Recividist drink drivers

February 16th, 2014 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

A 47-year-old man’s 18th drink-driving conviction has sparked calls for a radical law change that would allow judges to sentence the worst offenders to preventive detention – effectively locking them up for life.

Preventive detention is a step too far, but I certainly agree that there should be a threshold at which recidivist drink drivers start to get automatic imprisonment terms.

Darren Corey Newport, 47, has now racked up 18 convictions for driving over the limit – two of them in back-to-back drink-driving episodes this year alone.

Newport joins four other men who each have 18 drink-driving convictions, sharing the dubious title of New Zealand’s worst drink drivers. Newport is the youngest of the bunch.

The scary thing is he has probably driven drunk over 1,000 times. You only get checked around one in 100 times when out driving. To have 18 convictions, you must have driven drunk almost every week for a decade.

Statistics from the Ministry of Justice show that while the number of people convicted of has fallen in the past three years from 27,518 to 23,377, the number of repeat offenders has remained virtually unchanged.

I think once a drink driver is onto say their fourth or fifth conviction, then jail should be basically automatic and increasing. The recidivist drink drivers (who are no doubt alcoholics) need to know that if they jump in a car drunk, then they will be in jail for years, not months. It may be hard for them to stop drinking, but it is not hard to decide not to drive home.

Tags:

62 Responses to “Recividist drink drivers”

  1. Pita (372 comments) says:

    Lowering the alcohol limit to 50 milligrams per 100 millilitres will stamp this behavior out…

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. duggledog (1,417 comments) says:

    Only in NZ, where we also tolerate rock apes like the Mongrel Mob etc.

    Focus needs to be on punishment, or removing the problem from society, not rehabilitation (in a lot of cases), but oh no we have successfully expunged Punishment from our vocabulary.

    Ladies and Gentlemen I give you: The Department of… Corrections!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. peterwn (3,194 comments) says:

    “It may be hard for them to stop drinking, but it is not hard to decide not to drive home.” I suspect that a big problem is an intoxicated driver is unaware that he or she should not be driving. A driver needs to give this some thought before drinking one too many.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. tas (596 comments) says:

    It sounds like this guy will keep driving drunk as long as he isn’t physically prevented from doing so.

    Having a breathalyser installed in the car is another option.

    Preventive detention should be an option in extreme cases like this, if other means have proved ineffective.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. kowtow (7,877 comments) says:

    The war on alcohol has been a huge failure ,a massive cost to the taxpayer,increased the governments coercive powers over us and filled the gaols with people who have committed victimless crimes.
    Time to decriminalise drink driving.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. lolitasbrother (563 comments) says:

    duggledog (970 comments) says: February 16th, 2014 at 9:26 am

    Only in NZ, where we also tolerate rock apes like the Mongrel Mob etc.
    Focus needs to be on punishment, or removing the problem from society, not rehabilitation (in a lot of cases), but oh no we have successfully expunged Punishment from our vocabulary.
    Ladies and Gentlemen I give you: The Department of… Corrections!”

    Duggledog,
    Punishing an advanced alcoholic by jail terms is as useful as taxing solo parents for having overweight children,
    or maybe nanny state doubling the price of tobacco again, or telling people with diabetes to fuck off and eat carrots.
    Serious alcoholics who can not drive , could better live close
    [ ie walking distance] to market outlets and some community.
    No fuck it, says Tas , thats right preventive detention, yeah, pay here Tas, you pay Tas, not me, $100,000 a year for a victimless crime, , if it makes you feel righteous.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. WineOh (575 comments) says:

    @ Pita, I hope that comment was sarcastic.

    Much as I hate to admit it, I believe the only way to solve recidivist drunk drivers is incarceration. Of course they are alcoholics, and a treatment program might get them through a few months until they are back in the same set of circumstances as they were before. Preventative detention is about protecting the rest of the community from further harm. It seems a miracle that with that level of offending they haven’t maimed or killed themselves or someone else on the roads.

    I hadn’t thought about DPFs comments about the frequency of checkpoints etc before, and is friggin scary.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. wiseowl (799 comments) says:

    I have never thought locking these people up is going to solve the problem.
    They obviously need help and I am no expert but think there has to be a way of getting these turkeys to confront their drinking problem and address it.

    It’s these recidivists who help the cry to reduce limits and again penalise all those responsible people who are quite safe to have a couple of wines or beers and drive.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. CharlieBrown (916 comments) says:

    What about the concept of a lifetime ban from driving as well?

