Deseret News | Davis County to combat DUIs online

Reader comments
Davis County to combat DUIs online

Davis Co. Resident | 12:41 a.m. June 26, 2009

Way more useful would be an online registry of con artists and ponzi scammers.

How about people with HIV too... | 4:22 a.m. June 27, 2009

In an ultra-mormon area, the registry is public shaming, and to someone who has worked hard to salvage their life, even a bit unusual of a punishment.

Addiction is an illness that needs to be treated. The public shaming will do more damage to people that already have a tendency to self medicate. Having neighbors, employers, co-workers, in-laws, friends of their children know will not make the roads safer. As a sibling of a recovering alcoholic, I have seen my sister embrace her sobriety in the last two years. Her ability to hold her life together and rebuild it, gain her self esteem back has been amazing. I feel sorry for the politicians who want to make themselves feel useful by dragging her back into the hole she has worked so very hard to work her way out of. She has paid her fines, done her time, finished her probation, has been clean and sober for the past year and a half.

The money would be better spent treating the illness and giving support to people with addictions, rather than continue to drag people like her through the mud.

Hey | 5:54 a.m. June 27, 2009

Let's just post everyone out there with any illness, and that way we can shame them all.

Comments continue below

Addiction is an illness. | 6:07 a.m. June 27, 2009

From another article:

"Publicly shaming people doesn't address the underlying problems they need to resolve to stop drinking and driving, he said.

And one recurring theme is the difference between what people know and do, said Susannah Burt, program manager for the state Division of Substance Abuse and Mental Health.

"People are aware that it's not OK to drink and drive, but they're still doing it anyway."

Burt's office disseminated the grants that helped create Davis Helps and 12 other organizations across the state. Those organizations, depending on their individual community needs, can either address alcohol-related crashes or prescription-drug deaths."

So the ultra-holier-than-thou LDS in Davis County would rather spend the money shaming those already fighting an addiction, instead of helping those who are headed to a prescription-drug death.

Michael Jackson and Elvis aside, wouldn't it also get impared drivers off the road if prescription abusers were helped, saving the person who takes pills until their body shuts down, or while thinking they are driving safely when they plow into that schoolbus.

This is anti word of wisdom breakers, pure and simple.

Anonymous | 10:45 a.m. June 27, 2009

Personally, I believe that to post names and mugshots online of people who commit misdemeanors is a bit harsh. If someone gets a felony DUI, by all means, post them, they are felons, they are the ones who can't vote, own a gun, etc.

But to embarass someone in public, in the town square electronically, for a misdemeanor is pretty brutal.

I also believe it is a matter for the judiciary branch to decide punishment for the offenders, not the executive branch. This is a decision that probably should be decided in court, and probably will be.

Does the county have the funds for legnthly court battles to fight this out.

Anonymous | 10:50 a.m. June 27, 2009

I have also been watching The Cleaner on A&E, and I like the character William Banks' philosophy. He keeps the addicts away fro the police, and gets them to trained medical personel in re-hab centers.

That is really where our efforts should be. If we are really concerned with public safety, we should be into helping addicts, helping the families, rather than tearing them down. I guess it's an old What Would Jesus Do question to me...

Anonymous | 11:26 a.m. June 27, 2009

I think we should try to help and rehabilitate these people. I don't believe we should be showing them to the public.

Furious | 10:20 p.m. June 27, 2009

Maybe Bountiful Police Chief, Tom Ross, should be worried about the impaired drivers on the road, leaving bars impaired, swerving and really try to protect the public safety by getting his officers out of restaurants, donut shops, and speed traps and get them out doing real police work. I often see several police cars at the same restaurant parking lots, or parked other places just talking to each other.

Instead, he is posing for pictures and telling the press that he is going to stop impared drivers by punishing those extra severely who have already been through the legal system, done jail time, done the mandatory drug and alcohol testing sucessfully, worked through probation and are leading productive lives. Their childrens friends are the ones who are going to be searching the internet, taunting the kids at school, and emotionally scaring the children.

How does he really expect continuing to punish the people who are really trying, to lower the level of DUI's in the county.

Also publish the people who have been shoplifting, parking illegally, or convicted of other misdemeanors. Let's Shame Everyone!!!???

