Here's a link that may make you scratch your head and wonder if Drunk Driving "punishments" make people think before they drink and drive....

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/W...

Thoughts?

These should be installed after the first offense. "An ignition interlock is a sophisticated system that tests for alcohol on a driver's breath."
http://www.1800duilaws.com/article/inter...

your going to wait til their 7th or 8th, for stiffer penalties, hmm, but they will put a 16 year old in prison for probation revocation, unreal.way to go state of wisconsin.

take the license, take the car, give the drug disulfiram.

keep in mind that the allowed blood alcohol after a third DUI drops to .02 (one drink)
getting popped for a fourth offense does not necessarily mean one was drunk or endangering anyone.

For reference, the current Wisconsin OWI law is here:
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/moto...

People seem to be making a lot of assumptions about what the law currently does. For example, license revocation begins with the first offense. Jail time begins with the second offense.

Increased jail time is popular. (It's always easy to call for more jail time, and it's attractive for politicians to vote for it.) Research does not support the idea that increased incarceration of drunk drivers has any effect on whether they will drink and drive again. (In fact, this was the finding of a study done in Wisconsin, prior to two recent reforms that increased OWI penalties even further.)

Additionally, increasing penalties (especially mandatory penalties) at the state level simply increases the pressure on already overcrowded local jails, leading judges to consider drunk driving by itself -- without incidents that cause harm -- in the context of criminals convicted for serious offenses against other persons.

The basic problem is that drunk drivers are almost always already very severely addicted alcoholics. The chances of them getting effective treatment in most states remains low to negligible, unless they have strong family and employer support and better-than-average private health insurance.

http://dwidata.org/sourcebook/c25.cfm

Any reason we can't push and succeed at getting the federal government to tie equal-and-tough drunk driving penalties to federal road funds --- such as was done with 65 mph, mandatory seatbelt, and drinking age laws? A national standard for drunk driving penalties might lead to better compliance when looking at alcohol abusers behind the wheel. Now, when the driver has reached the point of alcohol addiction, I doubt if a standard penalty vs. individual state penalty would make much difference.

You shouldn't get a first! If you can't show proper judgement, you shouldn't be allowed to ever drive again. End of story.

I'm concerned about the April 1, 2008 public record "-- NATHAN M. WINCAPAW, 18, of 3845 W. Highway 14, Janesville, at 1:27 a.m. Saturday at Highway 14 and County F in Janesville Township. It was reported as his second arrest on a drunken-driving charge. Also arrested on a charge of driving on a revoked license."

What is going to happen? What Rock County judge is going to handle this case? Not just for WINCAPAW, but if he is only 18 and has had 2 DWIs and still insists on driving...what punishment will be sufficient to make him think before he commits yet ANOTHER stupid, yes, I said STUPID crime? I am sorry for his parents, but my only guess is that he was given everything he wanted whenever he wanted and now cannot live when someone tries to take something away from him. This is just plain ridiculous!

I would like to see laws like those in Indiana written into law nationally...regardless of who you are, where you work or how much money you have...And then, of course, I would like to see judges use truth in sentencing with said consequences...

6th, 7th ? Many adjoining states do not wait more than one conviction prior to getting tuff. Indiana, 1st offense, misdeamenor, 2nd Felony, 3rd is a class C felony with mandatory jail time. If ever convicted of OWI while on suspension or probation for OWI mandatory 25 years. That is getting tuff!

7th, 8th, and 9th get up to 5 years in prison. thats awesome. if i get arrested by the state of wisconsin TWO TIMES possessing as little as a joint, i can go to prison for up to 3.5 years. these laws makes sense.....

BTW, how many times do they drive drunk and NOT GET CAUGHT? I'll bet by the time someone gets three arrests, they have driven drunk at least 20 times.

sthomsen, "I know of one state that does not put up with this sort of thing, California, when you are caught DUI, you might as well kiss it good bye..Enough said."

Unless you have fame or money, of course. Kiefer Sutherland from the show "24", (read about the leniency of the judge postponing his sentence until after "24" stops production for the season...) here is a link http://www.reuters.com/article/entertain...

and let's not forget about Britney Spears, Paris Hilton and a bunch of others. You don't hear of anyone famous in Wisconsin getting a prison (or even jail time) sentence for DUI's. All we hear about are the deaths of children and families and the drunk driver is more than likely a "repeat offender".

Something different needs to be done. I don't know what the magical solution is, but it is everyone's responsibility to make sure we do not bury our heads in the sand and allow our friends/family/acquaintances to drive after drinking. And penalize without deals or plea bargains, and without compassion for the "livelihood" of the offender. I'm sure it sucks to grow up with a parent in prison, but I'm sure it sucks even more to go visit the grave site of a child (or parent, or spouse, etc.) killed by this nonsense.

imo, THIS should be our war against terror...

It only takes ONE time to kill someone! If you are drinking DON'T DRIVE. I can't believe how lax the laws are! Maybe they should send them to alcohol treatment rather than jail, but 3 strikes is plenty.

First of all I am not against being strict on DUI. I do have agree on a point that was said earlier that this is a life time thing. In a 30 or 40 year span a person is stopped for DUI and brought to court, I think the judge should look at this as not a person who has drinking problem and just throw the key away as most of you suggest. Each case has to looked at by the judge and if one has been stopped in the past 3 to 5 years 3 times or more then that person has a problem.

Is what we really need are Judges who are willing to give people the maximum. Just because statutes allow someone to get five years in prison doesn't mean the Judge will actually give that to them. Do some research on 5th OWI sentencing. The 5th is a felony in Wisconsin and can get you prison time under current laws. However, most Judges continue to put these offenders on probation. Pay attention to judicial elections in the future if you are not happy with current sentencing practices. Judges and DA's in Rock County continually run unopposed. What's wrong with that picture?

this is the stupidest thing i have ever read. they start so called severe punishment after 7 duis. anyone that has that many does not need to see the light of day. there has to be a cellar or something somewhere to throw them in. i agree with the 3 strikes your out although it only takes one to kill someone.

I believe that anybody can make a mistake, and that you need to temper justice with mercy. So you shouldn’t hang a person for their first DUI, and you might find grounds to show leniency the second time. But if somebody has 3 DUIs, they’ve got problems they are never going to get over. Or at least, they have problems that the rest of us shouldn’t have to risk our lives for while they try to rehabilitate themselves. DUI should be a 3 times and you’re out offense. After the third, give the offender a lifetime loss of driving privileges. There’s no reason anybody with 3 DUIs should ever be allowed to drive again – ever. If they do, then they should have mandatory jail time, 5 years for a start. The drinking driver doesn’t just risk his/her life, he/she’s gambling with all our lives. And nobody has that right.

What is it going to take to wake this state up?? We are so aggressive in some areas and lacking in others! I can understand one time and even two, but beyond that there is a problem. I know of someone sitting in jail right now for having hit someone while driving drunk for the umteenth time. The man and his wife are alive to still be able to tell about the accident, but the drunk driver had been cited time and again and just didn't care..even drove with a suspended license. Fines mean nothing to a repeat ofender. What is it going to take to get tough! I know of one state that does not put up with this sort of thing, California, when you are caught DUI, you might as well kiss it good bye..Enough said.

7???????????????? So we give them 6 chances to injure or kill someone? It is a choice that endangers everyone else on the road, 1 time is too many! It doesn't have to mean jail time for the first offense but make the fine so that people will rethink their actions. If you know you are going drinking them have someone else drive home, it's called planning ahead.

Seven or more times? I'd lower it to 3 or more. 1 time can happen to anyone, twice you may have a problem, but 3 or more is absolutely a problem.