Troopers target drunken drivers
The numbers are staggering.
South Carolina is second in the nation for most DUI-related traffic deaths. Last year, nearly half of the state's 920 highway fatalities were attributed to drunken drivers, the S.C. Highway Patrol said.
State officials are taking a three-pronged approach to change that.
Legislators enacted a tougher DUI law earlier this year, and on Wednesday the Highway Patrol announced the launch of a DUI-prevention media blitz and seven regional teams of troopers that will fan out across the state to get intoxicated drivers off the roads.
The troopers are the most skilled enforcers of the DUI law, and they will be assigned exclusively to catching drunken drivers, Highway Patrol Capt. Chris Williamson said. The
number of members in each team will vary from region to region, and while they will each cover an expansive area, they will have help from other troopers during DUI operations.
"They will isolate the issue and focus on the problem, not for a week or a month, but for as long as it takes to solve the problem," Williamson said.
The teams will take to the streets for the first time tonight and will work throughout the Independence Day weekend, hitting the known holiday "hot spots," Williamson said.
DUI troopers
S.C. Highway Patrol Troop 6 DUI Team members will patrol Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester, Colleton, Jasper and Beaufort counties looking for drunken drivers. Other troopers will join in to help during DUI operations and checkpoints.
The DUI Team members are:
--Lance Cpl. James Brantley
--Senior Trooper William Fawcett
--Trooper 1st Class Nick Reeder
--Trooper Paul Linton
The beginning for the DUI trooper teams coincides with the start of a S.C. Department of Public Safety media campaign aimed at educating the public about drinking and driving.
In the coming weeks, public service announcements and pictures of people who have been killed by drunken drivers will inundate radio and television, billboards and movie theaters. Also, law enforcement officers will start handing motorists their traffic tickets in a ticket sleeve that has the photograph of a DUI victim.
"The lives of the family members left behind will be forever altered," Williamson said.
A new South Carolina DUI law took effect Feb. 10. It requires higher fines and jail time based on the level of intoxication; attendance at a drug and alcohol program to get your driver's license back after a DUI conviction; and six-month suspension of a driver's license for a person who refuses to take a Breathalyzer test, Highway Patrol Lance Cpl. Bob Beres said.
While state officials do all they can to prevent intoxicated driving, the people of the state have a responsibility as well, Beres said.
"Law enforcement will do its part, but the drivers can do their part, and that's not getting behind the wheel if they are drunk," he said.
Reach Nadine Parks at 937-5573 or nparks@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
Tides (anonymous) says...
Seriously, one of the only ways a dent can be put in DUI drivers is to closed down bars for good. But we all know that will never happen because taxes on booze and beer sales is more important to our lame brain politicians than helping to prevent the death of children and others.
July 2, 2009 at 5:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sig (anonymous) says...
They need to have more teams and punishment to the maximum.
July 2, 2009 at 6:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Eye_on_You (anonymous) says...
Wonder if us sober citizens can help the teams?
July 2, 2009 at 6:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
Seriously, Tides, have you ever read about Prohibition and its consequences.
July 2, 2009 at 7:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
clubracergt1 (anonymous) says...
We can always help by reporting drunk, or otherwise unsafe, drivers. Just dial *HP from you r cell phone. And, Tides, that is spoken like a person who does not drink. Bars do not need to be closed. Bartenders should be more willing to cut someone off or call them a cab.
July 2, 2009 at 7:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
beefsaver (anonymous) says...
I can't help but think the fact that our roads are infested with lousy drivers when sober contributes to our very-high DUI fatality rate. Throw in the crazy bike-riders that weave about in the wrong direction at night throughout Charleston, NC, Hanahan, and no doubt all over other towns, plus meandering pedestrians as well and you've got a terrible mix.
I'd say this is a problem of education, but plenty of my "smart" friends hate the idea of carpooling to parties or bars because they might want to leave 5 minutes before or after the DD. If we are serious about lowering the impact of DUI, especially the crashes that are most typically very drunk drivers, start in your own circle of friends. Peer pressure and an honest offer to be the DD is a positive first step.
July 2, 2009 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GAL2000 (anonymous) says...
Any comments Mayor Riley, on your ridiculous statement you gave to the "press" about your "City Councilwoman's" recent DUI...or is the figures of being 2nd incorrect in your eyes.
"Quote and cited: The numbers are staggering.
South Carolina is second in the nation for most DUI-related traffic deaths. Last year, nearly half of the state's 920 highway fatalities were attributed to drunken drivers, the S.C. Highway Patrol said".
July 2, 2009 at 8:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MP (anonymous) says...
Beefsaver - "when sober contributes to our DUI rate"? DUI is driving under the influence. That means NOT sober.