This is profoundly the most un-American thing I have ever heard of.

The Children | 12:06 a.m. June 28, 2009

How about the children? Has anyone thought of what it must be like to be a child with a parent who has a substance abuse problem? As if these kids don't have enough to deal with as they watch their parent have odd behavior, or abusive behavior, they now will get to have added to that, other kids (or even adults) who will make fun of them after seeing their parent on this proposed site. I hope that someday county/city officials will think for a moment about what they are proposing and how it will, in reality, affect the citizens. This is an ineffective, cruel idea.

Who... | 1:48 a.m. June 28, 2009

...will be searching the internet for these things anyways. That's right, the same ones in your home who know how to send text messages, program your DVD player so that it doesn't blink 12:00.

Kids.

They will be looking for parents of friends probably at first, then they'll find the quiet little kid who acts strange at class (They had no idea that the child lives and deals with an addict daily). That's why the quiet kid is always late to school. Doing poorly in class.

Those kids will have a blast with the quiet kid the next day and the next. They won't be able to wait to make sure that everyone hears it from them. Power is knowledge. Then the kid will hate school more, hate life more, act out, drop out of school, maybe hurt themselves, maybe hurt others.

This is why in America, when someone commits a crime, we give them a way to pay it back to society, and then let them go, and hopefully become a more productive member of society.

But not in Davis County. Who do we contact. This is embarassing.

Dear Chief Ross | 2:01 a.m. June 28, 2009

Has anyone pointed out to you that the people you want to parade electronically through the streets have paid their fines, done jail time and community service, attended classes to teach them strategies about how to handle their addictions, sucessfully finished probation with all of the drug and alcohol tests, who have tried to make things right with their spouses and children.

Why do you feel the need to punish them more after they have paid their debt to society? Do people have an intrinsic right under our social contract to make a mistake, learn from it, make restitution, and go on to lead a productive life?

Maybe people do hit a down period in their life and make mistakes. But they go to court ordered counseling and learn how to take care of their issues, and rebuild thier lives. By breaking them back down for public humiliation, you are not keeping them off the streets with alcohol in their systems. You take away their light at the end of the tunnel, their hope for redemption.

Chief Ross, the legislature has created laws, you enforce them, and the courts pass a fair judgement. Please allow them a chance at redemption.

Although... | 5:43 a.m. June 28, 2009

Although I'm not sure how this registry will really help, I can't believe the comments defending drunk drivers and making excuses for them.
These selfish low lifes kill more innocent Americans every month than we have lost in Iraq since the war began. We shouldn't be making excuses for them,we should be demanding incarceration.

re:Although | 6:41 a.m. June 28, 2009

I just sat down and read the above comments, and I am not trying to be combative, but I could not find one person making any excuses for DUI offenders. I read legitimate concerns of taking emotionally fragile people who are trying to get back on their feet and sending them out, after they have done all that was asked of them by the legal system, for public humiliation.

I see them as being concerned about people who have literally paid their debt to society being called back after the fact for a high tech shaming, and a concern that families stay together. I have heard what I think are very legitimate concerns of how this might impact young children if this information is made availible to other young children on the internet.

Personally I know many outstanding citizens whose choices have made me very angry, however, I do not see them as "lowlifes". I know people who struggle with addictions daily, yet they are winning the battle. I agree with you, I cannot logically see how this will help as much as getting the police to notice cars leaving bars. At the very least for this to work...

re:Although part 2 | 6:58 a.m. June 28, 2009

...this should be legislated, people should be warned that this is what will happen, and it might work as a deterrent.

But to take people who have worked hard, who have done what is asked by the court, have cleared probation, have worked to rebuild the trust between themselves and their children, and then make a law and make it retroactive 3 years ago, it just does not seem fair.

I really like the part that came out of another article that was posted, how this money could be used to assist people who drive on our roads, who abuse legal substances.

And maybe the second DUI in three years should be a felony, maybe lower the BAC level for a second DUI to .0000000000001, give them jail, and put them in the registry. Maybe that would serve the Draconian bloodlust for the Bountiful Police Chief, but let the rules be set and let them live by them.

