get a dui here, your mug shot goes on facebook lolz

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fayd

Diamond Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,970
2
76
www.manwhoring.com
What price does society pay for a victimless crime? Please enlighten us.

it's not really a victimless crime if that behavior has a high chance to involve victims. just because they didn't that time doesn't mean they won't continue to do it, and involve someone next time.

so stop using the term "victimless crime".
 

Numenorean

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2008
4,442
1
0
A couple of reminders:

1) median house hold income is $49,000. After taxes ~40k.

10k fine = 25% of annual income
25k fine = 60% of annual income

How do you propose people will be able to pay this fine. What happens if they don't or can't pay the fine? Debtors prison?

Well since you are suspending their license for a year its not likely they will keep a job so the income will be realistically 0. Jobless and broke is a recipe for more crime. everyone knows this.

2) Permanent revocation of license will effectively make them jobless for life if their 5 year prison stint doesn't. Collecting welfare and unemployment. (unknown cost)

5 years in prison x 40k per year = $200k tax payer cost - 25k fine (assuming they have it) = 175k to tax payer not inclusive of court and administrative overhead probation/parole etc.

The recidivism rate for criminals is well over 50% so odds are they will definitely be in and out of the system permanently after 5 years in criminal training school(jail)

What if it was the bread winner of the family. Who watches the kids now? Who pays for them? What does that cost society?

3) Life in prison ....assuming 25 years x 40k = $1 million .


The societal risks add up quickly with this kind of punishment scheme.

Would it be more effective to invest in preventive measures?

You list a lot of reasons not to drink and drive. Should be a good deterrent I think.

No car != no job. There are these things called a bus.

You do make a compelling argument for the 2nd/3rd offenses though. I guess maybe we should just go with lethal injection for 2nd offense and not worry about it anymore.

And you can't just get unemployment. It's not that simple.

Ban these people from receiving any public help if you want.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Yes, death penalty. Society pays a huge price for what these dumbasses do, and I have no sympathy for those that can't learn a simple life lesson.

so, 3 times talking on cellphone while driving = death, too right?

Society pays a much greater penalty for those idiots than they do the drunk drivers, you know.
 

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
17
81
A couple of reminders:

1) median house hold income is $49,000. After taxes ~40k.

10k fine = 25% of annual income
25k fine = 60% of annual income

How do you propose people will be able to pay this fine. What happens if they don't or can't pay the fine? Debtors prison?

Well since you are suspending their license for a year its not likely they will keep a job so the income will be realistically 0. Jobless and broke is a recipe for more crime. everyone knows this.

2) Permanent revocation of license will effectively make them jobless for life if their 5 year prison stint doesn't. Collecting welfare and unemployment. (unknown cost)

5 years in prison x 40k per year = $200k tax payer cost - 25k fine (assuming they have it) = 175k to tax payer not inclusive of court and administrative overhead probation/parole etc.

The recidivism rate for criminals is well over 50% so odds are they will definitely be in and out of the system permanently after 5 years in criminal training school(jail)

What if it was the bread winner of the family. Who watches the kids now? Who pays for them? What does that cost society?

3) Life in prison ....assuming 25 years x 40k = $1 million .


The societal risks add up quickly with this kind of punishment scheme.

Would it be more effective to invest in preventive measures?

Sounds like the person who was drinking and driving should have thought twice before driving, eh?
 

IceBergSLiM

Lifer
Jul 11, 2000
29,932
3
81
it's not really a victimless crime if that behavior has a
high chance
to involve victims. just because they didn't that time doesn't mean they won't continue to do it, and involve someone next time.

so stop using the term "victimless crime".

Whats the threshhold for "high chance" ?

What other crimes meet that threshhold that we should be looking at?
 

IceBergSLiM

Lifer
Jul 11, 2000
29,932
3
81
You list a lot of reasons not to drink and drive. Should be a good deterrent I think.

A good deterrent would be a zero tolerance policy across the board.

No car != no job. There are these things called a bus.

only if you are lucky(or unlucky) enough to live in a city. Assuming they would hire a convict in the first place. Probably only a low wage job at most, it would make more sense to just make money the easy way.(commit more crime)

You do make a compelling argument for the 2nd/3rd offenses though. I guess maybe we should just go with lethal injection for 2nd offense and not worry about it anymore.
Should we apply this to all small offenses too?

And you can't just get unemployment. It's not that simple.
Your right but you can get welfare and food stamps and housing subsidies.
Ban these people from receiving any public help if you want.Then what do they do? Rob you and me? haha.



What do they call it when the solutions create bigger and worse problems? oh thats right its called A BAD IDEA!
 
Last edited:

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
17
81
Ok, let's do it your way.

DUI is just fine and everyone should do it!!

I have a feeling that the folks that defend drunk drivers here either have done it themselves or are heavy drinkers and expect to do it in the future.
 

NaOH

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2006
5,015
0
0
Ok, let's do it your way.

DUI is just fine and everyone should do it!!

At no point did he say that.........

Iceberg and Numernorean. I see both your arguments. Ice is arguing with logic and Numernorean is arguing with emotion. He is either trolling you or just really emotional about drunk drivers. In either case, I don't think you (ice) have anything to prove to him. Whatever you say now will just feed his emotions or trolling.
 

