Robert Christopher Johnston has been convicted of Driving Under the Influence 7 or 8 times (authorities can't quite remember the exact figure!) and yet is only now going to jail.Maryland Circuit Court Judge Paul A. Hackner convicted Johnston of driving under the influence and sentenced him to three years in prison. It was an extremely rare example of actual punishment being meted out to a drunk driver and it drew applause from Mother Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and others. However, it turns out that the sentence wasn't quite as serious as it first appeared. After all, the judge did suspend half of the sentence immediately; a $3,00 fine was also suspended; and the judge recommended Johnston for work release while at the county jail. Furthermore, when Johnston gets out and starts serving his five years of probation, he would be required to use an ignition interlock device for only those five years.
For recklessly endangering lives over and over again, this really isn't that tough a sentence after all.
And though it flies under the radar for most media and politicians, the reckless endangerment of innocent lives posed by drunk drivers should most definitely receive closer attention. Here's a few examples why.
* Over 17,00 people died in alcohol-related traffic crashes in 2006 (2007 figures aren't tallied quite yet). That's an average of two persons being killed because of drunk driving every hour. (For comparison, note the amount of news coverage and political discourse given to American combat casualties in the entire Iraqi war: 3,218.)
* These drunk driving deaths constitute 41% of the 42,642 total traffic fatalities. Of these, an estimated 13,470 involved a driver with an illegal Blood Alcohol Content of .08 or greater.* About three in every ten Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their lives. How many will die or be seriously injured?
* Alcohol-related crashes in the United States cost the public an estimated $114.3 billion in 2000, the last year that complete figures are available. That includes $51.1 billion in monetary costs and an estimated $63.2 billion in quality of life losses.
* 63% of the total cost of these crashes in the above mentioned year ($71.6 billion) were paid by people other than the drinking driver.
When will judges and legislators ever get serious about stopping this scourge? Indeed, how many tragic news stories about teenagers mourning their lost classmates do we have to watch before we're motivated to intervene and work for desperately needed change?
What's most vital? An awful lot: more aggressive police action...stiffer penalties for drunk drivers...stronger criticism for uncaring judges who let repeat offenders off...requiring ignition interlocks for all convicted DUI offenders...greater efforts to reduce underage drinking...and stronger penalties for drivers who refuse BAC tests.
As a son whose father was killed by a drunk driver, I have developed an intense desire to see the needless killing and maiming stop. But it is a desire shared by anyone with a sense of justice and a concern for the better protection of our citizens from the severe dangers caused by impaired drivers. Therefore I urge you to contact your political representatives at all levels and ask them what they have done (and are now doing) to more effectively get drunks off the highways.
Will legislators step up and make these life-saving, injury-avoiding, cost-containing measures a priority? Will police officers be allowed to get serious about getting drunks off the road, as opposed to having to them follow such unwritten rules as that which prohibits them from staking out a tavern parking lot? And, of course, will judges begin to enforce the tougher laws if enacted?
The stakes are very high. But for the memory of the hundreds of thousands who have been needlessly killed and mangled by drunk drivers (and, more important, to protect those still around), effectual measures to deter drunk driving are worth our best efforts.
(Statistics used in the above were taken from the MADD web site.)
