Top Stories

The Michigan Messenger going forward

By Staff Report | 11.16.11

I am writing today to announce the closure of the Michigan Messenger. After four years of operation in Michigan, the board of the American Independent News Network, has decided to shift publication of its news into a single site, The American Independent at Americanindependent.com. This is part of a shift in strategy, towards new forms [...]

Colorado-based abstinence program provided false and misleading information to Michigan students

HIV-AIDS-small
By Todd A. Heywood | 11.16.11

An abstinence-only presentation provided to numerous school districts in Calhoun and Eaton Counties in October of this year provided false and misleading information to students about HIV, experts allege.

Class action lawsuit filed against MERS over unpaid taxes

foreclosure
By Todd A. Heywood | 11.15.11

Two county registers of deeds filed a class action lawsuit Monday on behalf of Michigan’s 83 counties alleging that the Mortgage Electronic Registration Services owes millions of dollars in property title transfer taxes.

Schuette fights important mercury regulations

epa_logo
By Eartha Jane Melzer | 11.14.11

Despite evidence of the impact of mercury on children and public health, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette last month joined with 24 other state attorneys general in filing a lawsuit to scuttle new EPA regulations that would reduce mercury emissions from power plants.

New law stiffens penalties for ‘super drunk’ driving

By Ed Brayton | 10.18.10 | 7:17 am

A new Michigan law provides a significantly stiffer level of penalties for drivers arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol if their blood alcohol content is more than twice the legal limit. The Grand Rapids Press reports:

Starting on Oct. 31, there will be two kinds of drunken drivers in Michigan: standard and “super.”

Standard are those with blood alcohol content of 0.08 to 0.16 percent. The super drunk, a new category under state law, are first-time offenders who test at 0.17 or above…

Fines and other costs could top $8,000, some defense attorneys predict. Alcohol treatment is mandatory, possible jail time is doubled, and driving is forbidden for 45 days.

The penalties include another first for Michigan: a requirement to install an in-car breathalyzer.

More than 40 states have passed such laws with little opposition.

Comments

  • chopper4

    When are we going to STOPpassing all these stupid laws!

    That is only .06% above the previously .1 that used to be the law.

    We are simply transferring $s into the pockets of lawyers and govt.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_F7JJ4A426MSNYJJ4KTTJO2N6QI Kristen

    Well, The state can't budget their money, so they have to figure out ways to get more out of people! “super drunk,” that's just ridiculous. Add that onto the thousands of dollars in attorney fees and Drivers responsibility (a.k.a. double jeopardy) and you're SCREWED.

    • mycroft86

      You misunderstand the law of double jeopardy.

  • mssiegel

    As someone that faced a DUI for a .21 on my 27th birthday, a one-time binge drinking episode in my life, it ruined me for 3 years. I was a driver who lost all job prospects in this economy and paid out the $2,000 for the responsibility fee on top of being unemployed. That does not include $650 to my attorney and $750 in court costs. I served one day in jail, did 40 hours of community service and am very bitter they treated me as an alcoholic and not someone that overindulged on their birthday. Adding more fines will put people like I was into a deep hole they cannot get out of without sheer luck, an inheritance, or lots of money.

    • mycroft86

      The point of the law isn't to discourage alcoholism per se, it's to discourage idiots like you who apparently think it's not a big deal to drive with a 0.21 BAC. Oh wait, I'm sorry, I didn't notice it was your 27th birthday. I forgot about that exemption to the law.

      You can overindulge all you want. Just find someone else to drive, you irresponsible whiner.

      It ruined you for three years. That sucks. Good thing you didn't ruin someone else permanently.

      • Anonymous

        Your an complete idiot. Are judicial system is set up on rehabilitating criminals while my tax dollars back the murderers, sex offenders, rapist, robbers and cop killers to become more positive part of society. While those who are already productive part of society make a single mistake will never get a secound chance to correct their wrongdoing. I blew a half point over the legal limit from having two drinks on my 21st birthday after work. It has been 10 years and I will always have this on my record. I will never live the mistake that happen ten years ago while others are having there records expunge. I’m just glad that those who have records longer then your college list of classes is working right next to you!!!! lol

        • Anonymous

          “Your an complete idiot. Are judicial system…”

          I stopped reading after that.

    • Bear11011

      I have no pity. A 27 year old “one time binge drinker” with a .21 BAC was “ruined for three years” as well when she hit me three and a half years ago. She, too, feels the legal toll was too heavy.

      The price I paid, and continue to pay every day and will for the rest of my life, however, are in spinal and neck injuries and a traumatic brain injury that are permanent as a result of her “one time binge drinking episode.” Though I committed no crime and was not drinking and driving, I will never drive again. I will never be able to live 100% on my own again. I will continue to pay the price for that “one-time” episode every day for the next 50 years for her “over indulgence” because she couldn't be bothered to get a cab or a designated driver.

      You should be put in a deep hole you cannot get out of. In some states, you would have been charged with attempted manslaughter for getting behind the wheel of a vehicle in that condition, and frankly, you should have been. What you did is a crime, and you should be treated as any other criminal, not as someone who “oops! Made a mistake!”

      Grow up and take some very real responsibility for your very real criminal actions that, fortunately, in your case, apparently did not, but very clearly could have taken the life of another human being out of selfish stupidity.

