Is Life Sentence Too Harsh For Man Convicted of Ninth DWI?

[wayneflorida 0]

Lucky he hasn't killed somebody already. At 54 I don't think any kind of rehabilitation will help or would be very short lived.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-man-life-sentence-ninth-dwi/story?id=11395058

[kallend 1,644]

Quote

Lucky he hasn't killed somebody already. At 54 I don't think any kind of rehabilitation will help or would be very short lived.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-man-life-sentence-ninth-dwi/story?id=11395058

He had 8 previous chances and still blew it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Glitch 0]

I think the sentence is unfair! ....to the taxpayers that are now burnded to support his ass while in prison. Wouldn't it be less expensive to lock him up in an institution where he can be forced to sober up and treat his alcoholism until cured? And then, upon release, be permanently required to wear an alcohol monitoring device, as well as be required to take meds so that if he does consume alcohol he becomes violently ill? Is there such a med?

Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born...

[Shotgun 1]

No, I don't think it's too harsh. But I am curious what his sentences were for the other eight DWI's. (Would some harsher penalities earlier on have kept him from doing this so many times?) It says he will be eligible for parole in five years, so he does still have a chance to get himself together, but he will be off the streets if he doesn't.

And I don't think that his age means that rehabilitation won't work. Many people change and get sober late in life, when the consequences have added up and finally pushed them to the breaking point.

[happythoughts 0]

After the 3rd DUI, wouldn't it have been more reasonable to take away his license for 20 years ? As part of his parole, order that he sell the vehicle ?

It is done in a lot of other states. I have seen it done after the 1st DUI.

That would have eliminated the dangerous circumstances
of DUIs 4 through 9.

[Southern_Man 0]

antabuse makes you violently ill when you consume alcohol. Unfortunately there is not really a way to force anybody to take medication against their will effectively in an outpatient setting. Setting him free and requiring him to take antabuse is not an effective solution since our mental health system is not set up to monitor that effectively.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Bobby Stovall, 54, was driving his truck in Round Rock, Texas, in early July when he weaved through several lanes of traffic and hit another vehicle, injuring the driver. It was later determined that Stovall had a blood alcohol concentration of .32, four times the legal limit in Texas.

No, and above is why. This guy is going around putting everyone else at risk. He's already hurt people and caused serious wrecks while ridiculously impaired (a felony in many places) plus he is beyond habitual dwi (a felony in many places). My bet is he's already got three felonies wracked up (which is automatic life or massive mandatory minimum sentences in some places). So his getting a life sentence I not that much outside the ordinary. Now add in that every dwi is only inches away from a murder conviction, and yeah, a life sentence is reasonable. This guy has been through assessments, has had the chance for treatments. If you want to say he has a disease, then he is no different than the criminally insane who need to be kept away from society.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Kennedy 0]

There is a pill (I hesitate to call it medication) that makes a person violently ill if they consume alcohol. There are day reporting centers that an offender can be force to go to every day to take the pill under supervision as a condition of probation. The problem is higher courts have ruled that courts cannot force a person, even a convict, to take medicine against their wishes. So that solition is out. Also alcohol monitoring anklets only work after the fact. They do t prevet drunk driving. They only report drinking after the fact. As for the "forced cure" to his alcoholism, there's no real way to do it if he doesn't want it to happen and there's no way to know that it will stick.

Revoking their license is a joke. Most states don't have any real penalty for dwlr. Florida is a good exception. They treat habitual dwlr as a felony, and impound the car driven.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Nightingale 0]

A lot of things that you can't force people to do can be conditions of probation, since a convict doesn't have to accept probation and can choose to continue to stay in jail. Not sure about the medication ruling, but I know that's why they can get people to waive 4th amendment rights and submit to search and seizure terms as part of parole/probation.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

After the 3rd DUI, wouldn't it have been more reasonable to take away his license for 20 years ? As part of his parole, order that he sell the vehicle ?

It is done in a lot of other states. I have seen it done after the 1st DUI.

That would have eliminated the dangerous circumstances
of DUIs 4 through 9.

If he disregarded laws prohibiting drunk driving, why would he be concerned about driving without a license?

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Quote

After the 3rd DUI, wouldn't it have been more reasonable to take away his license for 20 years ? As part of his parole, order that he sell the vehicle ?

It is done in a lot of other states. I have seen it done after the 1st DUI.

That would have eliminated the dangerous circumstances
of DUIs 4 through 9.

If he disregarded laws prohibiting drunk driving, why would he be concerned about driving without a license?

The second line -
"As part of his parole, order that he sell the vehicle ? "

No car, no problem.

[wayneflorida 0]

Life isn't too bad. Probably means 10 to 15 with parole.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

After the 3rd DUI, wouldn't it have been more reasonable to take away his license for 20 years ? As part of his parole, order that he sell the vehicle ?

It is done in a lot of other states. I have seen it done after the 1st DUI.

That would have eliminated the dangerous circumstances
of DUIs 4 through 9.

If he disregarded laws prohibiting drunk driving, why would he be concerned about driving without a license?

The second line -
"As part of his parole, order that he sell the vehicle ? "

No car, no problem.

