Nobody wants drunk driving to be a thing. We all want our roads to be safer, right? But lawmakers seem to be going about it the wrong way by enhancing the severity of penalties and sentencing, when they should be searching for ways to nip the problem in the bud. While there are seemingly some benefits to harsher penalties, it may be proving to have negligible effects on stopping drunk driving.
Harsher penalties have never really been a deterrent for many reasons, and we keep waiting for legislators to understand that. Until then, however, it is up to criminal defense attorneys such as yours truly to fight for fair and reasonable sentences for our clients who do not deserve a punishment that will do nothing for them or the community.
What are sentencing enhancements?
Sentencing enhancements are a legal tool used to increase the severity of a sentence for a criminal offense, and they are often implemented supposedly to deter offenders from committing the same crime again. In the context of DUI, sentencing enhancements can include longer prison sentences, higher fines, mandatory ignition interlock devices, or other penalties that aim to prevent individuals from driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. However, while these enhancements may seem like a logical solution to combat drunk driving, they have not been proven to be effective in reducing the incidence of this dangerous behavior.
Why harsher penalties won’t and don’t work
One of the main reasons why sentencing enhancements may not be the way to stop drunk driving is that they do not address the root causes of the problem. Most drunk drivers are not out there thinking “You know what would be great? If I could live my dream of bringing GTA to life.” They may be struggling with addiction, mental health issues, or other personal problems that led them to make poor decisions. We know that our brains don’t always recognize when we’ve had too much to drink – that dopamine kick can be extreme – and most folks who drive after a few genuinely believe they’re fine. They’d be horrified if you told them they were being dangerous. Sentencing enhancements can be seen as punitive measures that do not address the underlying issues that lead individuals to drive while intoxicated in the first place.
Instead, the criminal justice system should focus on addressing the root causes of drunk driving, such as substance abuse, mental health, and social and economic factors, to prevent individuals from driving under the influence. And maybe have a talk with TV, film, and ad people about our cultural obsession with drinking, too. You tell people enough times that something is fun and good, they’re gonna believe it. (You think anyone actually likes the taste of milk? You think people actually enjoy “dad bods”?)
Another issue with sentencing enhancements is that they may not be uniformly applied, and some groups may be disproportionately affected by them. For example, individuals from low-income backgrounds or communities of color may face harsher penalties than others for the same offense, leading to a sense of injustice and discrimination. Additionally, individuals with prior criminal records may be subject to more severe penalties, even if their previous offenses were unrelated to drunk driving. These disparities in sentencing can undermine the effectiveness of enhancements and erode public trust in the criminal justice system.
Moreover, sentencing enhancements may not be effective in deterring individuals from driving under the influence. Research has shown that harsher penalties do not necessarily lead to lower rates of drunk driving. In fact, some studies have found that mandatory minimum sentences and other sentencing enhancements may have the opposite effect by increasing recidivism rates among offenders. This may be due to the fact that individuals who are struggling with addiction or other personal issues may not respond well to punitive measures, and may require more comprehensive support and treatment to overcome their problems.
Let’s take Utah, for example
The state has a unique law that lowered the legal amount of alcohol in a driver’s blood from 0.08% to 0.05%. The law might show some promise as it seems to have lowered the number of drunk driving deaths. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration reported that:
Road deaths were lower in 2019, the first year the law was in effect, than in 2016, the last year before it had passed, even though people in Utah drove more in 2019.
Utah also saw greater decreases in road deaths than the country as a whole, when comparing how many fatalities occurred per mile driven. The fatality rate in Utah dropped 18.3% between 2016 and 2019, compared to 5.9% nationally.
While this is good news, there was also another statistic that should be taken into account. Utah’s Substance Use and Mental Health Advisory Council put out a DUI Report, and it shows that while DUI related injuries and fatalities were down in 2019 (the year the new law took effect), those numbers shot back up in 2020. There were more than twice the amount of fatalities in 2020 compared to 2019, and a 13% increase of injuries.
It seems that the law may have had an initial impact on the state, but it’s clear that the idea of being arrested for less alcohol in the blood does not keep people from driving while intoxicated. Despite the results of a law like this, Maryland will be implementing tougher penalties for repeat DUI offenders this fall.
How can we actually lower DUI numbers?
Instead of relying solely on sentencing enhancements, policymakers should consider implementing evidence-based strategies that address the underlying causes of drunk driving. For example, increasing access to substance abuse treatment, mental health services, and other supportive resources can help individuals overcome their addiction and make better decisions. Additionally, implementing community-based prevention programs, such as public education campaigns, ride-sharing services, and designated driver programs, can encourage individuals to make responsible choices and reduce the incidence of drunk driving.
But until all of these suggestions become real policies, you’re stuck with me. 🙂
If you have been charged with DUI, Drew Cochran, Attorney at Law can help. As an Annapolis DUI defense attorney, I am dedicated to protecting your rights and preserving your driving privileges, both in court and before the Motor Vehicle Administration. Whether it involves representing you in a DUI case or navigating the legal process, I will work tirelessly to help you avoid a DUI conviction.
If it becomes necessary, I am prepared to take your case to trial, employing a robust defense strategy to fight for a favorable outcome. Additionally, I have extensive experience in negotiating plea bargains and may be able to secure a fair resolution, such as reducing a DUI charge to a DWI. To schedule an appointment to discuss your options, call me in Annapolis, or use our contact page. My dedicated team and I proudly serve the people of Annapolis and Ellicott City.
And remember – Keep Calm, and Call Drew.
[