    This is another example of a pathetic “justice” system that has no balls to start locking people up – lets face it the cost of not keeping these people locked up far out weighs any cost of keeping them in prison. This is just another recent example of how farcical our justice system eg, a couple more include the mother of nia Glassie only spending 5 years imprison for the manslaughter (murder in any other country) of her daughter, Israel Kaihau 8 years imprisonment for the completely random manslaughter of a man in a caravan park in waihi (another instance that would be murder in most jurisdictions).

    I hope politicians and judges are the next victims of the effects of their leniency and policy making, maybe then we will get a change.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. lazza (362 comments) says:

    18! times. Geez this speaks for itself.

    “We” (and as represented by the Magistrates!) … still have an unacceptable level of tolerance for DIC.

    IT IS NOT OK … THREE STIKES AND YOU ARE OUT

    Err … make that “IN” … a short sharp 3 months locked up.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. flipper (3,774 comments) says:

    lolitasbrother (228 comments) says:

    February 16th, 2014 at 9:47 am

    duggledog (970 comments) says: February 16th, 2014 at 9:26 am

    ******

    No sarc….but Lolita talks sense.

    Look….
    Punishment will NOT prevent illegal drink-driving,

    Limits will NOT prevent illegal drink-driving.

    Illegal drink-driving will increase as we lower artificial limits.

    Illegal drink driving is what we say it is – for everyone. But that does NOT mean that some “illegal drink-drivers” are not safe when driving.

    Will it be that a permit/licence/fine/prison is next to be given for illegal drink-walking???
    We know that drink driving by using a power boat or cycle breaks the law.

    But seriously, the ONLY way to prevent illegal drink driving is to make the installation of alcohol limit devices compulsory for ALL vehicles…and to have them as part of WoF requirements. [An edit after-thought. Make them receptive to traffic Nazi computer commands at holiday times.]

    Now…can we stop talking drivel and about Uncle Doets “Crime and punishment”??? :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. JMS (313 comments) says:

    kowtow (6,351 comments) says:
    February 16th, 2014 at 9:43 am

    The war on alcohol has been a huge failure ,a massive cost to the taxpayer,increased the governments coercive powers over us and filled the gaols with people who have committed victimless crimes.
    Time to decriminalise drink driving.

    Humour and logic have never been your strengths.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. tvb (4,236 comments) says:

    Extended supervision orders may be the answer here. They could include residence restrictions and bans on driving and alcohol treatment. To have 18 convictions for drink driving and other serious driving offences such as dangerous/reckless driving shows a reckless attitude to road safety and such a person is a risk to the community in the same way a sex offender/violent offender is.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Monique Angel (258 comments) says:

    I’d be careful of using the term ‘alcoholic’. It’s essentially a made up noun by people running from the human condition. He’s not an ‘alcoholic’, he’s an arsehole for putting other lives at risk. It’s not a moral question. What he’s doing is against the law and he needs to face the consequences.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Bad__Cat (139 comments) says:

    The problem with these mongrels is not that they are alcoholic, many others are. It is an illness, for which they are not to blame. Where they are to blame, is that they deliberately decide to risk other people’s lives by driving while drunk. And for that they should be punished like any other criminal who threatens innocents.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Brian Smaller (4,017 comments) says:

    How about immediate crushing of a recidivist drink driver’s car. If he borrows a car belonging to someone else then tough luck for them – unless he stole it (and hopefully will end up in prison for car theft). Pretty soon no one will ever lend him a car again.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Ben Dover (526 comments) says:

    Preventive detention ? ? ??

    Jesus When are you people going to get through your heads that mis use of a motor vehicle
    is as bad as or can have the same RESULTS use as mis use of a Fire arm

    Death Penalty would be good

    HOW MAN INNOCENT PEOPLE HAVE TO DIE

    I know of two people killed by Drunk Drivers one a girl two houses up
    getting into her car at the shops

    Shop keeper came out her show werr there she was gone
    dead

    The Driver had JUST GOT OUT OF PRISON FOR SOMETHING ELSE

    My Nanas sister FIT AS A fiddle looked 50 was in her 70′s

    Hit on a pedestrian crossing carried down the road on the bonnet for a couple of hundred metres DEAD
    another scum bag just out of prison

    STOP PUSSY FOOTING AROUND THE ISSUES AND STOP APPEASING LOW LIFES

    Lock them up THROW AWAY THE KEY

    CARS ARE WEAPONS

    People with Alcohol problems should not be allowed to own a VEHICLE

    They can cycle I DID in AK for 3.5 years

    Let them share the roads with their fellow CAR PSYCHOS

    if that does not scare them – nothing else will

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. flipper (3,774 comments) says:

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
    Ben Dover (97 comments) says:

    February 16th, 2014 at 10:43 am

    Preventive detention ?

