19 
0
I believe the Police across the state take their job serious enough seeing as they arecatching these people by the truckload every day.
The problem lies withing the courts.
Pay a lawyer enough money and you suffer the minimal consequenses.
Lawyers should not be allowed to plea down DUI’s.
its simple, either youre guilty or youre not.
At this point it is up to the courts to send a message that grabs the attention of other would be drunk drivers.
Too many people suffering at the hands of these lunatics.
Used to be you paid extra attention after 9pm on Friday and Saturday, now you can get whacked by a drunk at 1pm on a Wednesday.
Heck, you cant even take your car to a Ford dealership for an oil change without a drunk trying to run over everyone inside the dealership anymore.
Until the courts hit these people hard, they wont learn.
sitting through classes dont stop people either, only loss of money and freedom will get their attention.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17 
0
Did they determine that 90 some year old guy was drunk? I thought he had some medical condition?
Your right it’s the courts, but they need thougher laws enacted for them to hand down tougher judgements……And I agree about no plea bargining at all after the first, but I would go for what I think they’re already doing with reduced time for either in or out addiction treatment and those victim clases (I don’t know if they have them here yet….Where people with DUI’s have to listen to family members tell their stories of loss from losing a family member due to a drunk driver)…I think that’s ok the first time as long as there’s no harm to anyone in an accident…Then all bets off…
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
the vehicle he was driving was a late 90′s blazer.
The guy himself was stone cold drunk and aged 42 years old.
You would think he would know better by that age.
Everyday i am more surprised than the day before at what people do.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
Wow…Did I read that wron yesterday….I just re-read it and I see they do have DUI charges….The way I skimmed through it yesterday I thought it was a guy in his 90′s who later was taken to the hospital so I was thinking it was something medical……Guess I need to read a little slower sometimes….Thanks for pointing it out
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
You get caught poaching wildlife, you lose your guns, your vehicle and your right to possess a license for years. You get caught driving drunk, you go to court, pay a fine, a temporary license allowing you to drive to work and 6 months later get your regular license back. In North Dakota, it’s less of a crime to drive drunk than it is to shoot one too many ducks or catch one too many fish.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
0
“Until the culture changes the way drinking and driving is viewed”….what is wrong with this statement? How about, until our culture changes its views about drinking nothing will change! It’s not just about drinking and driving. Our culture says “hey, as long as you have a designated driver it’s great to go out and get toasted beyond all recognition, this is fun in America and they way it should be. Look at the commercials on TV. They all say drink responsively, but the bottom line is they want people to drink. They are selling the product on TV and in news print for alcohol of all kinds. The people making the money from alcohol don’t want you to stop. Advertising of this type used to be illegal but I think the makers of the alcohol got to the pockets of our politicians, just like the drug companies keep us from having affordable prescription drugs. Advertising should not be allowed for any of these products as people will find the alcohol on their own, and the doctors should be the ones that know what drug is best for you….you should not have to ask your doctor if it’s right for you!
People that drink in excess lose their ability to make rational decisions about whether they should get behind the wheel and so many other important decisions in life. People are losing their lives to alcohol everyday but nobody seems to notice that, only when someone else is killed by a car does it come to the public’s attention. Just like saying “it’s not the gun that kills, it’s people”; I say, it’s not the driving after drinking (car) that is the problem, it is the drinking. And drinking is not going to go anywhere as long as the public service announcements are competing with the for-profit beer, wine an spirits industry. Get the advertising out of our children’s faces and things might start to change back to what it used to be. Growing up watching TV in our culture makes addicts out of many people. It’s the thousand points of light that are killing people, not just drunk drivers…it’s corporate America that tells us that it’s fine to drink as long as someone else drives. As a matter of fact…you should drink as it is cool. Heard that before? I don’t see cigarette commercials on TV anymore: Hint.
