Offenders: Worst vs. First
Most criminal statutes follow one fundamental principle: “Let the punishment fit the crime.”
Accordingly, people driving at one sip over the limit shouldn’t be punished with the same severity as the high-BAC and repeat offenders who cause the majority of alcohol-related fatalities—and for whom interlocks are already mandated in most states.
The average BAC for a drunk driver involved in a fatal crash is 0.19 percent—more than double the legal limit. Interlock technology was developed for those worst offenders.
While it takes as little as two glasses of wine for a 120 lb woman to reach the 0.08 limit , most drunk drivers involved in fatal crashes have BAC levels in excess of 0.19—the equivalent of seven drinks for an average man.
In context with other traffic violations, drivers at 0.08 are less impaired than those talking on a hands-free phone, according studies in the New England Journal of Medicine and from the University of Utah. Proposals to mandate ignition interlocks for all offenders would inappropriately make a driver one sip over the limit and a high-BAC repeat drunk driver equal in the eyes of the law.
Currently, most states use a system called “graduated penalties.” This method properly matches the severity of the punishment with the severity of the crime. You would not punish someone driving 5 mph over the speed limit the same way you would someone going 25 mph over the limit. Why punish someone driving at 0.08 BAC with the same sentence reserved for someone driving at 0.19 BAC?
Click here to see more celebrity high-BAC and repeat drunk driving offenders.
