H 23°, L 4° | Tomorrow: 
H 21°, L 6°
Wisconsin’s drunken driving problem needs no introduction. With some of the most relaxed OWI laws in the United States, the state could certainly take a more proactive approach to drunken driving, particularly when the risks for such behavior are so high. However, as per usual, Wisconsin’s elected officials — in particular Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen — are rendering the implementation of common sense solutions to the issue unnecessarily difficult.
Van Hollen, along with certain Wisconsin legislators, opposes making first-offense drunken driving a crime. Wisconsin is currently the only state in the country that does not treat such offenses as crimes.
What is particularly striking, however, is Van Hollen’s rationale for opposing the measure. “There are a great number of people — people I know personally — who have first offenses. I don’t consider them criminals, and I wouldn’t want them to be tagged that way for the rest of their lives for having made what can legitimately be called a mistake,” Van Hollen said.
Van Hollen’s choice of personal relationships should play no role in his opposition to a measure that is utilized by 49 other states to combat the pervasive problem of drunken driving. Almost any offense can legitimately be called a mistake, and in no way makes it excusable, especially in the eyes of one of the state’s highest legal authorities.
We do agree with Van Hollen, however, that sobriety checkpoints are not a solution to the drunken driving problem. These checkpoints, which allow officers to stop motorists at designated locations, create a potential misallocation of police resources and may constitute an infringement on civil liberties. Still, we are not optimistic that his approach to the problem is anywhere near sufficient.
Drunken driving in Wisconsin needs to be controlled. Van Hollen cannot allow his personal anecdotes from friends to work against the common good of the state of Wisconsin. If he continues to act willfully ignorant towards the issue, the state of Wisconsin will be the losing party.
IP hash: 222e23bb
Unbelievable. What a disgrace for the state. Did you know that the majority of drunk driving deaths are caused by first-time offenders?
IP hash: ffa5e3bc
MAY constitute an infringement on civil liberties?
Sheesh, BH, take a stand!
IP hash: 653d039a
From a policy perspective what is Van Hollen supposed to do?
Deterrence doesn’t appear to work anywhere else in the country and given the alarming rate of drunk driving in the state already it’s not clear that criminalizing a quarter of your population would have any real change on the treatment of the offense.
For those who claim deterrence is the answer, 1) that requires a rational decision to not drive - have you tried reasoning with a drunk? 2) everyone knows that drinking and driving can be a fatal and that doesn’t seem to stop anyone and 3) Wisconsin’s mass transit systems are clearly incapable of handling Wisconsin’s drinking problem whilst accommodating the need for transport.
Even if Wisconsin criminalized the offense, you’d still have a significant portion of the community drinking and driving and the resultant response to that would be effectively nothing different than you have right now. Judges and Prosecutors don’t want a quarter of the population to be labeled as criminals, nor does the Wisconsin State Legislature, so deal with the fact that this problem isn’t going to be solved in Madison, it’s going to be solved when people figure out a way to get people home without driving.
IP hash: 6fabc93d
Driving while texting or while fatigued can be fatal too. We should send you to prison for doing either.
IP hash: 1345deb8
It should not matter how many people drink and drive. WI absolutely needs to toughen up the law. I have zero pity for people who get caught. They need to be held accountable for their actions the first time they “make a mistake” which happens to be a potentially lethal one.