SA mid range DUI punishments - what the?

[barnz_xr8]

oh and thats 8 years ago

[Mercury Bullet]

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

If he was just over low range, people might have some sympathy (i wont because you shouldn't be drinking and driving, regardless of the legal limits to avoid this exact situation) but he blew mid range. Thats not 'just a slip', thats well over and getting into plastered territory.

Plastered, really???
When I was 18 plastered was driving home with one eye closed so you could focus a little better.

I wonder how many of the do-gooders on here who have never made a mistake in their lives have been caught speeding?
Speeding is a well known killer on our roads too.

Sometimes this forum reminds me of the catholics who go to church every sunday yet can be found in the pubs on Friday nights, pi$$ed as farts trying to pick up loose women while wifey minds the kids.

At least the OP has learnt his lesson about posting about any mistakes he might have made in life.

[STEALTHY]

Originally Posted by ltd

Not my point.
I and I believe the OP were highlighting the disparity in terms of the real affect/s to the offender/s.

And i agree, that those other things he mentioned should have a higher penalty. But, so should mid range DUI

Originally Posted by raised by monkeys

To be fair, .08 isn't exactly plastered territory The limit of .05 you would not consider yourself drunk so I would hardly consider .08 plastered

Well, that depends on the person. I know plenty of people who can barely walk, let alone drive a car, but would be in the low range.

And thats exactly why we have these ranges, 0.05 isn't a target, its a mxaimum so if you've had a drink and need to drive, you wont be over the limit. If you are over 0.05, you shouldn't be driving, end of story! If you are over 0.08, you should be walking for alot longer than 6 months, thats not an accident!

Originally Posted by Mercury Bullet

I wonder how many of the do-gooders on here who have never made a mistake in their lives have been caught speeding?
Speeding is a well known killer on our roads too.

I've had many fines, but i dont view them as fines. I see it as a fee to do it (so it cost you $x to speed at x k's). The op should realised that it costs 6 months, and many $, to drive drunk to get food.

The difference between me and other people who have had fines, is they (most) dont post threads claiming they're hard done by. Accept responsibility for the mistakes and cop the punishment that is cleary listed on your local transport authorities website!

[prydey]

Originally Posted by ltd

Not my point.
I and I believe the OP were highlighting the disparity in terms of the real affect/s to the offender/s.

How it affects the individual isn't the laws problem. At some point you need to take responsibility for yourself. The OP has done this but he also knowingly got behind the wheel after having a few. The law isn't a surprise. He decided to take a risk and ran out of luck. If his circumstances were that critical perhaps he should have thought about that before driving.

I do agree that some penalties seem out of kilter with the offence but not for DUI. Too many people don't treat it like the serious thing that it is.

[Charliewool]

Originally Posted by Mercury Bullet

Sometimes this forum reminds me of the catholics who go to church every sunday yet can be found in the pubs on Friday nights, pi$$ed as farts trying to pick up loose women while wifey minds the kids.

How bloody true!!!
A mixture of would be coppers who couldn't make the grade and anti-alcohol wowsers who want prohibition brought back!
Pathetic really!

[STEALTHY]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

How bloody true!!!
A mixture of would be coppers who couldn't make the grade and anti-alcohol wowsers who want prohibition brought back!
Pathetic really!

I dont want to be a cop, nor do i want alcohol banned. But i do want alcohol and driving stopped!

[Mercury Bullet]

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

I've had many fines, but i dont view them as fines. I see it as a fee to do it (so it cost you $x to speed at x k's). The op should realised that it costs 6 months, and many $, to drive drunk to get food.

Right, so you're a serial offender who constantly puts peoples lives in danger but it's ok because you pay a tax. Yet continue to bash the OP for making a mistake.

Thanks for illustrating my point.

[raised by monkeys]

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

Well, that depends on the person. I know plenty of people who can barely walk, let alone drive a car, but would be in the low range.

And thats exactly why we have these ranges

I fail to even want to try and believe this.
Maybe follow up to ensure said persons have had their liver scanned.

[Charliewool]

Double standards galore!
If you got 6 months for 10ks over the speed limit, the same wowsers would be screaming blue murder over.. "What about the slap on the wrists for burglars or muggers, it ain't fair"
This place seriously has plenty of know it all soft cocks...

[Franco Cozzo]

Its not the worst mistake in the world, I feel for the OP and it sucks but its the rules.

I'm in the same position, self employed, without my license I'm in a bit of trouble as I could no longer run customers home or go out to pick up parts when required.

There are worse crimes around than blowing .05 or a touch over.

[STEALTHY]

Originally Posted by Mercury Bullet

Right, so you're a serial offender who constantly puts peoples lives in danger but it's ok because you pay a tax. Yet continue to bash the OP for making a mistake.

Thanks for illustrating my point.

My last fine was over 6 years ago, but none were for drink driving, thus alot less chance of anyones lives at risk than this guy ;)

Once again, its not a mistake, its an intentional thing. A mistake would be having one drink!

[raised by monkeys]

Hahahaha what a bunch of tripe! That's enough internet for tonight

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Mercury Bullet

Sometimes this forum reminds me of the catholics who go to church every sunday yet can be found in the pubs on Friday nights, pi$$ed as farts trying to pick up loose women while wifey minds the kids.

