[iowajournal]

I'm not sure that being completely honest is such a good thing anymore, and I am probably opening myself up for negativity and judgment but here it goes.

Tuesday night, I was arrested for driving while intoxicated. 2nd Offense OMVI as it's known here. I blew a .11 in the field test. I refused the breathalyzer at the police dept. and was booked overnite in the county jail.

Apparently, the convenience store clerk called police and alerted them that he thought I was intoxicated. I stopped in for a couple microwave sandwhiches like I sometimes do late at night coming home.

I was driving fine. Slow and careful like I always do, but because of the call the town police flashed their lights and pulled me over.

The Sports bar that I was drinking at had Karaoke night on Tuesday and the bartenders are very quick to pour you as many beers and drinks that you want. I have a problem with binge drinking meaning once I start...I go all the way. But the nature of alcohol is that it is a mild euphoriant and anesthetic so I'm not really doing anything the nature of the drug isn't intending. The more pain in one's life...naturally the more "anesthetic" one would need to subdue it.

I'm sure a lot of people have different thoughts about this issue. I know it is pretty common thing and everyone can be affected. Celebrities, Public Officials, even the Judge in our county was arrested for OWI. It happens more than you think. I am neither dangerous to society nor some evil drunk that is going to kill your children like all the propaganda would have you believe.

My point is this. Like I argued to the judge in the last OWI I had. Society is a hypocritical beast. It is intentionlly contradictory. It cares not about logic...it is poorly designed and poorly implemented. The OWI / Beer is God in our culture conundrum is so much a demon of the advertising industry. Every one seems to think that its all peachy keen...and you need to "drink responsibly" as the tags on the end of the commercials tell us. If any one of you have read my posts on alternative society you will know that I for one am tired of living in this false reality...under this ignorant, unrighteous system and especially after having been thrown in the same cell with 4 other guys, of which one of them was there for attempted murder (he attacked his wife with a claw hammer), and 2 others for serious domstic assault and one other for assault.

The government must not be trusted. I know this now completely. They are nothing more than a group of less than intelligent control/ authority junkies who I am convinced should not have the type of control they possess over people's lives. The very nature of the design of their penal system---placing non=violent offenders with violent ones tells me the system is unenlightened, archaic, and barbaric.

I'm sorry to be coming across as some bitter guy who won't accept responsibility for his actions. But macroscopically I see a bigger issue that needs to be rresolved. You have to break down the steps and system most people take for granted as "just the way its done, or is". The ability to omniscently hover over the situation and monitor my own punishent and treatment is a trait the present government dislikes about me. They know I look at the bigger picture and it annoys them. After all jailers, and police like to exercise absolute authority over people's bodies. It is why they got in the business, and a person like me who questions everything...they find the time to make things very difficult for me.

Society is planned poorly. I'm not bitter. I see it for what it is. It is not worthy to call itself my "authority" or leadership. No group of people shall have the right to call themselves captors and authoritators over other people unless those other people have expressly asked them to in the form of consensus, and direct voting in.
And since I don't remember having voted in the police and sherrifs on an individual basis...

The police forces assume control over the people and this assumption is dangerous and fascist leaning in my opinion.

[shadowofman]

I agree. Sorry for the bad luck there.
The problem with the authority that these cops wield is that our society is so afraid of everything and everyone, that they beg for more of it.

[Ocean-Blue]

"I have a problem with binge drinking meaning once I start...I go all the way. But the nature of alcohol is that it is a mild euphoriant and anesthetic so I'm not really doing anything the nature of the drug isn't intending. The more pain in one's life...naturally the more "anesthetic" one would need to subdue it.

I'm sure a lot of people have different thoughts about this issue. I know it is pretty common thing and everyone can be affected. Celebrities, Public Officials, even the Judge in our county was arrested for OWI. It happens more than you think. I am neither dangerous to society nor some evil drunk that is going to kill your children like all the propaganda would have you believe."

Your blood alcohol level was above the legal limit. The legal limit is a standard that has been set to protect those on the roads.

You yourself admit that alcohol can alter one's state of mind.

You could have killed someone when you decided to get behind the wheel after consuming as much as you did.

You state that you should be able to monitor yourself and self-police. And yet, you didn't, did you? You chose to get into your car and drive. You put yourself, fellow drivers and pedestrians at a great risk by driving drunk.

Getting a drunk driver off the road is not about control but the protection of society.

[iowajournal]

Except for the fact that in the dead of the night 2:20 am, in my small rural town area...everyone is sleeping and it is peacefully quiet. I was driving fine. Contrary to popular belief some people do know how to manage their vehicles while technically "over the limit". My point is the punishment must fit the crime.