My solution? Impound the vehicles and crush them. Then take them and put them on the offender's property. Not their car? Tough. Someone had to let them drive it.
July 2, 2009 at 8:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
malthus (anonymous) says...
Tougher law! What a crock! These laws are only a real deterrent to those like me who are automatically fired if ever arrested for any alcohol related crimes. I'd get a P.R. bond sure, but bang I'm unemployed and homeless if I don't find a new job fast. I can sit there and say I could never live with hurting someone else but that is not what makes me offer to DD. It is the loss of a job I love for something as innocent as waiting outside a bar for a cab when I've had too much to drink. Yes there are cops who will arrest you for that, and police departments that see that type of charge as a quick profit, its called public intoxication, and I would still be fired. Our DUI laws are a joke and no one takes them seriously except for those who can lose their livelihood as soon as their boss found out. Until employers start doing this across the board there will be no change whatsoever. The state troopers can claim they are going to fix it every year, but it is a joke when the person arrested is back on the street after getting a bond hearing. And if you have money or influence like a certain council woman, the idiots in charge will be crying about the painful battle the person has with an illness that forces her to drink, or the simple human error that lead to a careless mistake, etc.
My sympathies to anyone hurt by a drunk driver, I have seen many horror stories and on two occasions had to listen to a drunk asking where the friend was (a passenger who he had killed when he wrecked). I have stood by a friend whose son was patched back together after the drunken driver crashed. Those are hard experiences to deal with, but as I said it is the loss of employment that keeps me from slamming a few and getting behind the wheel.
If you lost everything after a DUI, regardless of who you are this crime rate would drop.
MP love the car crushing idea, but I would suggest that seizure and auction would be a better method. Like Department of Natural Resources does with a few of the wildlife violations. Think people would be so quick to drink and drive then?
Here's another instead of doing your time in a drunk tank at county, set up some stocks in Marion Square and let everyone make fun of the DUI law violators.
July 2, 2009 at 9:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
malthus (anonymous) says...
Threemer, Great points there. But this kind of article is just media hype to make the Staties look like they are accomplishing something. What about so called killer intersections that are designed so poorly there are serious accidents daily? I didn't see that issue mentioned.
July 2, 2009 at 9:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
counterpoint (anonymous) says...
Closing bars for good? No way.
Most bartenders cut people off when they are obviously impaired. Even if you are a 200lb male though, 4 beers in 1 hour puts you over the limit.
I believe that the best course of action is to make the legal limit 0.02%, so that you cannot even have one beer before driving. Make the penalties for DUI a minimum & brief stay in jail followed by a fine that is a percentage of your net income, say 10%. Check the DUI statistics for nations with heavy consequences. It works.
Arizona: 1992 - 1st time offenders - 24 hrs in jail, $250 fine and 90 day license suspension. 2nd time offender within 3 yrs - 60 days in jail along with fines and license actions.
Australia: the names of the drivers are sent to the newspapers and are printed under the heading, "He's Drunk and in Jail"- fine up to $1000 and/or 6 months in jail; 3 month minimum loss of license.
Austria: Drunk driving - no accident- fine of 5,000 to 30,000 Austrian shillings or prison up to 6 months. With an accident, the consequences are more severe.
Bulgaria: A second conviction results in execution.
Canada: 1st offense dor drunk driving - fine between $50 and $2,000 or jail for 6 months or both. 2nd offense - from 14 days to 1 yr in jail. When the motor vehicle has caused bodily injury- jail up to 10 yrs; death - up to 14 yrs in jail.
Czechoslovakia: Jail up to 1 yr, reformatory measure, loss of drivers license and fines up to 50,000 crowns. A reformatory measure: confiscation of 10-25% of driver's salary. The court may also direct that he will be removed from his present position and employed in a less responsible job.
El Salvador: First offence is your last - you are shot by firing squad.
Finland & Sweden: Jail - 1 year hard labor plus fines. NOTE: in Finland, if an individual yields a vehicle to someone guilty of drunk driving, they will be fined or imprisoned for up to 1 year.
Japan: fine up to 30,000 to 50,000 yen or 3 months - 2 years penal servitude ( imprisonment with hard labor ) or jail.
Malaysia: the driver is jailed and if he is married, his wife is jailed too.
Norway: 3 weeks in jail at hard labor, 1 yr loss of license, 2nd offense within 5 yrs - license revoked for life.
Poland: jail, fines, political lectures.
"For drivers with blood alcohol content above .15% on weekend nights, the likelihood of being killed in a single vehicle is more than 380 times higher than it is for non-drinking drivers."
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, U.S.A. , 1992
July 2, 2009 at 9:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
malthus (anonymous) says...
