I stated this on another blog and I will state it again. Those people out there who cant stop at 1 or 2 or dont want to,DRINK AT HOME! Get all provisions necessary ahead of time and have fun(just dont drive)

I was merely making an observation that maybe some of the lawmakers should take a look within as some of them have been in trouble recently from alcohol related offenses! If the laws don't change, we know why!! I said nothing about shooting and other nonsense.

whoanellie i changed my mind AGAIN zero tolerance while operating any vehicle .

whoanellie how you like them apples ?

whoanellie i changed my mind alcohol content shoud be A 0.2 or 1/2 beer 6oz.

2nd offence back um agin the wall and shoot them with jawbreakers..

You tellum nellie by golly ....

I was pointing out that a bartender that serves a person to the point of intoxication needs to be checked. And some people dont think they have a problem and some know they do but cannot quit. If you really think a person serving alcohol shouldn't be held accoutable. Then heres something to ponder; why charge the person who sells drugs and the person dies( Len Bias law)? DONT SAY IT IS ILLEGAL to sell drugs as to drive drunk is ILLEGAL and to serve a person to the frame of mind should be against the LAW. IMO IMO IMO If your kids have an underage party the owner/adult will be charged.If your family member was hit by a drunk driver just leaving the local pub and killed what would you think then? would you not question why they let him/her drink that much and drive? I know it is a business and they need to make money, but common sense says that you can see when a person has had enough to drink and most likely knew they drove there. I guess If you had a conscience you might see the point to this.IMO IMO

I suggest it starts in some of their own houses first! some of them need to apply it to their own lives as shown in some of the previous articles in this very paper!

916WI i forgot (have police stop checks)

916WI this is the way the laws should be.
. A .08—should be A.04
now we have people calling for a felony conviction on the first offense—I agree
MADD great group

I personally think the current drunk driving laws are ridiculous. A .08 is 2 or 3 beers--and now we have people calling for a felony conviction on the first offense? What a bunch of self righteous idiots! Thankfully some of our elected officials can see the error of these ideas dreamt up by the bored housewives in MADD and rejected in turning them into laws. People who want to go out and have a couple of beers probably make up the majority of the tax base in this state--it's a shame that they have passed the laws that they have--specifically the .08 legal limit law. I would put myself up with a .08 BAC against a teen on a cell phone any day of the week and twice on Sunday.....

i thought Wayne Wood retired from public office and now i believe Mr. Sheridan replaced him.

marymac and whocares,It is hard to agree with both sides here but I do. I believe a bartender ought to stop serving after someone is obviously drunk.(although I have never blamed a server for my stupidity) I also believe we need to be responsible for ourselves and our actions.Isnt that what grown ups are suppose to do? I have been what's called a functioning alcoholic for many years now.At first,It was only weekends,then a little at home,before I knew it,WHAM! I have sought help several times and even did jail time once.Now,I hide at home. I have accepted my problem and will try to get help again someday when im ready.Im just very thankful Im smart enough to NOT drive!Did it a few times in my younger years and that was stupid! I wish the bartenders would have stopped me,but I dont blame them either. Being that drunk,I doubt I would have listened anyway.

8 OWI's and he hasn't killed anyone yet. Time to look in the mirror and realize you have a serious problem. MaryMac, I understand some of your points, but it would be impossible for a bar to be responsible for monitoring someone's alcohol intake especially when everyone has different tolerances. Many can also handle it well without you noticing. Should they cut people off? Absolutely and a good bartender will. However, it's not the bars responsibility to monitor the alcohol consumption of everyone as they walk out the door. It's being accountable for your actions. Let's face it, some people cannot be helped.

marymac4,thats crazy to put the burden on the bar owner.there are more fat people killed by heart attacks every year than by cancer.are you saying that mcdonalds should not sell to people who order a double bacon cheeseburger and shake because they know its gonna kill them? the AA big book says to take the resonsability of your own life,you are to try and help others,not to run the asspects of everyones life. no matter how hard you try, you can't save everyone.quit making everything the bar owners fault.most people a cronic drinkers because their heads messed up, not because they like the taste of beer or wine. thats a taste you have to aquire.

marymac thats great that you attend meetings and you should be proud of yourself in making that tough decision but clearly Mr. Holmes has not made the decision to get well. How many chances do you get or how many wake up calls does one person need to say to themselves I need to change.