    ********

    Calm down…., you have NOT solved anything.

    Someone, once said something like…. “One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic”.

    Sorry, but it is true.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. RightNow (6,799 comments) says:

    “The scary thing is he has probably driven drunk over 1,000 times.”
    I wonder how many of those times he’s been involved in any sort of collision. Is it zero?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Nostalgia-NZ (5,004 comments) says:

    Did you take any time for toilet stops when you were cycling for 3.5 years Ben? I think I saw you in the fast lane on the motorway a few times and thought you must have been lost and looking for a toilet but I never realised it was a 3 year crusade.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. AG (1,795 comments) says:

    I think once a drink driver is onto say their fourth or fifth conviction, then jail should be basically automatic and increasing.

    This is pretty much what happens already. If you rack up 4 excess breath alcohol convictions, then unless you’ve got some sort of exceptional excuse, you are going to get a custodial sentence of some sort. This might be community/home detention (if you’ve suitable circumstances to serve it), or it might be jail. And if you then rack up more convictions, the custodial terms will get longer.

    See, e.g., http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/9270005/Man-jailed-on-fourth-drink-drive-offence

    In the New Plymouth District Court yesterday Philip Patrick Martin, 31, admitted careless driving and his fourth drink-driving offence.

    Martin was jailed for three months followed by special release conditions that he undergo alcohol and drug counselling.

    Or, e.g., http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/9254494/Drink-drivers-destined-for-jail-warns-judge

    A Taranaki judge says too many repeat drink-drivers are slow learners and can only end up doing jail time.

    “Four is too many,” he told Troy Lionel Bright, who admitted his fourth drink-driving offence.

    The message was that it was unacceptable to repeatedly drive after drinking, the judge said. And if people were resistant to change then they would go to prison.

    Judge Roberts said Bright might learn his lesson through being sent to jail for the first time. From here on in, if he continued to offend, the prison time would get longer, the judge said. Bright received a three-month prison sentence after a month was deducted for his guilty plea. He was also given a year’s driving disqualification and would receive a zero-alcohol licence and alcohol and drug counselling.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. kowtow (7,877 comments) says:

    JMS

    Not humour ,more like satire and irony.

    Alcoholics an illness ?As with all all the rest of modernist wowserism that seeks to medicalise so many of society’s problems that’s just an excuse for bad behaviour and personal choices.

    Whether this guy as the media puts it is one of our worst drink drivers ,I’m not so sure.Has he killed or maimed anyone?
    You could be driving a car drunk ,first time ever (not slightly over the legal limit) and as Ben has pointed out kill someone ,that would make you one of our worst in my book.

    Getting caught slightly over the limit a few times is more like bad luck (as well as stupid)than anything highly dangerous or vastly immoral.

    I think the cops need to target the dangerous recidivists who are a menace (instead of targetting every driver on the roads in occassional seasonal blitzes)
    Use their resources to target certain known dangerous drivers and then the courts should deal appropriately.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    So you get done DUI a couple of times when you’re 18 or 19, which is pretty easy considering the low youth limit. Following that you lead an exemplary life and keep your nose clean. Then when you’re 50 your wife walks out on you and takes the lot after taking you through the courts. You’re broke financially and broken mentally, so you go on a bender. You get done for low range drink driving. Is it fair to have a prison term? Methinks it’s not.

    It’s all very well to say “throw the book at them,” however drink driving is a pretty minor offence especially when you consider that most people who are slightly over the limit can still drive safely.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. RightNow (6,799 comments) says:

    from the Stuff article:
    “Is there a different way of penalising them that actually gets at them? You can crush their cars, but this day and age they can just walk out down the road and get a new one. It is too easy for them to get away without getting a penalty at all; there are millions [of fines] outstanding.”

    Outstanding fines should show up on credit checks and be passed to private debt collection companies after a period of time.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Psycho Milt (2,349 comments) says:

    I suspect that a big problem is an intoxicated driver is unaware that he or she should not be driving.

