Viewer Responses: Who's Really Responsible? - WECT TV6-WECT.com:News, weather & sports Wilmington, NC

Viewer Responses: Who's Really Responsible?

Viewer Responses: Who's Really Responsible?

  So, you want to eliminate part of the Bill of Rights to solve the drunk-driving problem?  I'm talking about ‘no appeals'.  You have much more confidence in police, their procedures and their equipment than I do.  On everything else (except CAPITAL offence), I agree.  But remember, it's usually a jury of their peers that ultimately let drunks off.  That's you and me!  And the state law that makes hosts and drink servers liable was passed by a majority of our Legislative members in both houses - the people we put into office.  THAT'S DEMOCRACY!  B.S. Carolina Beach, NC

*************************************************************************************

Your commentary on DUI laws was great!  It's a shame we've become a nation of people that can't accept responsibility for our own actions.  It must be someone's fault I break the law, they kept pouring me drinks, it was the video game violence that made me kill, it's McDonald's fault I can't leave french fries alone.  It's refreshing to see someone actually BELIEVE it's OK to punish the person who did the crime.  Oh and I loved the comment you have to serve your time even if you can afford an attorney!!! Great job!!! A.S.

******************************************************************************

I am all for the changes that you offered on your "Consider this" clip.  I also would like to propose that after you have had your license taken away, there should be NO - ABOLUTLEY - NO WHEELS under your butt that you are driving.  I know that people don't like to hear the "up in New York" saying, but here it is.  UP in New York people are not allowed to drive vehicles of any sort without a license and insurance.  I'm not sure who is responsible for this not being in the law down here, but it is dangerous enough on these roads in Wilmington without the fact that there are people (who drink-or have lost there license) driving around on mopeds with NO license tags or INSURANCE! I could only think what would happen to me if one of these chosen few happen to dart in front of my car either by accident or while they are under the influence. What is up with the laws? What can be done about this? I certainly would like to know. This law should be changed before it is too late for one more person. Thank you for listening. D.F.

*************************************************************************************

I agree that the blame should rest completely on the individual. Any intelligent adult knows the risks of drinking and the second they get behind the wheel they are assuming responsibility for what might happen. It disturbs me when I hear stories of repeat DUI offenders still on the road and still not taking responsibility for their actions. Everyone should be treated equally under the eyes of the law regardless of how good of a lawyer they have. Drunk Driving is grossly irresponsible and should be punished accordingly. If someone gets behind the wheel and injures or kills someone because they had too much to drink then they should be held accountable for their actions. If changing a DUI to a capital offense is what it will take to stop people from getting behind the wheel and possibly killing themselves and others, then so be it. A.B. Wilmington

*************************************************************************************

From someone that hasn't drank more than 2 beers in a 24 hour period In 20 years.Jail time before a day in court!!!   What happened to innocent until proven guilty in a court of law!!!!!!! Your idea stinks as in unconstitutional. Something to consider: Why is some one more guilty for drunk driving than talking on the cell phone and having a accident?  Why don't we throw a mother in jail if she looks at her child and has a accident after all we made her put the child in a safe car seat. Point being it is lack of judgment not the act of a planed intent to break the law, unless a repeat offender. Why prosecute someone based on the result of a action and not the deliberate actions of real criminals that get light sentences for lack of jail space. Was a faithful viewer.  C. Oak Island

*************************************************************************************

 We are now living in a society that blames everybody else.  It's high time we stopped blaming other people and making them responsible for our own poor judgment.  People who become drunk, ultimately have nobody to blame but themselves. J.G. Wilmington

*************************************************************************************

l happen to agree with the 0 tolerance & tougher laws of DWl's, however, though, there are people who are under other influences such as caffeine, antidepressants & other chemicals they take in.  There is also whatever is on one's mind when they get behind the wheel of their motor vehicle.  There is a lot to consider, yes DWl laws should be toughened up, but people will also come up with creative & l admit stupid ways of getting around the law such as driving without a license & driving under the influence til they finally get caught or they accidentally kill someone in an accident.  l do however, feel encouragement in finding other ways to get home from a club or bar, should be enforced such as calling a cab for yourself or whoever is in charge of an establishment calling a cab for you.  We all must take care of one another as citizens & with the enforcement of tougher laws, although it may help, we still need to take responsibility for what we do as individuals, but we can offer help to others if we know they need the help.   The time to help is before something is a problem before it becomes a problem to begin with. Thank you for listening to me!! Sincerely, A.M. Wilmington

*************************************************************************************

I agree completely with your commentary!  There are too many people who continually get slapped on the wrist for DUI's and the law needs to be harder on them - not the bartenders.