A three year probation with random same-day drug and alcohol testing, combined with three years of AA, or counseling, and group would be more productive to the people fighting addictions.

This seems unAmerican. More political posturing without real solutions. An easyfix.

Harry P. | 9:48 a.m. June 28, 2009

I'd rather see a registry of criminals such as thieves, drug dealers, sexual deviants, etc.; those are the people who need to be ostracized. However, people who make the choice to drive after drinking (yes, the CHOICE...has nothing to do with any "sickness") need to have their licenses revoked on first offenses, and thrown in jail for second offenses. Most DUI offenders are not alcoholics, they are just irresponsible.

Doc Maher RT | 10:01 a.m. June 28, 2009

Here is a novel idea, why not impose stiffer penalties for those caught instead of allowing them to return to the public. Lets say mandatory 1 yr in jail for the first offense, 2 for the second and life for the third under the multiple offense act. Australia bans anyone caught DUI for life from ever driving again and if caught spend 10 years in prison. They don't seem to have much of a problem over there. USA is too lax on crimes like these and need to start dealing with them on a harsher level.

THEeyepatch | 2:58 p.m. June 28, 2009

Let's categorize the DUI with the sex offenses. Mob rules. Maybe we could post speeders, or anyone that gets a ticket for jay-walking. When does this stupidity end. How about a public flogging for first time offenders and life in prison for anymore after that. Any of you clowns that want higher fines and punishment need to get a life. How about punishment for Judges that give 30 days in jail, a weak fine, and community service for a NFL wide reciever who killed a man walking home from working the grave yard shift. I think 10 years in prison for that Judge would be a great start. Always thinking small instead of the whole picture. Some of you genuises think prison is the anwser. Who's going to pay for them...YOU, Me, and since when did prison benfit anyone that's been there. You go in for DUI and you come out a stone cold killer. That kind of thinking is why this country will not be around in 100 years, the gene pool is the size of a toilet bowl. Australia's population is about a 1/5 of the USA, smart guy. LAX? Please!

wandrew | 7:46 p.m. June 28, 2009

It would be much cheaper and less intrusive to have a free ride service for those who should not drive. Why is this need so strong to punish? Driving after drinking is not "immoral" per se; it is simply dangerous (about as dangerous as talking on a cell phone). Why not consider other ways of lessening the danger without the need to put people in jail?

re:Wandrew | 1:45 a.m. June 29, 2009

Your plan woul never work because it would make sense.

The angry peopl don't want impaird drivers off the road, they want a pound of flesh, then come back when it's over and grab another.

There are very evvective ways to keep impaired drivers off the street. You ride home idea. Police could station themselves near bars and look for impaird drivers.

Did you notice this Grand plan proposed by the Bountiful Police Department takes ZERO police effort. Nothing is being done to stop the problem but to give out the scarlet letter.

It's very simple minded and embarassing. i'm hoping soon for another press conference.

Hester Prynne | 4:29 p.m. June 29, 2009

Set in 21st-century Puritan Davis County.

Geez, and here I thought Utah was only 30 years behind the times - this one should set us back to the at least the mid-1600's!!!

Did anyone on the Police Force ever read, "The Scarlet Letter" - by Nathaniel Hawthorne?

It tells the story of Hester Prynne, who gives birth after committing adultery and struggles to create a new life of repentance and dignity. Throughout the novel, Hawthorne explores themes of legalism, sin, and guilt.

Given this, I take it nobody in Law Enforcement reads.

To Brent Wilhite | 10:48 p.m. June 29, 2009

"The proposed registry hasn't been finalized and won't go online until October or November. Davis HELPS is waiting to weigh public opinion of the registry before going ahead with it, said Brent Wilhite, spokesman for Davis HELPS. He said that if negativity toward the registry outnumbers its support by fall, it would not go online."

I hope that Mr. Wilhite reads these comments.