      • Anonymous

        You are ridiculous. Drinking is legal in this state. Driving is dangerous. First timers should not have their lives ruined. Stop whining. These fines are about filling the state coffers on both ends. They tax us when you buy alcohol and they fine you if you drink and drive.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000226148291 Laurie Hoffman

      If you had killed someone, I’m sure they would have felt much better knowing that you didn’t make a habit of drunk driving.

      • Anonymous

        Oh, puhlease. Let’s exaggerate.

    • Anonymous

      I agree, these new laws are ridiculous. In the older, saner days, a first offender like you might have spent the night in the drunk tank and they probably would have allowed your family to come and pick up your car. You would have been embarrassed and never have done it again. I think it’s about politics and about filling the state coffers.

  • http://twitter.com/sirdixondongs Sir Dixon Dongs

    I want a ticket for vehicular mischief while super drunk. I would frame that shit.

  • mssiegel

    I certainly did not have the intention of doing what I did. I'm not asking for a slap on the risk, I'm asking for a lower financial penalty. A DUI should not make one move to another state just for a driver's license.

    I had a blackout and didn't even know what I did. I'm not saying that is proper or legal. I'm saying there is a difference between alcoholics that drive daily and someone that got that drunk once and learned. I'd feel that more public service, longer probation time, or longer restricted licenses would be more appropriate. There are already enough financial burdens. The state shouldn't look to drunks as a cash crop, rather, a problem that should be addressed behaviorally and not financially.

    A driver with a .21 blood-alcohol limit in a car running into a another car at 96 mph has the same result as a driver with a .09 level.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YLAR72SBIRWQLZMBLTNSZ7DOSA Monkey

      Yet it probably took those 3 years to make you “learn” your lesson. Doubt you would've learned anything if it was something “manageable”.

      Imagine the bunch of idiots out there that think “pfft, 80 hours community, what else are they gonna do?” I'm referring to stupid teenagers/young adults (although not a majority, still manage to **** up innocent bystanders on an hourly basis) that view anything short of financial pain and public humiliation as “nothing major”.

      If you want to lobby for a change in the law, change it to the one in Switzerland that scales the fine to income of the driver AND add public-humiliation+community work to the penalty. This way the idiots will learn and the rich bastards won't get away scottfree with their thong of lawyers that hunts down technicalities. Otherwise this sounds like the whining of someone who's sorry they got caught rather than someone who learned their lesson.

  • mssiegel

    Actually, I learned enough locked up in the drunk tank the next morning through “videou court” with drug addicts and other fellow drunk drivers from that night (33 or so drunk drivers).

    I would love to see fines based upon income level. Someone making $24K a year versus someone making $100,000 a year… that $2k fine impacts one quite a bit more than the other.

    Underage drinking is a different thing altogether, but driving to excess–I think the fines should pile on beginning with repeat offenders–a second offense should be where these proposed changes should take place.

    • kiauiowr

      Wow, $2000? You got off light. Other states would have thrown you in jail more than a weekend, auctioned your car, and fined you months of income. You should be grateful.

      • Anonymous

        Grateful? Are you nuts? $2,000 is ridiculous for a first offense or even a second! I can’t stand you sanctimonious people. How many of you have never driven after drinkin?. What is that adage about casting the first stone? We aren’t talking about raging alcoholics.

  • Anonymous

    I was just arrested for dwi, I blew .19 I realize I was at fault and should of gotten a ride. I’m glad I didn’t hurt anyone. I was charged with an impaired driving almost 3 years ago and now that this law passed I deadly affraid of going to jail. This action of mine already wreck my kids xmas and I can’t pay my rent and that was just because of my 1,000 bond. They also forfitured my car and said if i want it back its gonna be 900 plus 155 for the impound fee and 15 aday. What do yous think will happen. I didn’t get any jail time last time and I was lucky enough to no get arrested for the first one. If your gonna be cruel please don’t respond. I already am more angry at myself than anyone could imagine. I’m just asking from maybe someone who has been already charged after the super drunk law. I also have a very good lawyer so im hopeing that will help alittle.

    • Anonymous

      I’m sorry you used bad judgment, but the penalties you suffered were  RIDICULOUS. Some demagogue politician kowtowing to MADD and the state’s desire to fill the coffers voted these laws in and ridiculous judges trying to earn their 15 minutes of fame enforce them to the fullest extent.

  • Anonymous

    People that are bent on judging others will have their judgment day. I bet all of my earnings that these people who judge others and make nasty remarks will not get good results. Rather, all of their mistakes will be weighed on scales, and the scale will probably tip.

  • Anonymous

    Ok first of all, I agree with this law, I still think that our government is being to leanent on these drunk drivers.  I think it should be mandatory for all drunk dirvers to spend the first year in prison for the first offense.  Then make them pay all the fines, and take their license away for up to 5 years.  And to the guy back there that said his ONE TIME Drinking Binge, dood grow up, this about innocent poeple that you could have killed, who cares your life was spared, who cares it ruined your life for 3 years, you was 27 years old and you should have been SMART enough to not drink n drive in the first place.  BUT I guess the old saying is right SOME WOMEN SHOULD HAVE SWALLOWED.

Categories & Tags: Criminal Justice| |