*************************************************************************************

I completely agree with your opinion that drunk drivers should be responsible, and not the person who serves the alcohol. I would go one step further though.  If you drink and drive, your car gets confiscated and towed, and it will cost you $1000.00 to get it back. You have to hurt people before you can make them think. D.A.

*************************************************************************************I disagree with your comments.  The bartender/bar owner should
be held partly responsible.  If a patron is intoxicated, exhibits
behavior that is inappropriate, and/or has been served a large
quantity of alcohol, the bartender should be aware and know
when to cut the patron off.  It does not matter if the patron is
on foot, a bicycle, motorcycle, vehicle or whatever means of
transport; that is immaterial.  Intoxication can kill - even when
standing on one's own two feet!   A good bartender should
know this, and know when to call a taxi.  E.S.  
*************************************************************************************The responsibility should be placed on the individual, not some place or individual who is just doing his job to make a living.  That is a growing problem we have now.  Push the responsibility off to someone else.

*************************************************************************************

In response to your editorial suggesting a simple solution for the drinking and driving problem is to: execute anyone who kills someone while driving with an alcohol concentration over the proscribed limit; lock up everyone accused of DWI until trial; and eliminate the appeal process; I say:

Better than your solution - just execute anyone charged with drinking and driving.  Why bother with trials or constitutional rights?  That just slows the process of getting those who drink and drive off the streets.

Seriously, far less than half of automobile crashes involve drinking alcohol and driving.  One hundred percent of car crashes involve driving while foolish (i.e., driving while infirm, stupid, sleepy, eating, drinking soda, talking on the cell phone, playing with the radio or other car controls, etc.).  Many people can drive better with a 0.09% alcohol concentration than others can drive while sober and at their fittest.  For many people (like some of the very infirm, or tired, or emotionally distraught, etc.), driving at all is foolish and dangerous to all of us.  But there are no laws prohibiting driving in those conditions!

Why not remove from the laws anything about driving after drinking, and prohibit all foolish drivers by focusing on people's behavior, and the results thereof.  Or if the status of the driver is the point to focus on, why not prohibit driving after drinking any alcohol at all, and only if otherwise fit to drive.  Why should a person who kills someone in a car crash after having 4 glasses of wine (and may or may not be over the 0.08

limit) be treated differently than someone else who kills someone in a car crash after driving when they should not be driving at all - even while sober?

An annual driving test, and mental and physical examination, would help eliminate those persons who shouldn't be driving under any circumstance and who are always a risk while driving.  Such a measure would very likely reduce the number of car crashes far more than denying our constitutional rights of anyone charged with DWI, as your proposal would.

That's what I think.  What do you think about what I think? D.C. Wilmington

*************************************************************************************

Although I appreciate your point of view, I see alcohol consumption much differently and I am surprised that you haven't connected these dots.  If NC really wants to end DUI's they would set drink limits period !  But let's face the facts, NC sells the alcohol to bars & restaurants, NC reaps the taxes of alcohol sales and NC profits from the DUI's. If Bars, restaurants and Café's are held liable then the State who sells the liquor to the Bars, Restaurants & Café's should also be liable.  I have also heard that employees of our State run ABC liquor stores must never revel the names of patron who purchase alcohol.  I have heard that some patrons, on a daily basis wait in the parking lot for the ABC Liquor Stores to open, now wouldn't that be a sign of an alcohol problem ? Drowsy driving produces more accidents than DUI's but I haven't heard of limiting work hours to prevent drowsy driving. Routinely our great Military Troops work 10 hours days then they have "Duty" all night without sleep and then must work the following day which forces them to drive home drowsy, but the Brass refuses to do anything due to "Operational Commitments".

T. A.

*************************************************************************************  

Powered by Frankly