Like or Dislike:
8 
1
I agree- it’s completely “the tail wagging the dog”. Have some $5,000 minimum fines, mandatory jail sentences, and confiscation of vehicles. THAT is how you change “the culture”.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1
Just wanted to point out that this is very much and ADULT problem. Glad to see there is little to no references to our youth in the above comments…. which is usually the case when drinking (or drinking and driving) are discussed. The kids just watch their parents or other adults doing the D&D thing all the time.
BTW: I spent some time in “rural Germany” where there were few if any taxis. If it was going to be a heavy drinking party…. people would stay over and come home later the next day. That was expected in their culture, so the party holders planned for it. Drunk people can sleep on couches/floors/etc.
Like or Dislike:
14 
0
Spent quite a few nights on the floor with my arms as a pillow.. Loved them rural fests.. They have one for just about everything.. Strawberries, Flowers, October, the Wind Blowing..
I miss Germany.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
Many of our legislators will not support more serious punishment for DUI’s. You can predict sure as the sun is shining today that folks like Jim Kasper and the Great Al Carlson will parrot a line such as “increased penalties further infringe on our liberties and freedoms”. “So, I am not in support of any changes to the law.”
Like or Dislike:
11 
0
Its probably because they are some of the worst abusers.
Like or Dislike:
9 
2
As if another example was needed: “Juan Acosta, of Newburg, is charged with manslaughter and drunken driving in the deaths early Sunday of 5-year-old Alaries Ruiz and his 9-year-old brother, Cyris Ruiz. Northeast District Court Judge Michael Sturdevant set bond for Acosta at $250,000 Tuesday.”
Manslaughter. That is a legal admission by the state that the deaths were largely unintentional. As we discussed above, murder (non premeditated so no life without parole) is a more appropriate charge.
Last week I was fuming because the state saw fit to charge some kid with murder because his friend hit him up for drugs and later overdosed and died. The dealer did not commit murder; the dead kid committed suicide.
By the state’s twisted logic, the liquor store clerk or bartender who served our drunk driver in this case should be charged with murder.
Me thinks the state needs to take a step back and rethink their priorities.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
15 
0
Don’t get me started on the criminal justice system. The guy who murdered Dru is still playing it, after being convicted and sentenced how many years ago?
Like or Dislike:
12 
1
Yes, that guy is still insisting that he was at a movie theater watching a movie that hadn’t played there for 3 years.
Like or Dislike:
10 
0
and the attorney has milked that cash cow for every penny the state would give him.
They ought to put them both in the gas chamber and rid ND of two scumbags.
Like or Dislike:
8 
2
I’m not positive about ND, but I think bars can be charged for continuing to serve someone who is obviously drunk….The catch is that it’s completely subjective so it’s pretty tough to prove without other evidence to back it up…Like a breathalyzer shortly after leaving a bar.I see your point, but it still comes down to the drunks own responsibility.
It really is too bad that the guy who ran over those kids in the tent is being charged with manslaughter if it means that he could get a relitively light sentence like the poster above mentioned about the person who killed his brother. I know they have to look at all the evidence, but this is one of those areas that need a fixed standard of at least three years served. I know that doesn’t sound like much for a life, but the other side of the coin is that a lot of these are not career criminals. If they do too long of time then society will have another problem with another ex con who has a criminal mentallity once back in society.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Here’s a link to a site that compares the dram shop laws of the various states:
http://www.cozen.com/admin/files/publications/Dram_Shop.pdf
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
In 25 years of driving i have seen a car coming right at me on the wrong side of the Interstate 4 times.
All 4 times have been in the past 5 years and all right here around Grand Forks.
No guarantee the person was drunk but dang, you would darn near have to be wouldnt you?
Sad thing is that each time the person just kept cruising on don th highway, no brakes, no turning around etc…
This area is just flat out scary sometimes.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Fine, just to stop the wife from laughing as if i’m trying to feel young… the actual number is 31, not 25.
I was rounding it off
Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Are you sure it wasn’t you going the wrong way those 5 times, Capt.?