I understand the need for stricter sentencing and tough laws on repeaters. What baffles me is the goody two shoes comments in here. Everyone must be perfect and not have any problems or ever made a bad choice. Alcoholism is a disease and there needs to be funding and insurance companies that help the ones it affects. Dont get me wrong as no one should get behind the wheel after consuming any substance that alters their ability to drive. And to those that have never done anything of the sort I applaud you. Also after every sentence for OWI they are ordered an assessment at the some of 250 dollars. That is a County program called IDP. When sentenced to jail they do nothing but sit their time or get huber to work/childcare/look for work. They do not get the help most of them need. The need for change in the system as to actually helping with the problem is to CRACK down on the bars that sell it to the point of intoxication, Something to think about IMO is when a person dont help intervene in a crime if possible can be charged. Well to knowingly let a friend/family member drive drunk is a crime, to sell to a person and allow them to leave knowing they most likely are going to drive is IMO a crime also.IMO, To all the perfect people in here an alcoholic cannot stop at one or two drinks and most of them drink into a blackout frame of mind. If they dont realize they are acoholic how can they change. To some it is a way of life they look at it as all they knew and it was accepted all through growing up and when they got into adulthood as GEEZ look at all the bars and package goods stores they have access to. Yes they have them by gas stations just that it is separated by a wall in the same building makes no sense IMO.Apparently they drove there to get it. It is legal to consume but most people under the influence of it are charged as to the behaviors that occur after drinking it, OWIs/Disorderly conducts/domestic issues/ fighting/ some places public intoxication or drunkeness. Once a person crosses the line of social drinking into alcoholism it is a rough road back and not as easy to stop as some people think. I can speak from experience as to crossing that line and at a very very young age, I am grateful that I had friends who cared enough to help me see I needed help and that I have been sober for quite some time and to the community AA programs that keep me that way and friends that remind me everyday that it is a life time program.

Changing laws is only part of the solution. We need education on adictions to build awareness in order to prevent the actions of a Mr. Holmes. We need to invest in public tranportation or encourage Taxi business. One last point, Mr Holmes is a grown man and to blame is imbalanced childhood on his actions 30 years later and 8 DWIs-nice defense-lets face it we all are depressed in some form other deal with it differently but look up insanity in the dictionary and you will read that Mr. Holmes is clearly needs help.

sarah best to ignore those that try to get you going. get angry for a second and let it go. banter with anybody else on these forums showing anger and frustration just drives them.

Will they start with them selves?

Thank you, Sannio. And I appreciated your support earlier today also.

Shopierehuh: Normally, I would say that you are correct. However, here you are not. I looked up boater54's spelling and the word does have meaning with that original spelling too. So, your attempt to get me did not work. (LOL!) By the way, are you really a pharmacist? You don't seem to have that type of personality (IMO). And, no, I am not trying to be mean here.

That should be "heifer", not "heffer".

boater54 - I followed your trail of empties, and the long skid marks...

SarahB - What you need to use when signing up for these things is a disposable email address. That way people can send you all kinds of nasty-grams, and you'll never know it. Here's a link to eight of them:
http://email.about.com/od/disposableemai...

boater54: You just blew it. I told you that I would report you if you email me ever again. And, no, I am not a "heffer" or a "lardass" (terms you used in your emails). You got me to respond in kind one time and I will not fall to your level again. To the rest of the forum: Forgive me for interjecting this into the discussion, but I don't know a whole lot of other ways to put a stop to this kind of garbage from boater54.

I dont understand why this guy's punishments weren't stricter given the fact that he was busted 3 times in just over a month. 1st and 2nd offence when he gets a license back State should make drunk drivers have a seperate noovelty style license plate that is a noticable color with words that indicate he is or has been convicted of drunk driving. The cost of the plate would be paid by the drunk. Also the yearly registration fee is double those of regular registration. Also make 3rd offense a felony dont screw around and wait untill the 5th offense. Get tough!

Senator Ms Robson, we have two dudious distinctions. First, one of only nine states in the US that pays a legislative body full time pay for working about 140 days a year, Second, of being like the third highest taxed state in the US, but we are trying hard to be number 1. What have you decided to do about that other than give yourself and the rest a 5.3% pay raise and pile up the per dieum pay on your check while the rest of the hard working state tax payers go without and struggle??

Drinking is fine just don't get behind the wheel. Although drinking is the one main cause for domestic violence, divorce, and many other crimes. We would rather spend $57.00 a day to incarcerate than treatment??? That is because it is ALL about money and keeping the judicial and corrections system going not correcting the original problem of alcoholism. It creates jobs, jails and prisons. Let's get real here folks and I am not favoring drinking and driving so lets not go there. They won't get treatment in prison as the prisons are far to crowded to get treatment in 2 1/2 years.

How about forcing the taverns to stop serving alcohol at 8pm or so?

The first time has to be a criminal offense. Stop babying these jerks.

jim beam and seven, nothing wrong with that, huh.....