    Only if they’re in such a drunken stupor that they’re almost certain to crash into something. I did plenty of drunk driving as a yoof waster, and just about every time I knew I was well over the limit and would be in the shit if I got caught. These guys know very well what they’re doing, they just don’t give a shit.

    Punishing an advanced alcoholic by jail terms is as useful as taxing solo parents for having overweight children,

    Punishing a drunk driver for gambling with other people’s live is not punishing an alcoholic for being an alcoholic. Driving a car isn’t some random event that just happens to you.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    Outstanding fines should show up on credit checks and be passed to private debt collection companies after a period of time

    The people who have outstanding fines aren’t likely to be applying for home loans any time soon. They are more likely to be using a loan shark to afford their day to day living expenses. Try again.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. gump (1,538 comments) says:

    @kowtow

    “Alcoholics an illness ?As with all all the rest of modernist wowserism that seeks to medicalise so many of society’s problems that’s just an excuse for bad behaviour and personal choices.”

    ———————–

    I’d politely suggest that you’ve never met an alcoholic.

    I’ve met end-stage alcoholics who were drinking the hand sanitiser from the dispensers in public bathrooms. It’s a little shocking that you believe this is some sort of choice.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. RightNow (6,799 comments) says:

    It’s not houses they’re driving gazzmaniac.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    No, but you are talking about credit agencies. The people who don’t pay fines don’t pay them because they can’t afford to. Putting them on Baycorp won’t change that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. RightNow (6,799 comments) says:

    If they can’t afford to pay their fines, how can they manage to go and get another car on finance?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. kowtow (7,877 comments) says:

    Drinking hand sanitisers?

    That’s a personal choice too.

    May not appeal to most though.I know people who drink DB,it’s a little shocking I know ,but it’s still a decision they freely make.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Pita (372 comments) says:

    WineOh…9.57

    It was supposed to be dripping with sarcasm…but I guess sarcasm doesn’t work on Sundays.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. flipper (3,774 comments) says:

    RightNow (6,124 comments) says:

    February 16th, 2014 at 11:40 am

    If they can’t afford to pay their
    *************

    Someone can probably enlighten us….but a $150 seat belt, or 5kph money grab, can quickly blow out to $1000+ with penalties. There are not that many in Remmers, or Lowry Bay, or Khandallah, or Fendalton. But try Cannons Creek and Otara et al.

    Piddly arse fines for victimless “offences” to “encourage” people to do what know-alls want are a bloody disaster.

    They are, in fact. a major cause of recidivism. But they keep the policing/legal/judicial/corrections/counselling industrial complex functioning with a full; head of steam,.

    So back to DD… If DD and in an injury accident – very serious. If DD at breath test stop. Garbage. Warning, car impounded over night.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. RightNow (6,799 comments) says:

    Let me enlighten you flipper: it’s free to put on a seatbelt, and it’s free to stay within 4k of the speed limit.
    For those who can’t afford a fine, the free option is available.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. OneTrack (2,759 comments) says:

    Pita – “It was supposed to be dripping with sarcasm…but I guess sarcasm doesn’t work on Sundays.”

    Yes it does, and the trailing dots helped.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. flipper (3,774 comments) says:

    Right now…
    You are wrong.
    It is a choice… and a wise one.
    But it is a rule, and a victimless “crime” .

    If you cannot understand the reasoning, and the fundamental difference between “offending”, and such piddly victimless matters, then there is little chance of any sensible discourse with you.
    PS
    Take the new Police “walk around” policy. Care to bet on where it will impact most????
    Take just MV registration…..
    No WoF; no rego.
    No rego can’t drive; no WoF.
    Guess what happens in Otara, Cannons Creek et al?

    Stupid. Sorry :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. OneTrack (2,759 comments) says:

    AG – “This is pretty much what happens already. If you rack up 4 excess breath alcohol convictions, then unless you’ve got some sort of exceptional excuse, you are going to get a custodial sentence of some sort.”

    - “A 47-year-old man’s 18th drink-driving conviction …”

    This guy managed to get to 18 convictions. The custodial sentences “of some sort” that he may have got don’t seem to have helped much.