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
About 6 years ago, an older lady was driving south in the northbound lane on N. Columbia. I have seen it twice on Highway 2 in the past 15 years. It’s a scary thing.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
That’s like the old lady watching TV when they break in with shots for a chopper showing a car going the wrong way down the freeway….She called her old man on the freeway to warn him, and when he answered he said “That’s nothing……All these damn fools seem to be going the wrong way on the freeway today….”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Tougher laws for repeat offenders should have a positive impact. When the state cracked down on juvenile drivers by taking away their driver’s license at 6 points, there was a noticeable improvement in the driving habits of young people in our town. A few young people lost their licenses and had to go through the process of obtaining a license again. Word gets around fast. Seeing young people driving too fast, running stop signs, squealing tires, etc. used to be common. It is extremenly rare now.
I think something similar for a repeat DUI might work, too. I do not believe a first-time offender, who was not the cause of an accident, nor committed some other serious driving violation, should have to pay a fine higher than it currently is. The other costs related to a conviction may end up being $10,000 or more as it is. The fatalities are almost always committed by repeat offenders. That sometimes leads people to think that the majority of people convicted of a DUI will repeat. That is not true.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Here is an interesting article relating to repeat offenders:
http://lubbockonline.com/stories/021410/loc_562848512.shtml
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I’m all for tougher laws as well, but tougher laws will accomplish nothing until scumbag defense attorneys are addressed too.
A few years ago, a family member received a DUI. The lengths the attorney went to to prove it “wasn’t their fault” was nothing short of astonishing.
The results of the attorney’s efforts were twofold:
First, the person got off with a slap on the wrist…..no lesson learned.
Secondly, (and AT LEAST as damaging as having the person NOT learn their lesson BECAUSE they received a slap on the wrist), was how their attitude shifted after a few meetings with the scumbag attorney.
The person that was charged with the DUI originally consulted the attorney out of fear. They were worried about the financial implications, their job situation if they couldn’t drive for a while, etc.
After only a few sessions with the attorney, they did a complete 180. Suddenly, it was all about the officer having “no right” to pull them over in the first place. It was about the alleged inaccuracies of testing procedures and the violation of THEIR rights for even having to submit TO those testing procedures.
This person went from thinking that, “Well, I have driven impaired more than once. I suppose it’s not unexpected that I would be caught eventually and had to suffer the consequences….”
to:
“What right do they have to pull me over? What gives them the authority to test me?”
This person drove drunk, and they knew it. They were caught red-handed, and they knew it. Thanks to an attorney though, none of it was their fault. Being “put through” what they were “put through” during the whole traffic stop/arrest/night in jail process made them the real “victim”.
All courtesy of scumbag “representation”.
Like or Dislike:
9 
4
I fully understand what you’ve written, Scott, but the police should not be able to randomly stop people just to see whether they have been drinking. My wife and I had returned from a trip several years ago and were stopped for no reason other than the time of day we were on the street. Our flight landed around 3:00 AM. We took our daughter to her apartment and were on Gateway Drive on our way home. There were no other vehicles on the street. We were pulled over by a GFKs police officer. “Do you know why I stopped you?”…. “I have no idea. I was driving 38 in a 40. I KNOW I did not run a red light.” He then asked where I had come from, where I was going, etc. Once he determined that I had not been drinking, he told me to make sure to wash my license plate because it was muddy and the registration tab could not be seen. An almost identical situation happened to me on I-29 only it was a NDHP. I was driving an old van with a dirty license plate. Neither time had I had a drop to drink. Both times I had not driven in a manner that was dangerous. Both times I was warned about having a dirty license plate. I am not opposed in the least to officers stopping all vehicles at some location to determine whether the drivers have been drinking, but I don’t like people being stopped simply because the officer is having a boring shift and he sees a “suspicious” vehicle due to its appearance or due to the perceived probability that the driver had been drinking because it was that time of night. That behavior by law enforcement simply creates disrespect for them. It does not make our streets and highways safer. It is unfortunate that guilty drivers are let go because of technicalities, but those “technicalities” are necessary unless we want to live in a police state. Drivers who are driving safely should not be stopped because they MIGHT be drinking and therefore MIGHT have the potential to drive unsafely.
