usa drunk driving law is idiotic don't you think so?

[De Hollandse Ezel]

In my country people who are drunk, in an understanable rage, or insane are legally "not accountable for their actions"

nobody on purpose kills other people.. and to have people who cause an accident due drunk driving go to jail as they do in usa in insanity to me.

now I think my nations laws around drinking and driving are a lot better.

firstly our drivers are a LOT better trained (minimumage to get a licence is 18, not 16 as in usa, and our driving licence lessons and exams are way stricter.. there is a reason getting a licence will easely cost you 4 thousand euro and thats IF you even pass your first exam.. which about halve don't.. meaning an aditional 2k and 2 months for more lessons are slapped on top before doing your reexam.. most will pass this 2d run.. but theres always some who don't about 10% of all people won't have their licence even after 2 exams.. so thats another 2k.. more lessons.,. you get it.. there is no limit how often you can retry.,. but there is a minimum time between exams, and a minimum number of lessons you must take between each exam.

secondly our roads are a lot safer in their design -> usa roads are like 50 years behind in safety designs vs dutch roads..

usa has way way higher trafficdeaths per 10000 people.. than netherlands mostly because these above 2 reasons.. and idioticly strict alchol laws are not even a drop on that..

so to tross people who merely did a misdemeneor (drunk driving) into jail for manslaughter is UTTERLY insane when it is your road designs and low bar for getting a driving licence that are truelly to blame for the deaths.

now... what will happen if you drink and drive and cause a deathly accident in MY country,
***it depends firstly how MUCH you did drink.

-you are legaly allowed to drink upto 2 units of alcohol and still be legal to drive.
(thats basicly normal sized glasses of 250ml normal 5% beer, 100ml of 12% wine, or 30ml of 40% spirits)
1 unit takes an average persons liver 2 hours to filter out of your blood, so how long ago you drank before driving does still matter

If you are found with or at this ammount while in the accident the following will happen.
***insurance will pay out as normal, you were to the law considered sober
***if you had your licence for over 2 years.. nothing will happen.. just an accident.
***if you had your licence for LESS than 2 years though.. you get a mark (you also get that mark if found with any alcohol in a standard roadstop if you got your licence less than 2 years)
->
if you get 2 marks on a licence before you own it 2 years.. you loose it.. permanently (so you lost on a HEFTY cash investment). AND are banned from taking new driving lessons or taking exams for 2 years.

(basicly the law does allow experienced drivers to drink some alchol.. but does not beginning drivers)

still nobody gets fined.. nobody gets a criminal record, nobody goes to jail despite a person just died.. accidents happen.

------
a second amount of blood alchol... basicly more than 2 units.. but below 5 units.. will get you a fine, you are also instantly denied to continue driving, as well you aint sober
-> beginning drivers at this level will recieve 2 marks at once (so instantly loose their licence)

but other than that.. still nothing happens, no criminal record, no jailtime, no nothing, just a misdemeneor.
---------
over 5 units of alcohol (and up)

**this is where EVERY driver even experienced onces will loose their licence on the spot.
they will also be banned from continue to drive on.
-> and they will not get a standard fine.. but their case will go to a judge
-> judges are buisy so you likely at least loose your licence for 3 months until your case gets on trial.
**the judge will look at their case and set a fine, and a time for which the licencence will be held (for experienced drivers) or for how long you will be denied driving lessons (for beginning drivers)
**maximum fine the judge can give is 8000 euro.. maximum time you may loose your licence is 10 years.. (judge usually picks something below that extreme matching the severity of your case.. and the severity is NOT that you caused an accident, but by the judge of character.. one factor is how much DID you drink.. but repeated offender also counts.. finally.. character.. if the judge sees your young, and shocked.. or just a decent civillian who drank to much once cause his wife left him/just died.. he will judge lighter than if he sees a person who basicly is more hillbilly in their attitude..
in any cause you will NOT go to jail, and this judges judgment will NOT depend on the damage you caused.. so deaths or not plays no part in his ruling.
->
in REALLY extreme cases the judge can demand upto 6 months communiuty service.. to give back, and demand an alchollock to be installed when the no licence time has passed. (an alcohollock will be installed at the drivers own expense.. it basicly detects alchol in the drivers breath and won't allow the car to start if ANY is in it)