Really? Just because he doesn't own a car doesn't mean he can't get his hands on one to drive.
Taking a car away from a habitual DUI offender is like taking a stick away from a monkey. It pisses them off but they will get another.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

No car, no problem.

yeah, I'm sure nobody EVER drove any car other than theirs when they were intoxicated.

clearly if they don't own a car, they cant drive drunk... it's impossible right?

--
Rob

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

There is a pill (I hesitate to call it medication) that makes a person violently ill if they consume alcohol. There are day reporting centers that an offender can be force to go to every day to take the pill under supervision as a condition of probation. The problem is higher courts have ruled that courts cannot force a person, even a convict, to take medicine against their wishes. So that solition is out. Also alcohol monitoring anklets only work after the fact. They do t prevet drunk driving. They only report drinking after the fact. As for the "forced cure" to his alcoholism, there's no real way to do it if he doesn't want it to happen and there's no way to know that it will stick.

Revoking their license is a joke. Most states don't have any real penalty for dwlr. Florida is a good exception. They treat habitual dwlr as a felony, and impound the car driven.

Anabuse and I've seen a person drink on it. He was a huge guy so eh was probably underdosed.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Quote

No car, no problem.

yeah, I'm sure nobody EVER drove any car other than theirs when they were intoxicated.

clearly if they don't own a car, they cant drive drunk... it's impossible right?

I'd say it makes it more inconvenient than sending
them home WITH their vehicle as done in DUI arrests one through eight.

Apparently, whatever steps were taken for all the previous
DUI arrests worked on a level just below Fail.

So, I was suggesting an alternate strategy.
We can all agree that the current method isn't producing
the desired effect.

[billvon 2,426]

>"As part of his parole, order that he sell the vehicle ? "

He then buys a new one. It's a given that the guy lost his license several DUI's ago. If he's not going to obey the laws on DUI, or driving without a license, odds are he won't heed some court order to not buy, borrow or rent a car.

[shropshire 0]

Yes, it's too harsh. A sentence must be proportionate and Life is far from that for those crimes.

It's an easy option for the court but not necessarily the correct one.

The burden on the state is way too high too.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[winsor 187]

I say send him to Bulgaria
-----------------------------

Drunk Driving Penalties in other Countries

Australia: The names of the drivers are sent to the local newspapers and are printed under the heading "He's Drunk and in Jail".


Malaysia: The Driver is jailed and if married, his wife is jailed too.


South Africa: A 10 year prison sentence and the equivalent of a $10,000.00 fine


Turkey: Drunk drivers are taken 20 miles outside of town by police and are forced to walk back under escort


Norway: Three weeks in jail at hard labor, one year loss of license. Second offense within five years, license revoked for life.


Finland & Sweden: Automatic jail for one year of hard labor


Costa Rica: Police remove plates fron car


Russia: License revoked for life


England: One year suspension and a $250.00 fine and jail for one year


France: Three year loss of license, one year in jail and a $1000.00 fine


Poland: Jail, fine and forced to attend political lectures


Bulgaria: A second conviction results in execution


El Salvador: Your first offense is your last---execution by firing squad

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Bulgaria: A second conviction results in execution
El Salvador: Your first offense is your last---execution by firing squad

This is one of those viral blogosphere things. I'm surprised you would have accepted all of that at face value, unless you were repeating it tongue-in-cheek.

Anyhow, Bulgaria had its last execution in 1989, and abolished capital punishment outright in 1998.
El Salvador abolished capital punishment in 1983 (the only exception is that it may be imposed only in cases provided by military laws during a state of international war).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_capital_punishment_by_nation

[winsor 187]

Quote

Quote

Bulgaria: A second conviction results in execution
El Salvador: Your first offense is your last---execution by firing squad

This is one of those viral blogosphere things. I'm surprised you would have accepted all of that at face value, unless you were repeating it tongue-in-cheek.

Anyhow, Bulgaria had its last execution in 1989, and abolished capital punishment outright in 1998.
El Salvador abolished capital punishment in 1983 (the only exception is that it may be imposed only in cases provided by military laws during a state of international war).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_capital_punishment_by_nation

Oh, I'm not saying it's fer real - I just like the concept.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Yes, it's too harsh. A sentence must be proportionate and Life is far from that for those crimes.

It's an easy option for the court but not necessarily the correct one.

The burden on the state is way too high too.

The level of state-mandated barbarism in the US, imposed through its courts, against people within its own borders, is pretty high compared to most other modern, Western-style, industrialized democratic republics. Most Americans, not knowing any better, have no idea how it compares to the other Western nations, and are quite approving of it.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Quote

Yes, it's too harsh. A sentence must be proportionate and Life is far from that for those crimes.

It's an easy option for the court but not necessarily the correct one.

The burden on the state is way too high too.

The level of state-mandated barbarism in the US, imposed through its courts, against people within its own borders, is pretty high compared to most other modern, Western-style, industrialized democratic republics. Most Americans, not knowing any better, have no idea how it compares to the other Western nations, and are quite approving of it.

So, what would you guys suggest is an appropriate punishment for someone's ninth DWI?

[shropshire 0]

I don't know BUT Life in Prisonment is the wrong answer and does not feel like the correct punishment for this crime.

You shouldn't punish someone because of what they could do.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 2,426]

>You shouldn't punish someone because of what they could do.

Right. But in this case it seems like we are punishing people for what they DID do. He has hurt others and shows absolutely no signs of stopping.