Like or Dislike:
9 
4
Many people will ignore the point you are making, claiming the end justifies the means. It’s so sad in this country that we can’t all wrap around the entire U.S. Constitution. We seem to feel we can pick and choose what rights should be randomly taken from us. In Mn, the saturation checks that still go on in ND have been found to be unconstitutional. ND is in the dark ages in some areas and many are in denial.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1
So explain to me how what the TSA does to people is constitutional? I know this it off the subject, but those TSA invasions of privacy without cause just don’t make sense…..Compared to random spot checks of all traffic I’d think if one can be deemed just then so can the other…Either that or neither are just…
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
Tundra: let me take a stab at that great question because i think there might be a big difference. If you come to my house (i.e., Excel Center, Target Center, O’Hare Field) you have to play by my rules. Don’t bring a jackknife into my house. When you are driving down the highway in your own car, that’s your house. The gov’t has no business in your house without just cause. What do you think?
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
I understand that, and I’m not saying there shouldn’t be security and wand scans or such, but some of the tactics I’ve heard about remind me of getting booked for brawling or such in my drinking days….Hell….I actually did something to end up having to be searched like that….Purchasing a ticket to travel shouldn’t automatically make you akin to a law breaker who has no say in how he’s frisked.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Glenn— You were warned not to drive with a dirty license plate because the police could not read your tab, yet you did it again and want to complain because you were pulled over again? HUH???? Maybe you should have been ticketed the first time around for driving with an obstucted plate and you would have learned your lesson rather then blame the police again when you got pulled over the second time. Put on your thinking cap and maybe you can come up with a few reasons why the police have to be able to read license plates. You didn’t get pulled over because of the time or because your vehicle was dirty—-you got pulled over because they couldn’t read your tabs!!! Your vehicle was suspicious and the police were doing their job.
Like or Dislike:
9 
5
Vince, the “dirty plates” incidents were years apart. I am not sure whether you just moved to ND, but you need to realize that we went through a lengthy wet cycle. The first time I was stopped for dirty plates (and I do not believe that was the reason) my wife and I had driven through the rain to get to the airport. After returning from our trip, the plate was still muddy. I suppose I was being an unsafe driver because I didn’t carry a wash bucket and water and remember to wash my plates. The second time I was stopped was after it had rained also. I do check my plates when I stop for gas, but I think I’d be a bit more unsafe if I were stopping every ten miles or so to clean my plates so the police could verify my vehicle. I am pretty sure they were not checking to see whether my vehicles were stolen. Thieves generally have better taste than to steal what I drive.
I have the utmost respect for most police, but even they will admit that they have a few hotdogs who act as if they were paid on commission. I have been driving legally for nearly 50 years. I have not had an accident since I was 15 and have never had so much as a speeding ticket while driving a car. I have been warned once for driving 8 mph over the limit and twice for dirty plates, though the dirty plate warnings were only verbal.
Like or Dislike:
2 
4
Amazing that your plates get so dirty that they are unreadable everytime it rains—especially driving on paved roads.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4
The lawyers make a lot of money finding any loop holes they can that will work for their clients…..So scum bag or just representing scum bags this wont change until the laws are tweaked to allow less wiggle room. We want law enforcement to have the ability to check for impaired drivers, but then again we do want rules so checks don’t get abused either.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
While I share your frustration I cannot agree. This litle inconvenient document known as the Constitution prevents what you say from coming to fruition.
Remember: you will be the scumbag some day. It is inevitable. In our hyper-litiginous society you will one day be in court. I think you will believe differently after such an experience.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
Like the old saying….Everyone can’t stand lawyers…Except the one they use….
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Are these the same drunks that don’t want to breath in my second hand smoke but then think they have a right to risk others with their drunk driving?
Like or Dislike:
9 
4
Jack, I would bet my retirement savings that the vast majority of the drunks you refer to, not only smoke, but have a cavalier attitude about blowing their smoke into others faces, as I believe you would like to continue doing. (Jeepers…Some people cannot stay on topic, but always twist things to address their pet peeves.)