Produce the corpse. Show me the damage. And I will gladly confess to the crime. Detterance does nothing for the rehabilitation of that particular individual. It is designed for the next individual. And I don't believe in Detterance as a major policy setting tool. You may. But I don't. Society is impersonal enough. We don't need more hangings.

[Ocean-Blue]

Originally Posted by iowajournal

Except for the fact that in the dead of the night 2:20 am, in my small rural town area...everyone is sleeping and it is peacefully quiet. I was driving fine. Contrary to popular belief some people do know how to manage their vehicles while technically "over the limit". My point is the punishment must fit the crime.

Produce the corpse. Show me the damage. And I will gladly confess to the crime. Detterance does nothing for the rehabilitation of that particular individual. It is designed for the next individual. And I don't believe in Detterance as a major policy setting tool. You may. But I don't. Society is impersonal enough. We don't need more hangings.

You were held in a cell overnight. How does the punishment not fit the crime? How do you think you should have been punished?

It does not matter if it was very late or if your town is rural. You could have hurt yourself. You admit in your initial post that you are a binge drinker...that you cannot stop once you start. What if you had hit a pole? Or a poor, unsuspecting animal crossing the street (or one off the road)?

And how do you know deterrence does nothing to rehabilitate the offender? How do you know the policing of the roads do not prevent crimes such as involuntary manslaughter due to negligent driving (brought on by intoxication)?

So what do you propose? That the police not stop drivers they suspect of being under the influence?

And what would you say to those families who have lost a loved one to a drunk driving incident?

Are you aware of the statistics? Do you realize how much damage drunk drivers cause? They affect insurance rates, mortality rates, etc...

[iowajournal]

I'm saying deterance is designed to affect the next group of would be offenders. If you hang someone, the rehabilitation aspect is obsolete and the deterance for the next group becomes relevant.

The fact is I did not hit an animal, or a pedestrian or a pole. And I don't believe I should have been punished at all. I should have had to walk home from that point and the police take my keys to the police dept.

Even if they impounded the car and I couldn't drive for a week. That would be good. But the OWI charges in Iowa are devastating. $5000 in fines and court costs and losing your driving for 1-2 years. It is way too much...one year without driving? What logic is that? For a guy to lose his job and make things hard on friends and family? Winter time in Iowa requires you have a car. We don't have good public transit here. So the implications are far more devastating than you understand. It is a poverty death sentence for 2 years minimal.

The broader point I'm making is that society is hypocritical. They don't want to solve the problem-Bars and Booze are everywhere. They're not going to take on big alcohol industries. They're going to take it out on the individual drinker. He is a more helpless and easy target.

It's overkill man. I'm sorry you can't see that. But I can tell you probably don't drink by the reading of your posts. You kind of come across as sanctimonious.

[Ocean-Blue]

Originally Posted by iowajournal

I'm saying deterance is designed to affect the next group of would be offenders. If you hang someone, the rehabilitation aspect is obsolete and the deterance for the next group becomes relevant.

The fact is I did not hit an animal, or a pedestrian or a pole. And I don't believe I should have been punished at all. I should have had to walk home from that point and the police take my keys to the police dept.

Even if they impounded the car and I couldn't drive for a week. That would be good. But the OWI charges in Iowa are devastating. $5000 in fines and court costs and losing your driving for 1-2 years. It is way too much...one year without driving? What logic is that? For a guy to lose his job and make things hard on friends and family? Winter time in Iowa requires you have a car. We don't have good public transit here. So the implications are far more devastating than you understand. It is a poverty death sentence for 2 years minimal.

The broader point I'm making is that society is hypocritical. They don't want to solve the problem Bars and Booze are everywhere. They're not going to take on thos big alcohol industries. They're going to take it out on the individual drinker. He is more helpless and easy target.

It's overkill man. I'm sorry you can't see that. But I can tell you probably don't drink by the reading of your posts. You kind of come across as sanctimonious.

Deterrence can rehabilitate a would-be repeat offender. Putting a drunk driver in a cell for the night is one way of deterring the said driver from doing this again. Does this always work? No. But it works some of the time. Some is better than none.

I am not aware of the sanctions in place in your state to really comment on the fairness of punishment (fines and or imprisonment) where one contravenes law...nor do I know what the insurance rates, mortality rates and rates of drunk driving accidents are. However, I do sympathize with those who find themselves sans vehicle and license and with a massive fine BUT the anti-drunk driving message and horrifying effects of it have reached a wide enough audience that would-be offenders should not be surprised with the severity of the consequences (if the punishment is in fact "severe").

You state that society is hypocritical. How so? You further state that society doesn't "want to solve the problem Bars and Booze are everywhere. They're not going to take on thos big alcohol industries. They're going to take it out on the individual drinker. He is more helpless and easy target." I beg to differ. I am not aware of Iowa law...but various states and other countries of the West, recognize commercial host liability.

