Solutions Needed For Drunk Driving In Wisconsin
This past weekend was another sad example of what can be found on our Dane County roads when drunk drivers feel no sense of responsibility or shame for their actions. As Channel 3000 reports, “In addition to the felony arrest, 13 other drivers were cited for Operating While Intoxicated over the weekend. At least three of those OWI’s were preceded by crashes.” One of those cited this weekend was going 88 mph in a 55 mph zone…while drunk! Aren’t we glad we were not on that same road at the time he was there?
Makes one feel that the roads we pay taxes to build and maintain can no longer be used unless we wish to take our chances with drunk drivers. But does it have to be this way? There is a growing segment of the citizenry that knows there has to be a reduction of drunk drivers on the roads, and they are urging their state elected officials to ante up with sound and workable legislation. As many have noted with alarm and disgust, there is something wrong with Wisconsin when we are the only state that has only a token ticket given out when the first offense of drunk driving occurs. A ticket?……..yes only a ticket.
After you think about that startling fact ask yourself a question. Why is that the case? Then look no further than the Wisconsin Tavern League, and the too-often spineless legislators who are bought and paid for with special-interest money for your answer.
Granted, I come at this issue with a desire to see society be more responsible in a broader sense by limiting the number of liquor licenses it grants, and fostering a healthier attitude that good times need not require intoxicating beverages. That in no way means I am eager to return to Prohibition, but I do suggest a more rational response to the way alcohol is consumed, as it would be a positive turn for our state.
I fully understand the issue of drunk driving is so pervasive and deadly that there needs to be more than just long-term attitude adjustments to stem the problems. For starters, I support two bills in the Wisconsin Legislature that are sure to draw fire from the Tavern League, but also are likely to draw public support if more voters became aware of them.
First, is a measure drafted by State Senator Neal Kedzie that lowers the legal blood-alcohol limit from 0.08% to 0.02% for someone convicted of two or more offenses. I might tighten that up to apply for anyone after a first offense, but given the nature and strength of the Wisconsin Tavern League, I can understand the way the bill is written. In addition this bill has two provisions that I very much approve of, and complement Kedzie for including in the proposed legislation. They include those convicted of drunken driving being prohibited from buying vehicles while their licenses are suspended or revoked, and those applying for occupational driver’s licenses would have to wait 15 days to get them.
The second bill that I support outright is requiring that people serving alcohol have none of it in their system. This bill is authored by Rep. Josh Zepnick, and though there will be plenty of folks opposed to this measure, I think it a correct one. I have long argued that those who own the bars, and pour the drinks, need to be held more accountable for their customers who leave with too much alcohol in their system. If a person pouring the drinks has a full sense of his/her surroundings they might be better able to determine who should, and should not, be buying another glass. There must be accountability by tavern owners for what they not only pour into a glass, but also pour out into the streets that then get behind a wheel.
There are those who will quibble about this and that within the bills that are hard-hitting, but the overall fact remains that drunk driving in Wisconsin must be reduced. And it must be dealt with now. Citizens around the state should call their elected representatives and voice their support for these bills.
Today!












I think that all the drivers who are driving the cars in wrong way should be stooped at signal and test should be taken of them.
Las Vegas DUI Attorney
Not to be completely cynical, but, it’s always the the smart people that sit at home and the evil [bastiches] sit on the hill. “I would that you were wise as foxes”
If we, collectively, are to make a dent in any state legislature we have to play the game. The game being, I’m gonna get you reelected if you support my bill.
I personally [and this might shock you] don’t understand drunk driving. As much as alcohol costs these days, a fraction of that cost could be used to purchase a taxi.
0.08 is limit in Maine. Licence taken away on the spot 2 nights in jail and repeat offenders go to shrink [$1000 at least] before lic. returned. [jai;l time gets longer also] Worse cases must use breathalyzer in car or it won’t start. special lic. plate needed for OUI and part of your lic. missing where it has been punched out for OUI. State looses federal money if rules not followed and also if insurance not reinstated. Also looses fed. money if people don’t wear seat belts.
Don’t worry, my state not perfect. Last guy had 13 OUI convictions before he killed someone. Why he kept getting his lic. back is beyond me. Of course in the end he just drove without it.
Also bartenders are criminally responsible for someone leaving their place drunk. And you can be responsible for providing a place where people can party and drink. If they leave your place drunk and get in accident you could be held accountable.
I can’t support either bill, because neither targets drunk driving. I understand the theory that repeat drunk drivers should not have a drop of alcohol in their system before they drive. However, .02% is so low as to be laughable. How will it be enforced, since no one is impaired at .02%? Roadblocks?
The bartenders are not the problem, so cutting them off does nothing to keep drunk drivers off the streets. This is just another attempt by the Women’s Christian Temperance League (also known as Mothers Against Drunk Driving) to gradually return us to Prohibition.
I support making the third OWI a felony. I would support increasing the penalty for a first time OWI, but only if the legal limit is returned to 1.0%. There is no evidence that .08% or .09% causes significant impairment. Lowering the limit (like raising the drinking age) is another example of creeping Prohibition.
Make people responsible for their bad acts. Don’t wrap us all in bubble-wrap in an attempt to make bad acts impossible.
I have yet to understand why we have not followed the lead of most European countries when it comes to alcohol consumption. Let’s take a look at Spain for example. After the fall of the dictator Franco, people who had any money at all either bought a cab or a bar. A visitor from WI to Madrid would not feel out of place–both are over run with bars! The difference is of course that by law if you serve someone an alcoholic beverage in Spain, you are required also to give them a small amount of food to go with it… the famed tapa. The cost of the food is just part of the cost of the drink and is mandatory. Eating while drinking provides for some place for the alcohol to be absorbed and keeps people from drinking quite as much as they do here since it also helps to fill them up.
Last night, a father and 11-year-old son killed outside Fort Atkinson by a drunk driver…
How is it that folks like you who understand this issue and seem resolute are never the ones in the legislature?