Like or Dislike:
1 
4
Point 1. Someone refered to the difference between a first time offender and repeat offenders earlier in this thread. I agree there is a difference and should be punished differently. Fisrt time without accident equals an increased fine in nd. First time with crash increase in fine. First time with bodily harm increased punishment (possible jaul time) and on and on. Repeat offenders should be punished with mandatory jail time based upon circumstances leading to the arrest
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
Point 2. A change in penalties would not have stopped the tragedy that happened near jamestown. That manchild had multiple offenses while operating a vehicle along with a suspended liscense. He was bound and determined to be on the road and had no regard for the law or his fellow man.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
You’re partially right, but only because the circumstances allowed him to be behind the wheel. I mentioned on the Opinion piece this morning that if we had the tougher laws that are needed then we don’t play with those who drive under suspension….They get locked up after the first time and their time increases by years should they keep trying to do it (I mean sober or drunk)….With that many driving under suspensions he should have been looking at a minimum of five to ten….You don’t play and they’ll get the picture….Either you crack down hard or you end up with this merry go round crap.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Vince, glenn was pulled over for his dirty plates and because of the time of day. I do not support dui checkpoints because they are unreasonable search (in my opinion) and you are better served looking for minor infractions that can lead to larger charges such as dui. I have been pulled over for 5 over in mn at closing time and ran through the drills because I have had 1 beer and instead of being angry an uncooperative I respected that officer for taking the time to run through the motions (he knew what the outcome would be but did it as a teaching moment). and took the lesson to heart.
Like or Dislike:
4 
3
If you think the police get bored during the night shift so pull people over because they have nothing better to do, then you’re mistaken. The night shift is when they’re more apt to have drunken drivers out and about, vehicles involved in hit and runs, vandals looking for mischief, and burglars looking to rob. It also may or may not be the most dangerous shift to work. Having a plate number to call in and verify? Priceless.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Glenn, you were stopped for the minor infraction because of the time of day. I would be more concerned if the officer did not stop you at 3 am, just because these minor infractions can lead to big busts especially at 3 am. Where does anyone really need to be that early in the morning that they cannot be inconveniced by a 5 minute traffic stop for a legitimate minor infraction?
Like or Dislike:
4 
3
I don’t believe either are constitutional. No scans or pat downs without just cause and no traffic stops without just cause!
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
Although I agree with you in general because I hate seeing this country start looking like it’s going police state on us…..I have to admit that there is a dertain level of security screening that needs to be done at airports. I just think our country is still over-reacting and maybe not taking a few ideas from other targeted countries like Israel where I understand is far less invasive to travelers….And if there’s a country to be concerned…it theirs..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nobody was randomly stopped in the scenario I mentioned. It was about 2 am, and this person was stopped because they were driving down a well-lit street….with no headlights on. They were pulled over to see why they didn’t have their headlights on. The officer smelled alcohol, (not surprising because the person was pretty loaded), and performed a couple of tests.
The reason it bothers me so much, is because like I said earlier, this person KNEW they were guilty. In a couple of conversations, this person actually said to me that they thought it was likely only a matter of time before they got busted. All it took to change their attitude was a couple of sessions with an attorney. Suddenly, their rights were somehow violated because they had to submit to a test. Somehow, the accuracy of the testing procedure(s) were questionable. The attorney proposed going to trial because he had a hired gun “expert” on speed dial that could be paid a reasonable fee to come here from out west, (Dickinson, I think), to offer testimony as to the alleged inaccuracy of the testing.
The defendant told me all about how his attorney had explained to him that this paid “expert” was a doctor, and was therefore qualified to speak to the alleged inaccuracy of the testing procedures and results. Of course, when I asked why a local doctor couldn’t be tapped for testimony…..he had no answer. The attorney’s paid expert was going to come to town, collect a fee, and blow back out of town again….probably so his reputation as a doctor wouldn’t take a hit.