"I believe that the best course of action is to make the legal limit 0.02%, so that you cannot even have one beer before driving. Make the penalties for DUI a minimum & brief stay in jail followed by a fine that is a percentage of your net income, say 10%. Check the DUI statistics for nations with heavy consequences. It works."
just to play devil's advocate here, aren't there mouthwashes and breath sprays that would cause that kind of false positive reading? While I'm all for harsher penalties, I hate to see someone jailed for proper hygiene or trying to cover onion or garlic breath after lunch.
July 2, 2009 at 9:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
fred_durst1 (anonymous) says...
If we want to reduce DUI just start making cars that won't let the person behind the wheel drive if intoxicated. The technology exists and its affordable.
and before you blast away that it cost too much, etc. who thought 25 years ago that we would have tv screens, GPS, hands free communication etc in cars.
July 2, 2009 at 10:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
malthus (anonymous) says...
Threemer I am agreeing with you, I just think the article is a waste of space. We can chuck bigger driving dangers around all day. But that would be a waste of space, seems like you thought I was arguing with you.
Fred_Durst don't some jurisdictions already require the blood alcohol analyzers that act like an ignition kill switch for those already convicted of DUI?
July 2, 2009 at 10:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
whalernut (anonymous) says...
Catch me if you can
July 2, 2009 at 11:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ColdBud (anonymous) says...
Troopers getting serious about DUIs? Wow.. that means we should have a lot of photo ops for mayor riley next week as he explains why he supports the drunken losers...
July 2, 2009 at 12:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
WHATEVAUSAY (anonymous) says...
if you drink and drive just go ahead and put your hands behind your back because you will get caught
July 2, 2009 at 1:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UrGatorbait (anonymous) says...
Drunk drivers are the some of the most selfish bunch you can find...well except for politicians.
Yes reemer take the onus off the story and hijack another thread with your off topic rants.
July 2, 2009 at 1:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
desspec (anonymous) says...
ALMOST half are DUI ... that means MORE than half are straight (?) ... maybe we should be going after THEM.
July 2, 2009 at 1:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
vmirat90 (anonymous) says...
thereemer...you and I agree 100% finally. I in no way condone drunk driving, but I think that texting and driving is just as big a problem. And what about the really old people that drive and don't have a clue as to what's going on around them? I have almost had major accidents several times going down Old Towne Road, when these geezers pull out of the "old person's Publix", don't look and I lock it up so I don't crush their land yacht Lincoln Town Cars.
I'd rather ride with someone blowing a .08 than with those old relics.
July 2, 2009 at 1:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nopartisan_noproblem (anonymous) says...
I'm with reemer and vmirat on this one. All different things are putting other drivers at risk. You can get a DUI for simply refusing to take a sobriety test. Many of you are condemning people to death before any harm has been done. If someone is beligerent operating any vehicle, yes punish them. You take a risk speeding through a red light, which could much more easily and more potentially killing someone. Should they be put death for speeding through a redlight. I do not condone drinking and driving, but the punishment must fit the crime, not the one that has to be possibly be committed.
July 2, 2009 at 2 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Sure, there are other dangerous behaviors while driving, but if drunk driving causes nearly half of all highway fatalities, then all of the other causes added up can only come to just barely over half.
I'm not saying that we should get a rope every time someone drinks and drives, but there's a disproportionate representation there that speaks to the difference between pure accidents and everyday poor driving and the kind of intentional stupidity that engenders drunk driving.
July 2, 2009 at 2:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
vmirat90 (anonymous) says...
I stand vehently behind banning old geezers from the road. Yeah, that is a little bit of an exageration, but once you turn 65, it should be mandatory to have to take a test and eye exam EVERY year.
Frankly these old geezers in their tanks on the road are every bit as dangerous as the drunk drivers.
July 2, 2009 at 2:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Honestly, Vmi, I'm in favor of mandatory re-testing every single time licenses come up for renewal. We have FAR too many idiots on the road here who only learn just enough about how to drive the right way to pass the test, then forget everything and drive like complete morons for the rest of their lives.
July 2, 2009 at 2:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
vmirat90 (anonymous) says...
I'm not ready to go quite that far....but I do like the way you are thinking about that.
July 2, 2009 at 3:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
WSM (anonymous) says...
The problem is that when SC had its DUI laws "reformed" a few years ago, the General Assembly made them damned near unenforcible.
Ever had to participate in a DUI trial? I've had easier prosecutions in armed robbery and murder.
So, the DUI laws are just another fine example of WHY the you have to have accountability of elected officials. People just do not care,all they want is their bennies from the gubbermint and "thier guy" to win.
July 4, 2009 at 1:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.