Image Image

  Nostalgia ain't what it used to be

Tuesday, 01 December, 2020

Drunk Drivers

Date: 15 August, 2005

By: Chief

Imagehey are, without any doubt, the scumbags of the road.

I personally do not care one way or the other if a person drinks. I also do not care how much a person drinks. It is none of my business. But, if said person is drinking or is drunk and bothers me or a member of my family, then it becomes my business and I shall, one way or another, shut that fool down.

Drunk drivers, however, are the scumbag of a different color. They need to be shut down, one way or another.

Face it, the current laws in most states do not really quash the problem of a drunk behind the wheel. Some stupid son of a bitch decides to tie one on and then drive home (how stupid can one person be?) places by his or her act of utter stupidity every person who is in his or her vehicular line of fire in direct and mortal peril. Period.

You, I or anybody else do — not — have the right to place anyone in direct and mortal peril because of our own stupidity.

How many times have you read in the local paper or watched on the boob tube about some really stupid person drinking too much then pouring themself into their car, SUV or pickup, attempting to drive and ending up causing a wreck with another vehicle and killing innocent people or just plain old hitting an innocent pedestrian? The sad fact is, we have all read about it, watched it on the tube or witnessed it. Quite a few times the carnage is caused by repeat drunk driving offenders.

Those 'repeat offenders', in my view, need in the worst possible way to be shut down. Permanently. But, in case you have not noticed, nothing has changed. Not one bloody thing. And that is the worst travesty of all.

Here in New Mexico we have laws specifically pertaining to stupid people who, it seems, enjoy drinking and driving. Funny, well not so funny at all, thing is that this state appears to have a real high level of repeat drunk driving offenders. You can translate that as stupid offenders. Stupid offenders:

I suspect the same just might be true in all of the several states.

A perfect example of what I am discussing happen the other day up in Santa Fe, New Mexico's capitol. Here is the transcript between a concerned citizen in a vehicle talking to the sheriff's dispatch center (courtesy of KOBTV online edition):

"There's a really drunk guy and he nearly T-boned me and I'm really concerned because there's lots of bicycle people on the road and stuff, says the initial call from a woman who then followed the truck being driven by 36-year-old [stupid offender].

"Three minutes later, [a] cyclist was hit.

"Oh my God, says the woman[,] [i]t's a bike.

"Okay, okay, okay, responds the dispatcher.

"He just hit a bike.


"Oh my God.

"Okay, asks the dispatcher, did he hit the person?

"Oh my God, said the caller[,] I think so.

"After arriving on the scene, the caller and other witnesses searched for the body of the victim, whose lifeless body they eventually found in the bed of [the stupid offender's] truck.

"Oh God, the caller says after finding the body[,] I'm so sorry.

"Okay, responds the dispatcher[.] You're doing a good job.

"I'm so sorry[,] I'm so upset 'cause I knew this could be prevented.

"Is he [the stupid offender] still there?

"He's still here, said the caller[,] He's just looking at the person. He doesn't even care 'cause he's so drunk."

The stupid offender was arrested a few minutes later by deputy sheriffs.

Further, according to the same report, the stupid offender:

"[The stupid offender] has at least three prior DWI convictions and six arrests for drunk driving. If convicted of vehicular homicide while under the influence of alcohol, he could be sentenced to 15 years in prison."

The person on the bicycle who this scumbag maniac hit was a 58 year old married woman.

Isn't that just lovely?

At worst, this stupid offender is going to end in a state prison for 15 years.

If this scumbag were sentenced tomorrow and did the full 15 years in a state cross bars bed and breakfast the stupid offender would be back on the streets, alive and well, at the ripe old age of 51. In other words, scumbag himself would be free at a younger age than the age of the women — he murdered.

That's right, stupid offender murdered that 58 year old — innocent — woman. Don't even try to give me the crap that the Center for Disease Control (CDC) says about alcoholism should be treated as a disease. Hogwash. And some, possibly all, state bar associations make the categorical statement that alcoholism is:

"(a) A disease, (b) 'treatable like a disease', and; (c) a 'disease based concept' " (quote from (ask Stanton)).

That is a full blown crock of crap.

It is a decision

Drinking, even alcoholism is not a disease and never has been. Indeed, it is a decision. A person decides to:

The rest, as we all know, is history.

Therefore, as far as I am concerned, some stupid offender who kills a person should not be tried for vehicular homicide. No, they should be tried for capitol murder. Because of the decision to drink. It is that simple.

Maybe, just maybe, if we started hanging these wretched and worthless sons-a-bitches — publicly — we just might be able to reduce the number of innocent people being maimed or murdered by these stupid offenders.

If nothing else we most certainly would reduce the number of stupid repeat offenders.

Additionally, one cannot blame in anyway the bartender or 'likker' store sales person for the decisions and subsequent actions of the stupid offender. The bartender at the local gin mill or watering hole, along with any 'likker' store sales person, are not baby sitters. Those folks sell alcohol to — adults. Adults are to be held, at least in theory, accountable for their actions.

So, says I, we hold drunk drivers who kill people accountable — at the end of a rope.

[Ed. note: This story has been updated.]

(Return to the top)