So a bar that over serves a patron can be held liable and found negligent in their role as a commercial host (because of the nature of the relationship). So you see, it's not just the individual that is on the hook, the bar is too!

You presume much. You're wrong. I'm a sanctimonious drinker.

[Tripper]

You're wrangling with 2 issues. The first is how society enforces protection/punishment on it's members. The second is you got your A$$ busted for D'n'D and you don't like it.
You have the right to live your life as you see fit as long as you don't infringe on my right to do the same. The minute you got behind the car, wasted, you became a potential danger to others. And THAT is the issue. Laws are made to protect the whole and for the greatest good.

Adults realize that for every action there is a consequence. Good actions = good consequences, bad actions = bad consequences. You're supposed to learn this in childhood. The laws are clear. Get caught D'n'Ding and you will pay. If you don't want to subscribe to the laws and the penalties then drop out of society. Go live in some remote region of the world and do as you please.

[iowajournal]

Tripper Burning Thanks for your input.

And Tripper, your suggestion that I drop out of society and go live in a remote region of the world is precisely what I am working on!

Burning, Commercial Host law typically applies only in the event of accident. It should apply to help me the consumer pay off the hefty fines that the product I bought from them caused me.

[blind_otter]

No offense, but it's not society's fault.

I'm a recovering addict. Alcohol and cocaine mainly. I have never blamed society for my personal choices, or an inability to control myself. We live in a free society - we have choices.

Now I am sober. I don't drink at all. I don't do drugs (OK, I am addicted to celebrity gossip websites ). It's my choice.

When I drank, I justified my habits. I would drive drunk. I endagered others and myself. I got into accidents. I royally ****ed myself over financially. But in the end, what I had to face when I finally admitted my problem and joined AA -- was that it was MY FAULT. I had to face everyone I had wronged and try to make amends, and believe me only about 40% of the people I made amends to were receptive. But you have to accept that too.

I also was a binge drinker - lord knows, I didn't drink every day. But when I did drink, I drank to excess, to numb the pain. That's not healthy drinking habits, IMO.

[iowajournal]

Sorry to hear that you were involved in accidents. But you see, I wasn't. I was quietly driving home from singing Karaoke in a bar that I spent over $50 bucks in (local economy that is good) and was 3 blocks or so from my house when I was pulled over.

I'm saying the punishment must fit the crime. If I would have actually done something accident wise...then yes throw the full weight of the law at me. But I caused no damage to anyone or anything, and for this I will have to pay the state $5000 some dollars plus spend 7 days in jail. The night I was locked up I was in a cell with a guy who tried to kill his wife with a claw hammer, and two other guys for serious domestic assault.

Why is that right ? What good is that doing to society? Where is the rehabilitation in such a scenario?

Its archaic, Its barbaric...and most importantly...its a flat out lie.

The state won't announce its true thoughts on the matter because honestly dictatorship,sadism and profiteering would be part of the confession.

[blind_otter]

Well theoretically if they punish you for disobeying the law now, you will be less likely to do so in the future.

Hey I understand where you're coming from on one level - my exH was sent to federal prison with a mandatory minimum 10 year sentence because he was charged with federal conspiracy (3 guys growing pot). I thought it was load of effing bull**** at the time, I still do....

But what would you have them do? wait until you kill someone before punishing you?

[iowajournal]

This is part of the project. To redesign what we think of as being punishable offenses in the first place. We accept too much. Take too much for granted.

I like the Old Testament notion of eye for an eye. Deterance is not eye for an eye. It is a future events doctrine. It relies on Pavlovian conditioning rather than true comprehension / rehabilitation.

If it is known that you will have your head chopped off for eating chocolate in public...(chocolate sales will slip)

I don't doubt it works. Man is generally a weak creature. I don't like its dubious / impersonal mechanisms, however successful they may be.

Humanism is what I think they call it, or call people like me. I'm possibly a Humanist. Meaning I believe in Self Awareness and dialogue and emphathy and education to explain things rather than using cheap biological models to control behavior.

[Kasan]

I find it interesting that you would post your rant and rave in the Addiction and Recovery forum.

You admit to binge drinking which in my mind alerts me to the fact that you know that you have a problem.

What are you going to do about it, beside rail at the system?

[Tripper]

Originally Posted by blind_otter

But what would you have them do? wait until you kill someone before punishing you?

And therein lies the rub. If you kill someone while driving drunk a) an innocent life is taken and b) by extension of your argument your life is forfeit. An ounce of prevention....

Rehabilitation of alcoholics can't be legislated. Problem drinkers need to bottom out on their own before they realize they need to stop drinking. Some lose their jobs, some their families, some their lives.