As motorists approach a checkpoint, they would have the option to pull into the right lane to stop or take the left lane to drive through without interference.
Motorists who stop would be asked a few questions while officers activate passive alcohol sensors that test the driver's breath alcohol while he or she is talking.
If officers notice no sign of impairment, they will hand out educational pamphlets and send the driver on his or her way. If officers notice a sign of impairment, they will tell the driver that he or she now is being lawfully detained, consistent with a normal traffic stop.
Neenah resident Bob Lace initially thought Wilkinson's idea was ludicrous.
"I can't visualize anybody volunteering to go through (the checkpoint), even for a coupon," he said. "You are not going to get any drunks going through unless they are absolutely stoned."
I always assumed that with checkpoints you were forced to pull over if the cops wanted to see if you were wasted, but I guess I was mistaken. I think it would still work to deter drunk drivers, as Lace understands, since people who choose to skip the the checkpoint would be potentially monitored by the cops for impairment. You'd also have the deterrent effect, in the sense that people who go out drinking and know they have to pass a checkpoint later in the evening will be more likely to plan ahead and either not drink as much or get a sober driver. The large-scale deterrence might do a better job of curbing drunk driving then the suggestion of beefing up roving patrols. The strength of the checkpoints come from the visibility and certainty of the program. Of course, police might be able to get the same returns from just publicizing that the police are going to crack down on drunk driving for a certain amount of time -
"More than 300 Wisconsin law enforcement agencies will be on the hunt for OWI offenders beginning Friday, Aug. 21. This is part of a nationwide "Drunk Driving. Over the Limit. Under Arrest" crackdown on drunk drivers that will run through Labor Day.
Drunk driving is a big problem in Wisconsin. Last year, approximately 37,000 Wisconsin drivers were convicted of drunk driving. Alcohol-related crashes in Wisconsin killed 234 people and injured 4,319 last year alone, according to the Wisconsin Department of Transportation."
Regardless, it's safe to say that these responses to drunk driving will continue to be slaps on the wrists of offenders as long as the first 3 times you get caught drunk driving is misdemeanor.
The bill approved by the Senate mirrors the Assembly bill in many ways. Both would:
• Make a fourth offense a felony if it occurs within five years of a previous offense. Now, drunken driving isn't a felony until the fifth offense.
• Require ignition interlocks for all repeat drunken drivers and for first-time offenders with blood-alcohol levels of 0.15 or greater - nearly twice the legal limit for driving.
Ignition interlocks don't allow vehicles to start until drivers can show they don't have alcohol in their system by blowing into a device similar to a Breathalyzer.
• Make first-offense drunken driving a misdemeanor if a child younger than 16 is in the vehicle. Wisconsin is the only state to treat first offenses as traffic tickets, rather than crimes. The provision wouldn't affect punishments for those with two or more offenses if they were caught driving with a child in the vehicle.
• Expand statewide a Winnebago County program that gives judges the option of offering reduced jail time to offenders who complete alcohol or drug treatment. Backers say it saves money while reducing recidivism.
• Eliminate a provision that provides lighter penalties for those with a blood-alcohol level between 0.08 and 0.10, compared with those above 0.10. Those with lower blood-alcohol levels would face the same penalties as those of 0.10 or above.
No comments:
Post a Comment