==================================
now why is taking somebody's licence and that such a big deal?

driving without licence or driving in a car without alchollock when the judge said you have to have one.. IS a criminal offense.. that again regardless of damages caused.. can land you upto 1 year in jail (but can.. is not the same as always will).. you car will in that case also be ceized.. and regardless of if your given jailtime or not you WILL get a criminal record.
(a cat 1 one, so it will disapear from your record in 10 years.. but still thats a long time to be excluded from jobs that need a "certificate of lawfull behavipr" -> a document only citycents without any criminal record can get from their city council to hand their employer.

[vinny]

If you drink to the point of intoxication and get behind a wheel you should be held 100% accountable for your actions and should be imprisoned. If you are old enough to drink and old enough to drive, you should be mature enough to make the right decisions. There's especially no excuse nowadays considering things like Uber or Lyft are easily accessible. Not to mention if you have the money to go out and spend money on drinks you should have the disposable income to spend $20 for a ride home and not put other people in harms way for no reason at all.

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVse8f0DoBo

[End0fDayz]

İlk olarak KolacheLover46 tarafından gönderildi:

If you drink to the point of intoxication and get behind a wheel you should be held 100% accountable for your actions and should be imprisoned. If you are old enough to drink and old enough to drive, you should be mature enough to make the right decisions. There's especially no excuse nowadays considering things like Uber or Lyft are easily accessible. Not to mention if you have the money to go out and spend money on drinks you should have the disposable income to spend $20 for a ride home and not put other people in harms way for no reason at all.

This is partially true. With the current laws, you can get a DUI when not even on anything or drunk. For example if you have a weed card or partake like a day ago, they can get you for it being in your system even if you are not high or drunk. Phoenix, AZ for example has 0 tolerance so even if you had 1 drink.. boom DUI (ask me how I know). They could sit outside any restaurant and just pull people over non-stop. It's more of a money making scheme over safety IMO.

[GlaceonChireiden]

İlk olarak De Hollandse Ezel tarafından gönderildi:

nobody on purpose kills other people..

Who wants to tell him?

[Raelic]

Doesn't sound like OP understands Neterhland's Drunk Driving Laws at all.

[Ulfrinn]

Why shouldn't someone who chooses to drink be held accountable for what they do after drinking? If you don't want to be put in jail for killing someone, even accidentally, don't put yourself into a scenario where it's very likely you're going to kill someone accidentally.

This isn't rocket science. It's like running red lights because you don't feel like stopping, sure, most times you may not have an issue, but when you do hit someone, it's totally your actions that set up the situation that resulted in the outcome, and you should have known better.

[JD]

İlk olarak De Hollandse Ezel tarafından gönderildi:

In my country people who are drunk, in an understanable rage, or insane are legally "not accountable for their actions"

That's not good. As a person who drinks constantly, I will never put myself in a situation where I would hurt someone else. This is why I get drunk alone, when no one is around.

Drinking is not an excuse to hurt someone. Also, the Netherlands does throw people in jail for being drunk. I have 3 cousins and one aunt who lives there. They're all seen a jail cell for their drunk behavior.

[Ulfrinn]

Yeah, I've been very drunk before and at no point during being drunk would I have ever thought it okay to drive in that state or do something that puts someone else at risk. Alcohol didn't make that go away. For people who do put others at risk, and get them killed, that part of them was probably missing beforehand.

[vinny]

İlk olarak End0fDayz tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak KolacheLover46 tarafından gönderildi:

If you drink to the point of intoxication and get behind a wheel you should be held 100% accountable for your actions and should be imprisoned. If you are old enough to drink and old enough to drive, you should be mature enough to make the right decisions. There's especially no excuse nowadays considering things like Uber or Lyft are easily accessible. Not to mention if you have the money to go out and spend money on drinks you should have the disposable income to spend $20 for a ride home and not put other people in harms way for no reason at all.