Hey Phil...Next time we see you litter I think it should be an aoutomatic day in jail.

Just put a mandatory 6 months in jail for the first offense and nothing less.

what is a drinking problem? (drinking defined as having a drink of anything with alcohol as an ingredient in it)here it is folks. if you drink, the first time, somewhere in the middle, or when you ultimately take your last drink, and during that eppisode, something bad happens, you have a DRINKING PROBLEM. you don't need quizes, tests or assessments. if you drink and as a result of that drinking a problem occures, then, you my friend have a drinking problem. that is how every law should view the consequences of drinking and driving. take that to the tavern.

The treatment programs are all a sham. The only good ones are only offered after you go to prison. As long as it's about making money, it will remain this way.

1st offense - citation, $300 fine, mandatory "Do you have a drinking problem?" evaluation and 4 weeks of Antabuse injections. If you don't have a drinking problem, that won't be a problem.
.
2nd offense - misdemeanor, 30 days in jail (no huber privileges), $1000 fine, mandatory "You appear to have a drinking problem" counseling, 6 months of Antabuse injections, and ignition interlock for one year.
.
3rd offense - misdeameanor, 6 months jail time (no huber privileges), $2000 fine, mandatory "You have a drinking problem" counseling, ignition interlock for five years.
.
4th offense - felony, a mandatory year of state prison time, $5000 fine, and mandatory Disulfiram (Antabuse) injections for the rest of your life. Miss an injection and you do a year in jail - WITH the injections while you serve your time.
.
Anyone with 5 DUI convictions needs to be permanently banned from driving and liable for automatic arrest for reckless endangerment if found behind the wheel of a vehicle - even if stone cold sober.
.
To prevent people from moving to another state and commuting into Wisconsin to avoid the Antabuse, automatic drug testing for it if they are found driving in Wisconsin after 4 offenses. If the Antabuse isn't in their system, 5 years of prison AND Antabuse. If found driving in Wisconsin after 5 offenses, 5 years of prison time.
.
We shouldn't be demonizing people who have a problem with alcohol, just seriously stopping people who drive under the influence of alcohol. Unless violent or self-endangering behavior occurs with public intoxication, it should be treated more leniently by the police and courts as a medical problem - citations, small fines, voluntary treatment programs and escalating counseling.
.
Tavern and bar owners should put effort into obtaining rides for their patrons who have had too much to drink to drive safely and convincing them to take them.

Stimulate the economy by building more prisons and hiring more prison workers, then lock up all of the drunks.

Speaking from experience the DUI laws in WI are a total joke. I was issued a DUI last year after having 2 glasses of wine. .08 BAC.
I'm 56 years old and have never had so much as a speeding ticket.
I was ordered to go to assesment and pay assement fee of $250. Only, to be told I don't need treatment. Then to the Drivers Safety Program. Another fee of $196. That was a total joke and all we did was write in books while the instructor talked about his life. And showed old movies from the early 70's.
I had to get an occupational DR and pay SR-22 insurance. More fees and my car insurance tripled. Then pay the fine which was $803. Luckily for me I had the funds to pay all these fines.
The bottom line is I feel the programs offered for treatment need to be improved.
Also, I'm going to start a riot, but the drinking BAC should be .10. Fine those people not the wine sipper that blows a .08!

Here again, statistics would be useful. You use two examples and describe them in highly morally charged language. Who cares if they are stocky or wear a gotee? How many examples do we have of repeat offenders? And, by the way, the arrest of a man, who has chosen to stop drinking, does send a confusing message? You're damned if you do, damned if you don't. You might also discuss the increase in hit and run cases, an inevitable fallout of these draconian drunk driving laws.

The worst part of getting tougher laws passed, is that the State Senate Majority Leader, Russ Decker was caught drunk driving after leaving an event sponsored by the Wisconsin Tavern League. If people on this board already haven't, they should contact there state representative and state senate members and insist that they do something. You have that voice. If enough people do that, they will do something, you put them in, you take them out. The story here is repeated daily across the state, sometimes it's a ditch, other times a tree or stop sign, but why does it take it being an innocent life before the fires get stoked. I know of people who have never been caught drunk driving, and I would guess they have done it hundreds of times. I bet it is a 1000:1 shot that you get busted, that's why the repeat people scare me.

your state motto should be -Wisconsin - America's drunk driving land

Bellagio_Bound: There was nothing wrong with that post and you know it. For those who missed it, read today's public record. I think the fact that seven allegedly impaired drivers were cited in Janesville in under three hours early Saturday is important PUBLIC information. And, I would have run it as a sidebar (no pun intended) to this also important article. If people don't know by now that they should not get behind a wheel after drinking alcohol, then they need help from treatment providers.