    Supposedly we crush boy racers’ cars for making a bit of noise and smoke. Oh the horror. But we cant do it to drunk drivers cars because……? That would be mwean?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. RightNow (6,799 comments) says:

    I’m not debating whether a crime is victimless, or whether a law is reasonable flipper. That’s a different matter. What I’m proposing is that to make fines more effective, especially those for drink driving (and I think also for careless or dangerous driving offences), that they should be passed on to debt collection agencies after a period of time and show up on credit reports.
    I proposed this in response to this quote in the Stuff article “You can crush their cars, but this day and age they can just walk out down the road and get a new one. It is too easy for them to get away without getting a penalty at all; there are millions [of fines] outstanding.”
    I don’t believe anyone is getting their cars crushed for seatbelt or WoF/Rego infringements.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. OneTrack (2,759 comments) says:

    flipper

    How about -

    50-80 mg -Garbage, warning, car impounded overnight
    80-120mg – Uh oh, serious fine, car impounded for week
    120+ , Get out of here, serious fine, jail time, car impounded for month

    Repeat of 120+ WTF, serious fine, serious jail time, car crushed

    Mandatory minimums with no discretion for judges.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. peterwn (3,194 comments) says:

    There is a possible improvement – Reckless driving causing death / serious injury should be made both a ‘strike’ and ‘preventative prevention’ crime. It should be removed from Land Transport Act and put into the Crimes Act and to cover motor vehicles, boats, aeroplanes, trains, etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. flipper (3,774 comments) says:

    One track and oeterwn…

    Yep…but I would go easy on the Minimums…not everything is the same.

    Peterwn’s comment on reckless driving causing death (or injury = GBH?)…. quite agree. Some may argue that can be done now, but I suspect it would be hard in all cases.

    But all such penalties will deter only those in a state to understand the consequences. Deterrence is B/S, and senior Judges will privately confirm this. They maintain the pretence because deterrence is a key element of the sentencing process.

    IMV…. unless the vehicle is immobilised until it passes the alco-lock then nothing will stop the ultimate recidivist. And the vehicle lock would need to account for the bastard who would get his bird or mate to do the blow, while he or she does the driving.
    Only way out… require someone carrying a red flag to preceed all vehicles.
    Bugger!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. nasska (10,841 comments) says:

    peterwn

    Sensible suggestion.

    There’s been an incremental creep over the past four decades to punishing actions that the “experts” consider to be the causes of deaths & injuries. We’re now at the point that the punishment is nearly equal for an offence involving behaviour that MAY cause an accident as opposed to ACTUALLY killing or injuring someone.

    It is all part of creating a neat orderly society where everyone does what they are told but has made drink driving a calculated risk rather than an action where the offender ever risks serious punishment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. nasska (10,841 comments) says:

    ….”Only way out… require someone carrying a red flag to preceed all vehicles.”….

    Don’t worry flipper…..I’m sure the law is being drafted now. As soon as the Nannies manage to get the prosecution for all speeding 4kph over the limit in place that will be the next move.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. flipper (3,774 comments) says:

    Hi Nass….

    I would not bet against U on that. :-)

    Come to think of it…. Is that one of the proposed red melon policies designed to reduce motor vehicle use????

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. nasska (10,841 comments) says:

    flipper

    To the Greens it would be a master stroke. Instead of accident fatalities people would die peacefully in their sleep halfway between home & the supermarket. The horse & cart would be marketed as the new fast means to travel & unemployment would vanish as WINZ clients were issued with stout shoes & red flags.

    They’re onto a winner! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. flipper (3,774 comments) says:

    Nass…
    Why do we not suggest this to DPF …

    He could tell the red melons that this “fell off the back of a truck” and that it is Steven Joyce’s answer to red Len, and Paula’s answer to job shortages.

    Yep … Would be fun!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Mrs Trellis (34 comments) says:

    kowtow…. “Humour and logic have never been your strengths.”

    Nor has your mastery of the comma :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Harriet (4,614 comments) says:

    “…..The scary thing is he has probably driven drunk over 1,000 times….”

    So where are all the accidents and dead people?

    He can clearly then drive safely when he is drunk.

    I think he is probably just one of those blokes who lives a K or so from his local pub and is ‘technicaly over the limit’ and is now the case du jour for imposing further restrictions on drinking and driving.

    As the police in QLD have said ” Any further reduction in the road toll will only come from further driver training.”