Huh...What do you mean sometimes?

I thought thats what we all have in common...isnt it

[BENT_8]

On a more serious note, you wanna hear hard done by. I knew of a bloke who never drank in his life and he had to go to Court to prove his innocence after being pinged for DUI.
The man in question was the oldest serving Holden Dealer Principal in SA, Rex Toop of Maitland Motors.
He got pulled over in a RBT on the way home from a social function and blew over .05.
He couldnt believe it and explained that he had never drunk alcohol in his life, all to no avail.
Took it to Court where some important people stood as witness and it was decided that as he was in close proximity to people consuming alcohol, he had somehow breathed in alcohol vapour and it was enough to register over .05.
He got off.

True story.

[Blem]

Why was over .08 a DUI charge & not perhaps a PCA charge ?
Ie over the prescribed concerntration of alcohol but not driving under the influence ?
Anyone here got real world answers???

[Iggle Piggle]

In my teens and through my 20's I would have done the same as you - would have driven after that many, would have hit that roo, and would have told anyone that would listen how unlucky I was for the roo to jump in front of me and that no one could have avoided it, and how unlucky I was that some Samaritan called emergency services.

After a while I came to really appreciate that, more often than not, it is choice and not chance that determines your destiny. It was not bad luck that saw you get done - it was a bad choice.

Re the sentence compared to other crimes you mention - you are right, it appears to be overly harsh - but only because those other offences are not punished severely enough. Look at your offence and likely punishment in isolation and it seems fair enough to me - just need to take a bigger stick to those that commit the other offences you mention.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Blem

Why was over .08 a DUI charge & not perhaps a PCA charge ?
Ie over the prescribed concerntration of alcohol but not driving under the influence ?
Anyone here got real world answers???

Isnt DUI reserved for circumstances where they cant determine what your BAC was?

http://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com...n-pca-and-dui/

[ea90gl]

So I am back again and decided to go over the more recent replies, good to see that a certain few can see where I am coming from. No I am not wanting people to cry for me and hear replies that support what I done was right like some of you may think. There obviously are the usual who continue to harp on about their complete opposite ideals which is fair enough, each and everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I respect that.

By the way and once again for the umpteenth time, I have definitely accepted that what I did was wrong and am more than happy to accept some form of punishment due to the mistake which I accept full responsibility for. Of course there has been a lesson learnt on my behalf and it will most definitely not happen again. And by the way, try being self employed and do what I do - it was most definitely not the case of being lazy (thanks again for the wrong assumptions) and not being able to cook for the wife. However this is not to be used as an excuse and I should not have headed out driving at all.

To explain yet again, I still do not see how the punishment does fit the crime as explained. For the record, I should of noted that in SA a low-range DUI offence is considered as having a BAC of 0.05-0.079. The punishment for this crime is just a fine and away you go. A mid-range offence is classed as having a BAC of between 0.08 and 0.1 at time of offence. I was found guilty of a a BAC of 0.082 which is a few more drops of alcohol more than a low-range offence. I am sure this will not change people's opinions of the issue (and once again to appease the majority the limits are the limits which I will ultimately have to accept).

Anyway like mentioned I will appear in court shortly and conform to whatever the judge has to say and will just have to cop the punishment on the chin. There is no more point for me going on about it and it will be what it is.

It will most definitely not happen again but there is no way I will ever accept that this punishment is suitable to the crime committed regardless.


Thanks to all for the replies and peace out.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

If he was just over low range, people might have some sympathy (i wont because you shouldn't be drinking and driving, regardless of the legal limits to avoid this exact situation) but he blew mid range. Thats not 'just a slip', thats well over and getting into plastered territory.

Isn't the limit in some places (USA) 0.08.
I don't think that can be considered plastered or even close to it.

I want to know who calls 000 because someone hit a kangaroo. Must of been their first day on a rural road. Well unless they noticed OP driving badly beforehand.

[Express]

Originally Posted by raised by monkeys

To be fair, .08 isn't exactly plastered territory The limit of .05 you would not consider yourself drunk so I would hardly consider .08 plastered

This reminds me of what my old man used to say to me back in my heavy drinking days, "you know you've having a good time when you s..t yourself."

[russellw]

I must have blinked and missed the transition from the Australia where fairness and (rough) compassion were the standard we lived by into the Australia ruled by PC, namby-pamby, epicene acolytes of the system. It saddens me.

This thread is going nowhere of use so it will be closed.

Oh and before it does, it might pay to remind the wowsers in this thread that from the introduction of drink-driving legislation that was supported by breath testing (70-80's dependant on State), most of the States considered 0.08 to be an acceptable limit for driving and even though there was little empirical evidence to support the reduction to 0.05, once the Nanny State had done so, the rest followed like sheep. Oh, and before someone jumps on the 'proven' research bandwagon - NZ only reduced from 0.08 to 0.05 in 2014 and 16 other countries still allow >0.05.

Finally, before you go trampling over someone's right to speak out about inequities in the law, consider that there is currently a push in some States to further reduce the limit to 0.02 or even zero so you could well be next.

Russ