Wis. lawmakers try again on drunken driving laws
MADISON — Two Republican legislators say they’ll try again this session to overhaul Wisconsin’s drunken driving laws.
Rep. Jim Ott of Mequon and Sen. Alberta Darling of River Hills say they plan to introduce bills that would criminalize first-time offenses for drivers with high blood alcohol percentages; require first-time offenders to appear in court; make a third conviction a felony; establish mandatory minimum sentences for drunken drivers that cause injuries or death; and require police to seize drunken drivers’ cars beginning with a third-time offense.
The package closely mirrors bills Ott and Darling pushed during the last session. None of those proposals got a vote after fiscal estimates showed they would have cost the state tens of millions of dollars.
Ott says those estimates were unrealistic.
Jan 1, 2013 at 4:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Prohibition didn't work. Why would tougher DUI laws work? You cannot stop this behavior with tougher laws. They're already tough, and they don't work. Education is the real answer...along with parents being good role models.
Jan 1, 2013 at 1:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
We have all kinds of things in place ie;MADD,Tough laws..I understand it is a big problem.As long as they sell it and even if they don't sell it. It is going to be a major ptroblem.It is a drug.Drugs form habits.Habits become problems.Sorry to say those problems kill people.I just do not have a answer.Everyone knows how it affects the body.AA has been working on it for years along with other treatment centers.Taking things away will not solve anything.Where there is a wii there is a way..We know that!
Jan 1, 2013 at 10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Forgot one......I think Wi. has a burial vault factory too.
Pure capitalism at its finest.
Jan 1, 2013 at 9:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
916WI- I agree with you on the texting and driving too.
Jan 1, 2013 at 9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
Face it folks, we live in an alcohol state. Our economy relies on alcohol for employment. From the grain that is used ,to the bottles,cans,labels,ink,plastics,cardboard,trucking industry ,sales,car sales,repairs and body work, insurance,law enforcement ,jails, medical, etc., etc.A sad State indeed.
Dec 31, 2012 at 10:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
belman- I'd agree with that starting at .21
Dec 31, 2012 at 8:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
First one should be a felony and you loose your right to drive, own a gun or vote. Nothing less.
Dec 31, 2012 at 7:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
916wi@ 3:06, I agree. In fact, I've always thought those texting & phoning should be held more accountable since they are supposedly not judgment impaired like the person who is drunk.
Dec 31, 2012 at 6:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
At the 3rd conviction, they should lose their license for life. If someone cant learn after the 1st or even the 2nd, after the 3rd its proof they have no ability or intention to follow the DWI laws.
Dec 31, 2012 at 6:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytransams- Unfortunately thats what has to happen when there are lots of people who can't control their own behavior.
Dec 31, 2012 at 5:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Just what we need more laws to generate more income for the state!
Dec 31, 2012 at 5:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
916WI- Yes, absolutely, without a doubt....They need much more comprehensive ways to prove text/cellphone use at crash occurrences.....Bottom line is there are very very few vehicle "accidents", vast majority are CAUSED by one or more of the drivers involved.
Dec 31, 2012 at 5:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Sure WI
Dec 31, 2012 at 3:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
For drunks who use other people's vehicles to avoid confiscation, have driving under the influence using someone else's personal vehicle incur a mandatory additional year in prison, no time off that.
Dec 31, 2012 at 3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
It is sad when their is a price tag attached to public safety. The best Court sentence I attended was when the defese presented a cost analysis argument of confinement versus community based supervision. The Court blasted the argument and said there is no price on public safety. Very true. Stricter OWI laws need to be put in place. Not extreme; more reasonable and less lenient.
Dec 31, 2012 at 3:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
MGDJoker
"Jail time for being .08? Seems a little insane to me."
Do you have a source for that?
From the Madison news....
Wis. lawmakers try again on drunken driving laws
"Ott and Darling said this time they'll try to make first-time offenders with blood alcohol contents of 0.15 percent or more _ "super drunks," _ guilty of a crime; require first-time offenders to appear in court even if they're tagged with a civil violation; make a third offense a felony; and allow judges to order police to seize third-time offenders' cars. Also on tap are mandatory minimum sentences for drunken drivers involved in crashes that result in injuries or death."
Read more: http://host.madison.com/news/state-and-r...
Dec 31, 2012 at 3:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Surely you people would also advocate for jail time for those caught texting or using a cell phone for the first time as well....no? I have found that these drivers are far more prevelent and just as reckless as those driving drunk. Why are we not pushing for laws that will make this behavior a felony complete with jail time as well?? Helge......you with me on this one??
Dec 31, 2012 at 2:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Some harp about "gun control" while this kind of killing and maiming has gone on forever....By the third offense .20 or more it should be 10 years ankle bracelet home confinement............"revocation"LOLOL.......Same with repeated excessive speeding, etc....
Dec 31, 2012 at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
As a taxpayer, I'd much rather pay to keep drunk drivers off the street rather than some of the other useless stuff we're paying for. I agree with helge1939. It needs to be strict at the first offense, not the 3rd. Yes, people make mistakes, but this way maybe people would learn from them rather than make them over and over again with apparently not enough consequences.
Dec 31, 2012 at 2:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jail time for being .08? Seems a little insane to me.
Dec 31, 2012 at 1:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
It's about time! I sure hopes a stricker bill passes. I get so tired of reading all the articles on people who have their 3rd, 5th, 12th etc. OWI.
Dec 31, 2012 at 1:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
If a person is driving with a revoked liscense ... confiscate the vehicle! Obviously the person has shown that revoking the liscense will not stop them from driving so take away the vehicle. Depending on the occurances and amount of fines either impound the vehicle until the revocation period ends or sell the vehicle to pay the finds. The DNR can confiscate not only your gun but also your vehicle if used in violation of a game law ... Yet we continue to let people rack up charge after charge for not only drunk driving but also for driving after revocation. I think our priorities are screwed up.
Dec 31, 2012 at 12:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jail time right away
On the spot 10 days
No get out of jail free for any one
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.