Home of Today's Common Sense

Published – Brownsville Herald 2/20/2005
I recently read a Brownsville Herald editorial entitled “Bad Examples” which pointed out circumstances where a number of public officials had been arrested and charged with intoxicated driving and then received smaller penalties than others.
Firstly, it is important to note that the enforcement officers did their duty without preference and prevented a worse tragedy. In years gone by the officer might take the brother officer home or just not arrest him, therefore enabling the individual to continue with the destructive behavior. With most officers today, there is little sense of tolerance in a DUI stop no matter who the violator is. In part, I feel we should thank the “Mothers Against Drunk Drivers” for keeping the focus on.
The editorial seemed to point out issues of public officials because they are public officials not necessarily because there has been unfair treatment. We all understand that these folks are in positions that make them examples and as such should be held to a higher level of scrutiny. It does not seem that these cases were hidden to avoid scrutiny but just what they seemed to be. Perhaps some favoritism was shown and if that is the case a bit more light has been shown on them by the editorial and either higher authority will take action if appropriate or the electorate will take the action it deems necessary. It proves to me that the system works.
I also doubt that there is any increase in the number of county officials or anyone else hitting the road after becoming impaired. I believe it is that law enforcement is becoming more vigilant and more effective in dealing with these violations that has brought so many to light. After the immediate danger of a disastrous wreck has been lessened by law enforcement taking the right action and the system takes over, the process certainly deserves an amount of review, and that review seems to be in place because of the instant article and the recent criminal actions for bribery.
While I don’t always support aggressive and creative judges, I am amazed at the effectiveness with which the criminal judges (with MADD sitting on each shoulder) deal with the issues by being just that aggressive and creative.
Each case is unique and for the judge to provide the right motivation to each defendant to stop the bad behavior, and not just issue punishment, is a monumental task, and I am confident is taken very seriously.
I would like to see any flexibility in their abilities to issue sentences increased rather than restricted because DUI cases are unique in the criminal system. Criminal actions are taken because of the increased damage that could be done by an impaired driver and the repetition of the bad behavior.
This is not just an issue of fair treatment under the law but one that divides many in the same families, and affects nearly every workplace. Alcohol and substance abuse are ever looming problems and how to deal with the individuals and the effects to society have been the cause of many broken people and terrible consequences to their families, as well as those injured as a result of the intoxication.
I do not have a solution and when someone does have one, that person should become a saint.
Like so many, I have come face to face with alcohol and abuse of other substances in people that I have known, since my youth. An article I read recently, estimated that more than 10 percent of the population are active substance abusers and possibly many more have the propensity except that they don’t use alcohol or substances.
I do not doubt for a minute that it is a serious disease but I do believe that it is a controllable one.
I have come to think of substance abuse as something like psoriasis, many have the propensity to develop it but because the skin is not broken it never exhibits itself, and when the symptoms do show they are for an indefinite period, if not forever.
I also see it as something like diabetes, a serious, life threatening disease that can be controlled with the proper treatment, such as abstaining from some sugars and eating healthier or proper medication.
There are all kinds of help available for the substance abuser; some at a price but possibly the best is free. The “Anonymous” groups AA, NA seem to be the most successful. Alcoholics Anonymous started it off in 1935 with 2 drunks helping each other to not drink today. It has grown to now there are more than 2 million who call themselves members and most likely many more millions in the other Anonymous groups helping each other to a better life one day at a time. More information can be secured from www.alcoholics-anonymous.org on the internet or looking up one of the Anonymous groups in the phone book or in the Club meetings area of this paper.
No one needs to be a victim; one can accept the problem and get help to enable the choice not to drink or use today. Beyond that the fellowships promises help to learn how to deal with life without the substance and to make better choices in daily living.
In preparing this article I spoke to a number of folks who have chosen to avoid that first drink or joint or line today and for a number of yesterdays. They can be a very frustrating bunch.
Just at the start, I was told by one; “I can’t tell anyone how to get sober but I can tell you how I did it”. Another said, “If anyone else thinks you have a drinking problem you probably do.” Another remarked, “If you think there may be a problem, come to meetings for a month and you should find out. If you don’t have one, the money you saved by not drinking will buy you a great party.”
They talk like that!
They also refuse to be quoted by name, even though many are not really worried about who might know that they used to be a drunk. I was told that a principle of the organization was to remain anonymous to the media.
In my opinion, the issue that the instant case clearly focuses on, is that many from all levels of society, not just the poor and disadvantaged, are being arrested and incarcerated. In many cases these folks would otherwise be great contributors to society and bastions of the community but a third conviction comes along and it is for a felony. An otherwise promising life is ended by a loss of civil rights and a conviction of a crime that prevents any future employment in many fields.
As I pointed out earlier, these kinds of criminal convictions may not be the result of an accident or destruction of property or injury to anyone; but for the increased probability that destruction may happen. That is what makes it somewhat unique in the criminal system.
Most judges today when sentencing a violator for the first two instances of misdemeanor DWI (and there is no property damage or individual injury involved), seem to require some jail time, probation that includes some exposure to substance abuse treatment, the installation of a device in the vehicle that prevents operation when alcohol is present on the breath and provide that the fact of the conviction may be removed from the record after a number of years. These seem very reasonable to me and provide a great opportunity to introduce the possibility of the need for rehabilitation before something more serious happens.
In the case of the felony conviction (indicated at the third conviction), I would like to suggest that the conviction be changed to a misdemeanor after perhaps 5 years subsequent to the completion of all the sentence requirements and no further instances of criminal behavior. This would encourage many to seriously work towards lifestyle changes, especially youthful violators convicted a third time, the hope of a better life when the proper behavior is demonstrated. The retention of the misdemeanor would also continue the record in the event the gains are lost.
I think both the carrot and the stick are needed and both should be used judiciously.