Difficulties within the Law

Another holiday weekend in New Mexico and more repeat DWI offenders kill innocents in traffic accidents. It’s like clockwork with hand-wringing and explorations of the reasons behind these kinds of occurrences and how to punish the offenders on 770 KKOB this morning. Some of the opinions are vague and pointless such as suggesting some kind of undefined and undiscovered magic pharmaceutical to “cure” alcoholics. Other opinions are more of the “throw up the hands in the air” variety, decrying the judicial system and connections that many offenders seem to have and a lack of will from judges to follow strict sentencing guidelines. Others offer police state solutions to include forcing retailers to have breathalyzers to the implantation of chips in people that would monitor their blood-alcohol level and tying that information to the operation of their vehicles. The host, Jim Clark, laid all responsibility on the accused and suggested mandatory life sentences for repeat DWI offenders who commit vehicular homicide, a reasonable opinion and solution. Too much of the conversation from the listeners, however, disassociated responsibility from the perpetrators, blaming others for these horrific actions and offering up so-called solutions that will likely prove ineffective while taking away freedoms from people who are responsible.

Drunk drivers have plagued our society since the advent of the automobile and a solution to the problem has proved elusive. Spreading responsibility, considering servers and alcohol sellers equal in guilt for the actions of adults in not the answer. Of course the clearly inebriated should not be provided more to drink but there is no way for someone to judge a person’s capacity for drinks by sight alone and keep track of every person’s intake simultaneously considered against that capacity. It is also impossible to know if a repeat offender will eventually commit a deadly crime driving in the future and there is no justification to preemptively jail anyone based on the presumption of future crimes as some suggest. It is one thing to install a breathalyzer in a person’s car but another to physically implant something (if such a technique actually existed) in a person.

Giving up isn’t an option. Encouraging responsibility and punishing crimes harshly makes sense. A first time DWI requires sincere reflection and a reconsideration of one’s priorities and situation. A second should require one to consider their consumption of alcohol. While a one-time DWI is a reason for concern, punishment should not destroy a person’s life. A second should include a much stiffer punishment that still allows the perpetrator to re-integrate into society. More occurrences should increase punishment and if a multiple DWI offender should kill someone when they are driving drunk their three strikes should be up. These punishments must be non-negotiable and applied in every case without any other consideration. Starting from grade school, public education must include strict and frequent lessons on personal responsibility and the consequences that can result in its absence. There is no way to eliminate DWI without eliminating automobiles and every possible kind of stimulant. The best that can be done is to ensure that it isn’t a worthwhile path and that people understand and accept their responsibilities.