The defendant got off…and learned no lesson. Except of course, that HIS rights had somehow been violated by the whole situation. He also *learned* about “testing inaccuracies” and such….which will serve him well in the future when he drives drunk again. He’s a classic “repeat offender”, whose record conveniently won’t reflect the habitual behavior….thanks to “representation”.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Years ago, my uncle, a lifelong alcoholic, took a job working in the middle east for an oil baron. The treatment of drunk drivers in that country was swift and certain. They took them out to the edge of town in the morning and shot them. There were no repeat offenders. In that situation, my uncle had no difficulty staying sober. I’m not saying we should implement consequences as harsh as he faced under the Shah, but I would like to point out that consequences that are certain and swift tend to have a greater impact on behavior than consequences that are distant and iffy.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Sure would hope they’d have to be caught red handed…Otherwise if you pissed a neighbor or spouse off…..A pretty easy way to get rid of them
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I suppose the ones who actually hadn’t had anything to drink, but may have been driving erraticly for other reasons got shot too. This approach may work as well for our financial mismanagement crisis. Shoot the bankers when they screw up.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Just Go Back To the Prohibition years. Make alcohol illegal again that should take care of the problem. No alcohol, no death.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3
Ya right….We’re already throwing billions down a deep dark hole trying to enforce a prohibition on other drugs. What’s basically happened is that prohibition just like in the 20′s has become a huge cash cow for the under world dealing with the drugs….Add alcohol to the list and we will see even more money go down a deep well that really does nothing to stop anything.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Let me first state that you should not drink and drive, I think we all agree on that. But, with things the way they are, to many people it is worth the risk. We as a society have tried for years to place the responsibility on the individual not to drink and drive. And, it is not working. I think the solution is get some form of affordable public transportation, affordable being the key word. I had a friend who had a suspended license, and found it was going to cost them over 450/month to cab to work. So, they drove to work because they simply could not afford to pay that every month. Get affordable, reliable public transporation and watch the DUI numbers drop.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, I really like the fact that you think we should provide not only affordable but also RELIABLE transportation for the drunkies. Key word there–’reliable’. Society does not owe the drunkies of the world transportation if they get their license suspended. Planning ahead is always an option–’-If I get caught driving drunk and get my license suspended, it’s going to cost $450 to take a cab to work and I can’t afford that.’ See how that works? “Since I can’t afford that, I’ll have to walk to work or get a bicycle.’ Here’s another option—-don’t drink and drive because if you do, you’ll have to be accountable for your actions and face the consequences. Here is NOT an option—if you drink and drive and get your license suspended, you won’t have to pay $450 a month for a cab to get to work,nor will you have to walk or get a bike, because the rest of the world owes you affordable, RELIABLE transportation if you get your license suspended. That’s just nuts!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
No, what is just nuts is just criticizing without offering a solution. If you had read my post from beginning to end, you would see the first thing I said is not to drink and drive. But, always more fun to point fingers than come up with a solution. By using your logic, people should just not commit crimes and we would all live in a happy little world. New York, you might as well close Rikers Island, because people are not supposed to murder, steal, and commit crimes. You may like to look at some studies on what public transportation improvements have done to lessen DUIs and the related accidents in cities of all sizes rather than just criticize.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Gene offered an excellent solution—it’s the first post of this topic—and I agree that that solution would cut down significantly on drunken drivers. There’s already available transportation TO and FROM the bars. Take a cab to the bar in the first place and you won’t have to worry about a DUI, a suspended license, and not being able to drive to work. How hard is that to figure out.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Why doesn’t und or grand forks have a drunk bus? I can’t think of any other town this size that does not have a public bus available at closing time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
UND does have some sort of a program in which students can take a cab to or from the bars for a relatively inexpensive fee—I think it’s somewhere between $2-$5—and I believe that’s per destination, not per person, so people can split the cost. Maybe someone here can provide specifics.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
But a cab can only carry so many people this company also only has so many cabs. This program has been criticised for long waits or no shows. A drunk bus has a schedule and can transport large volumes of drunks
Like or Dislike:
0 
0