One of the reasons that this problem is increasing is that a portion of our state economy is based on the manufacture and distribution of alcohol. There are licensed dealers everywhere you look.

The "League of Alcohol Distribution" frequently contributes to state, local concerns, political campaigns, (kickbacks), therefore perpetuating their existence.

We cannot solve this issue while organizations can buy favor from our government representatives.

I propose a much different sentencing structure to reduce drunk driving in our state.

1st conviction: Mandatory 30 days, $1,000 to the convicting municipality.

2nd conviction: Mandatory 60 days, $10,000 to the convicting municipality, surrender vehicle, (no matter who it belongs to).

3rd conviction: Exile

No more prison crowding.

Drunk Driving...another "Stupid Human Trick".

It is pure common sense. As long as there are public drinking establishments with parking lots, there will be drunk drivers.

The solution is easy. Eliminate public drinking, it is not beneficial to society, in fact it is lethal.

There are enough drivers on the road already that do not have the mental or physical skills to operate heavy machinery. Yet we add a third liability for impaired driving...alcohol.

Amazing, that professional drunks will not keep up their car equiptment like taillghts headlights and bliinkers. if you are going to booze it up at bars, dont drive a clunker. Probably a reason why muckety mucks like lawyers, judges, and community leaders and so on who drink big time, get caught much less.New clean cars give the well to do drunk a clear advantage

usaret - So what are YOUR proposed penalties for OWI convictions? You seem to think what you proposed for DUI is adequate.

March 2007 arrest-January 2009 sentencing? 20 months from arrest to sentencing? That's a long time for someone to be locked up waiting for a trial, so I assume that the defendant was out on bail during that time. That's a long time for a dangerous person with a problem to be trusted to obey the law. This is reflected in the wave of 3 arrests in a little over a month in 1992. I am aware of the need for due process, but I feel that the present system does not do enough to balance the protection between the presumed innocent the true innocents.

I'm tired of the speeders on Milton Ave., the people that do not use their turn signals, the idiots that fail to come to a complete stop at stop signs. We should throw the book at these offenders as well.

Why give them a 2nd 3rd even a 4th chance? That's stupid. Take their license, take their registration on the 1st offense and don't give it back till they do the time, pass the class, and pay the fines. If they do it again their done driving for the rest of their lives. People should prove they have a valid license to even get a car registered, that might help get some of the unlicensed drivers off the road to.

Lets see....8 times.....those are the times he got caught. I am sure there are many more times that he made it home "safely". 1 time is a mistake but 8?? Obviously he does not learn quickly. Maybe when he kills someone on the 9th time it might start to sink in!

1st DUI--60 day suspension, fine.
2nd DUI--60 day suspension, fine, new dr. lic in bright red. (Untill proven that you are no longer a threat for drunken driving, you will be issued a red dr. lic.Applying and receiving a false dr. lic will automatically require revocation and jail time.
3rd DUI--revocation of dr. lic.,fine, 1yr jail, temporary dr. lic (red) for 6mons after release from jail.
4th DUI--revocation of dr. lic, 2yrs jail, fine, no temp lic for 6mos. Can apply again if no further drunken activities found. If caught driving while dr. lic revocated, automatic 3yrs jail, fine. Application for dr. lic must be approved by Judge.
5th DUI--JAIL, revocation of lic if in effect at time. Amount of jail time to be determined.
If any of the above involve an accident, injury, death, etc., then judge and jury will determine punishment.
If you wish to drive drunk be prepared to pay the price. Your stupidity is not worth my life or the life of others.

When the consequences become severe enough, the behaviour will change. Slap these drunks hard the first time.

After a first offense, re offending shows complete disregard for the laws. Obviously, if someone continues to rack up occurrences, it should be obvious it won't stop till someone dies.

Seriously, there is no reason to keep "letting them off" with fines and such... they don't care!!!

By round two or three, they should be incarcerated, THEN treated or whatever, but get them off the roads!!!

What? SarahB actually posted without saying, "My prayers are with you". ?????

I remember sarahB's comment as simply a copy-n-paste to today's intoxicated arrest report found elsewhere on this website? Please explain your deletion Gazette Staff.

Why the heck was SarahB's first comment deleted? I think the readers deserve an explanation.

Saying your sorry doesn't take ownership. Is he sorry for drinking and driving, or sorry that he got caught?
If he was deemed incompetent due to a mental illness, he could be kept secured until doctors felt there was a reasonable expectation that he will remain sober. Maybe that's the angle that should be pursued in multiple OWI cases.

Watch out, she will do a typo-grammar check on you and call you a name.