This is partially true. With the current laws, you can get a DUI when not even on anything or drunk. For example if you have a weed card or partake like a day ago, they can get you for it being in your system even if you are not high or drunk. Phoenix, AZ for example has 0 tolerance so even if you had 1 drink.. boom DUI (ask me how I know). They could sit outside any restaurant and just pull people over non-stop. It's more of a money making scheme over safety IMO.

Yeah I'm not sure how it is in other states but that sounds incredibly stupid. Here, if you have marijuana within your system but are not in possession, you can't be criminalized in any way since there are no internal possession laws. This of course doesn't apply if you're doing something such as a drug test and they find it in your system, since if you don't have an Rx for marijuana then the only assumption that can be made is that you smoked it illegally. But one drink and not being able to drive sounds extremely dumb, I don't even know how bars can run in AZ if that's the case.

[Incarnate]

İlk olarak De Hollandse Ezel tarafından gönderildi:

so... in most cases in usa where they trow drivers (often teens) into jail for like 20 years.. a mere accident..

here we would have given them only a fine at worst an 8000 euro one.. or at worst taken away their licence for 5-10 years.

No, lol. That's absolutely not correct! Nobody serves a 20 year term for DUI, especially if it's a first time offense. You have no clue what you are talking about.

Hell, even some murderers get out after five years for good behavior.

[L1qu1dator]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSvJaYxRoB4

[ZZZZZ]

would u say the same about a flight controller or someone driving a train? imagine them being drunk and causing a train/airplane crash

[Chaosolous]

İlk olarak De Hollandse Ezel tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Chaosolous tarafından gönderildi:

Tldr

If you’re drinking and commit a crime, you chose to drink, you’re responsible.

a crime is when you do something with intent.
nobody who is drunk driving.. hits another person on the road on purpose.. it's an accident.
and if you see it as such when they are sober.. than see it also such when they are drunk.

if normally you only give a fine for drunk driving.. that thats what you also should do when they cause an accident.
you should not suddenly judge an accident differently cause they happen to also comitting a misdemeneor.

So here’s the thing though. They chose willfully to drink knowing it can cause poor judgement. They didn’t have to drink. Blaming your choices on your choices is insanity.

If you drink you know you are drinking. Therefore you understand how it works. If you get wild while drunk and commit a crime, you are responsible because you are the one who was drinking.

Do y’all just let people walk free if they’re drunk when they kill someone, vehicle or otherwise? I hope not.

Choosing to drink or not are the only options you have to prevent drunken incidents.

[Chaosolous]

İlk olarak Incarnate tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak De Hollandse Ezel tarafından gönderildi:

so... in most cases in usa where they trow drivers (often teens) into jail for like 20 years.. a mere accident..

here we would have given them only a fine at worst an 8000 euro one.. or at worst taken away their licence for 5-10 years.

No, lol. That's absolutely not correct! Nobody serves a 20 year term for DUI, especially if it's a first time offense. You have no clue what you are talking about.

Hell, even some murderers get out after five years for good behavior.

This man was given a life sentence after his 9th DUI.

https://nypost.com/2023/04/21/texas-man-christopher-faran-sentenced-to-life-in-prison-after-receiving-9th-dwi/

IIRC he didn’t hit anyone but the judge decided it was only a matter of time until he kills someone’s so the judge gave him life.

[Incarnate]

İlk olarak Chaosolous tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Incarnate tarafından gönderildi:

No, lol. That's absolutely not correct! Nobody serves a 20 year term for DUI, especially if it's a first time offense. You have no clue what you are talking about.

Hell, even some murderers get out after five years for good behavior.

This man was given a life sentence after his 9th DUI.

https://nypost.com/2023/04/21/texas-man-christopher-faran-sentenced-to-life-in-prison-after-receiving-9th-dwi/

IIRC he didn’t hit anyone but the judge decided it was only a matter of time until he kills someone’s so the judge gave him life.

That's not at all what the OP was referring to all in that post. That's called aggravated factors.

Also, that's extremely rare. Most people serve little or no time.