    And that is why the police here in QLD mostly spend their time policing L & P plate drivers on the road………we have none of the ’4k over the speed limit’ nonsense being spouted by QLD police to drivers who have been driving for 20,30, 40 or even 60yrs. NZ does though.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. gazzmaniac (2,319 comments) says:

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA police in Queensland spending most of their tome policing L & P platers.
    Your head must be stuck so far up your arse if you believe that. They are concentrating on stupid little offences like leaving your car unlocked or the windows down more than 4cm. Or they are hassling motorbike riders since they might be gangsters.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Zebulon (78 comments) says:

    It should be jail from the very first time. If they kill or hurt someone the sentencing should be the same as for any other kind of violent crime and not the pathetic wet bus ticket sentences that the courts reserve for drink driver criminals.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. GPT1 (2,101 comments) says:

    There needs to be longer penalties than the current 2 years for significant recidivist drink drivers. It’s a small number but they are hard core and they don’t change. For whatever reason they are not safe in the community and society needs a long break than 12 months maximum.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Psycho Milt (2,349 comments) says:

    But all such penalties will deter only those in a state to understand the consequences.

    Fuck ‘em. If it does happen to deter them, great. If it doesn’t, banging ‘em up for a while means they’re not out risking other people’s lives every weekend. Either way, good result.

    He can clearly then drive safely when he is drunk.

    Yeah, and maybe he can drive safely while slipping a hooker a length, smoking, eating a pie and texting on his phone all at the same time. So the fuck what – other road users get to pay with their lives if he fucks up while doing it.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. lolitasbrother (563 comments) says:

    where did we get you from Psycho Milk

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. lolitasbrother (563 comments) says:

    OneTrack (1,647 comments) says: February 16th, 2014 at 12:41 pm
    quote

    How about -
    50-80 mg -Garbage, warning, car impounded overnight
    80-120mg – Uh oh, serious fine, car impounded for week
    120+ , Get out of here, serious fine, jail time, car impounded for month
    Repeat of 120+ WTF, serious fine, serious jail time, car crushed
    Mandatory minimums with no discretion for judges.
    unquote

    yeah, thats great One track, lets crush cars, pay here One track, you pay for the first offender $100,000 for the first year, but you get to have the fun of crushing the car, yeah, way to go One track

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Viking2 (11,228 comments) says:

    Maybe this sums it up.

    http://screencast.com/t/JbmFyRAzQRg

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. ZenTiger (425 comments) says:

    Being caught 18 times, means he has also got to be driving without a license and probably a host of extra offenses. It means he doesn’t actually give a shit.

    He’s heading in a direction that is going to get someone else killed, and if that happens on the 20th time or whatever, then I think the police and justice system also needs to be held accountable.

    Ban him from access to alcohol and put him in a rehab facility for 12 months to ensure he gets off it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Harriet (4,614 comments) says:

    “….qld police……They are concentrating on stupid little offences like leaving your car unlocked or the windows down more than 4cm….”

    Unlike you I don’t live in Brisbane gazz………….the local cops here in Bundy have told me what they target and windows and unlocked doors are not at the TOP of the list.

    We are lucky in that we have regional policing – where you lot in Brisbane suffer under metropolitian policing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Harriet (4,614 comments) says:

    “….He can clearly then drive safely when he is drunk………………So the fuck what – other road users get to pay with their lives if he fucks up while doing it…….”

    LOL………….My point as I said was “he is maybe technically over the limit” – just like some people ‘technically have a legal licence to drive’ – even though they really can’t and are therefor dangerous.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Psycho Milt (2,349 comments) says:

    Yeah, I’m sure this unlucky mope’s just happened to have been stopped 18 times while only slightly over the limit, and is in fact a heartwrenching victim of officious bureaucrats and a merciless justice-as-revenue system. That’s gotta be it.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Harriet (4,614 comments) says:

    “……and is in fact a heartwrenching victim of officious bureaucrats and a merciless justice-as-revenue system….”

    LOL……..you mean like being just 4k’s over the limit……..4 whole km’s a fucken hour………fucking walking pace……..the fucken army can march faster…………..or paying for a council permit to place a marque on your private farmland?

    Where’s all the deaths to warrant that officious and money-grabbing bullshit?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Psycho Milt (2,349 comments) says:

    Yes, the fact that you’re bitter about some speeding ticket you got definitetly means this guy is a victim.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. ChardonnayGuy (1,170 comments) says:

    Certainly if the repeat offender is guilty of vehicular-assisted homicide through their own selfish hedonism, negligence and carelessness. I hope any such expansion of penalties will be bipartisan and I would strongly support any increased severity in penalties for recidivist drunk drivers. Imprisonment and permanent confiscation of licenses strike me as appropriate. Thankfully, though, the vast majority of drivers (and drinkers) are prudent and responsible about their conduct.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.