Lisa | 11:51 a.m. June 30, 2009

Heres a SIMPLE solution. Pay for a TAXI if your going to drink. No one anywhere in any state or any city would make DUI a religious issue but here! My aunt and niece where killed by a drunk driver. I have been hit from behind by a drunk driver, no one hurt but my car. I have NO sympathy or empathy. You drink, get a taxi or ride the bus or stay home and pass out there. If you are going to defend a bunch of drunks for becoming 60 mph weapons than you need to get your head examined. I dare anyone to tell me that its to much trouble to get a taxi. You can afford to get drunk you can afford to pay to get home. I think the first time you get a DUI you should get your car impounded and be forced to talk with a family that lost a loved one. A slap on the wrist just doesnt cut it. I say a scarlet letter is fine if its working in N Mexico go for it!

Lisa | 2:42 p.m. June 30, 2009

I agree, these are solutions that can prevent people from driving impaired. This is what we need to focus, is how to keep them off the road. I am sorry for your losses. I too have stories.

But I think it is a diservice to the memories of those I have loved and lost to keep the hate. I know many people with one or two DUI's. Not just alcohol, but also medication. I know how much the have been through, how much they have lost financiallym but they are honestly trying to maitain sobriety. Why not let those people pay for what they did, and then let them go on with their lives, without painting a large Scarlet A and the chests of their whole families.

I would hope in Utah that if someone stumbles and falls, and they want to get up, we would extend to them a hand of assistance, rather than swatting their hand away and look upon them and their children with anger and hate.

Utah Mentality -Hate the Sinner | 2:56 p.m. June 30, 2009

I just want to get this straight.

There are already laws in place and these human beings that we are discussing, they have already done their time, paid their fines, been through court ordered counseling, finished their probations, with mandatory unscheduled drug testing and interlocks on their cars?

These are the people who have jumped through all these hoops at their own expense, and we believe that, after they have played fair in the system, we jerk them back in from the lives they have basically rebuilt from the ground up?

3rd DUI is a felony. I think that speaks for it's self. But to punish someone ex-post-facto is wrong. It's un American. That is why the framers told us not to do it in The Constitution.

If the current program isn't working, let's put up a billboard with the faces of the politicians and police officers and hold them accountable for not doing their jobs. It seems to me that the people they want to put on the data base have done what they need to for restitution and should be left alone.

This is just so wrong on so many different levels.

Lisa | 4:11 p.m. June 30, 2009

This isnt about hate this is about facts. You make a choice to drink and you make a choice to drive you take away the choices of others to assume they are safe on the road. Want to be a drunk do it at home or learn to use the bus. What, are drunks too good to use public transpotration? I did for 2 years and I wasnt needing it cause I was wasted I just wanted to save money. Stop with the bleeding hearts. Davis County is where I live. If we have the highest DUI rate in the STATE they have my vote to do whatever is necessary to make it a bad place for drunk drivers to be on the road. I keep insurance on my car or I dont drive it. I need contacts to drive I wear them. I keep my car registered and obey the speed limit. I have my urges to do bad things same as anyone!!! Difference is I dont let my choices possibly kill/maim/injure/destroy lives and property. Get a taxi,bus or hoof it but stay off the roads.

Veteran | 8:41 a.m. July 1, 2009

Anyone here ever been to Germany?
When I was in the service there, we were told - Do NOT drink and drive, the laws are different in German.
The Germans can and will drink you under the table, but if you get behind the wheel - Uncle Sam can not help you. You will be held accountable according to German law and WILL go to jail!
Call the base, we'll have someone come and get you. It was far cheaper and easier to send a cab, that have Americans sitting in German jails.

Middle ground..... | 9:27 a.m. July 1, 2009

After reading these articles, I have a proposal to make. I know that shame CAN be a motivating factor. I know that everyone who drinks knows that if their BAC is above .08% they are driving illegally. I am currently going through an addiction recovery program so I know a little something about addictions and recognizing them. The bottom line is that most people who drink don't view themselves as addicts. Most people need to get a DUI before they will admit to themselves that drinking is a problem for them. Unfortunately, all it takes is one time behind the wheel drunk and you can kill someone. You'll never pass any legislation that will register someone as a drunk BEFORE they've acquired their first DUI. I can almost guarantee that if the laws were changed and they took your car away for your first DUI, most people would listen. The benefit of this is that after the car is taken, you could sell that car for money to go towards programs that benefit either people who have been hurt by drunk drivers, or programs to help addiction recovery. Either way, it's a win-win. Any comments?

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.