IceBergSLiM

Lifer
Jul 11, 2000
29,932
3
81
Ok, let's do it your way.

DUI is just fine and everyone should do it!!

In the perfect world there wouldn't be any DUI laws.

No, not because I think it is fine to drink and drive. I think the laws and approach society is taking is bogus.

We have the technology and means to disable a car from starting if the driver has been drinking yet we do not implement it. Instead we take the passive approach and demonize those who do it for the revenue it generates. We've put a cost on saving lives and decided its easier or more convenient or *gasp* more profitable to not prevent the problem(dui's). All the laws in the world won't stop dui's and dui deaths but a simple readily available technology can. We opt to let the problem continue in order to continue taking in all that money.

Demonizing someone that gets a DUI does zero to benefit society. Treating them like killers(assuming they didn't hurt or kill anyone) does even less for society.
 

FDF12389

Diamond Member
Sep 8, 2005
5,234
7
76
At no point did he say that.........

Iceberg and Numernorean. I see both your arguments. Ice is arguing with logic and Numernorean is arguing with emotion. He is either trolling you or just really emotional about drunk drivers. In either case, I don't think you (ice) have anything to prove to him. Whatever you say now will just feed his emotions or trolling.

This
 

PhoKingGuy

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2007
4,685
0
76
I live like a mile from this "downtown" area and its not anywhere as bad as they make it sound. Most of the idiots who do this kinda thing are the out of towners from Long Beach/Costa Mesa and frankly you would have to be pretty stupid to drive intoxicated anywhere near that area. Its crawling with foot cops and sobriety checkpoints.
 

Numenorean

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2008
4,442
1
0
In the perfect world there wouldn't be any DUI laws.

No, not because I think it is fine to drink and drive. I think the laws and approach society is taking is bogus.

We have the technology and means to disable a car from starting if the driver has been drinking yet we do not implement it. Instead we take the passive approach and demonize those who do it for the revenue it generates. We've put a cost on saving lives and decided its easier or more convenient or *gasp* more profitable to not prevent the problem(dui's). All the laws in the world won't stop dui's and dui deaths but a simple readily available technology can. We opt to let the problem continue in order to continue taking in all that money.

Demonizing someone that gets a DUI does zero to benefit society. Treating them like killers(assuming they didn't hurt or kill anyone) does even less for society.

I never have and never will drink and drive. So does that mean I should be forced to have these devices in my car? That's ridiculous.

Now maybe a better preventative measure is to install these devices in ALL vehicles owned currently and in the future by anyone with a DUI. Make them permanent from the time of the first DUI. They have to pay for any install/maintenance.

But those devices aren't perfect.
 

surfsatwerk

Lifer
Mar 6, 2008
10,110
5
81
I never have and never will drink and drive. So does that mean I should be forced to have these devices in my car? That's ridiculous.

Now maybe a better preventative measure is to install these devices in ALL vehicles owned currently and in the future by anyone with a DUI. Make them permanent from the time of the first DUI. They have to pay for any install/maintenance.

But those devices aren't perfect.

I thought they were all shot and killed the instant the cop pulled them over?
 

IceBergSLiM

Lifer
Jul 11, 2000
29,932
3
81
I never have and never will drink and drive. So does that mean I should be forced to have these devices in my car? That's ridiculous.

Now maybe a better preventative measure is to install these devices in ALL vehicles owned currently and in the future by anyone with a DUI. Make them permanent from the time of the first DUI. They have to pay for any install/maintenance.

But those devices aren't perfect.

Seat belts, airbags, anti lock breaks, break lights, rear view mirrors are all safety driven advances that were made to cars since their advent. They have saved countless lives. This would be no different. If the challenge was posed to car makers I can bet they'd have a tested working non-intrusive solution ready in under a year.
 

Numenorean

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2008
4,442
1
0
Seat belts, airbags, anti lock breaks, break lights, rear view mirrors are all safety driven advances that were made to cars since their advent. They have saved countless lives. This would be no different. If the challenge was posed to car makers I can bet they'd have a tested working non-intrusive solution ready in under a year.

"break" lights?

anti-lock "breaks" can actually be a bad thing.

Thanks for more proof that you're a moron.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
I never have and never will drink and drive. So does that mean I should be forced to have these devices in my car? That's ridiculous.

Now maybe a better preventative measure is to install these devices in ALL vehicles owned currently and in the future by anyone with a DUI. Make them permanent from the time of the first DUI. They have to pay for any install/maintenance.

But those devices aren't perfect.

well atleast you are showing a smidgent of logic. But its funny that you dont think you should be punished, but someone with a DUI that didnt hurt anyone should be treated like a murderer. a bit of a logic fail. you are too emotionally vested in this.
 

PimpJuice

Platinum Member
Feb 14, 2005
2,051
1
76
"break" lights?

anti-lock "breaks" can actually be a bad thing.

Thanks for more proof that you're a moron.

If hes a moron, then you're an even bigger moron.

You haven't said more than 2 logical things in this thread but I guess thats obvious judging from the last 2 pages where you reply with nothing but insults.

You are a fucking idiot
 

SphinxnihpS

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2005
8,368
25
91
The ATOT temperance convention is in town again I see. You "there's no penalty too harsh for a DUI" crowd are such ignorant bastards.