South Carolina Criminal Defense Blog

It is amazing how so much effort is made to clarify the changes in fines.Money,money,money. South Carolina is ridiculous with the drainig a turnip for blood scenario.
Seems there is no concern for the person that mey be dying from alcoholism.Yes,it is very bad when an innocent person is injured or killed because of drunken driving but why doesn't MADD and the other haters go for the government's throat about creating dry counties and such?? It's all about money,that's why.

All i can say is just right that check all they want is money back in the day all they did was drive you home its a joke

You guys got it wrong. You can do a lot to a person before they change their behavior. You start taking their paycheck and things change fast. So, I guess you are right, it is about money. If someone realizes that if they get caught drunk driving the penalties are worse, they may decide to find alternate means of transportation before drinking beforehand.

So does this mean that there is no lisence suspension along with these other penalties?

There is a license suspension for conviction as well as for refusal of the datamaster, and the penalties have increased as well. In the next month as I have time I'll post more information on the new law and its requirements.

Because money now a days is the only thing that grabs someone's attention. What if you get killed or rather kill someone riding with you. what is you kill someone's child, parent, sibling, spouse? I believe they should be a lot stricter on the fines and penalties. No trading out jail time for community service. I am not some holier than though person who has never done it, I did. I was thankful and lucky I never hurt myself or no one else. There are people out there that do it several times a week. That shows lack of concern for your well being or anyone's around you.

I don't think there should be any fines at all. It should be a mandatory loss of your license for a year or more, and a mandatory jail sentence of a year or more. Anyone who thinks that driving while under the influence is ok is seriously in need of a wake up call.

I agree with mike. Anyone who drinks and drives should be lashed forty seven times!

Did any of you ever think how completely wrong all DUI laws are? the first tenet of law going back to the Magna Carta is you can not arrest a person until they commit a crime, not on suspicion they might someday. Drinking and driving is NOT commmiting a crime it is only slightly increasing your odds of causing an accident.
All the statistics you have read are completely skewed. If fifty per cent of all accidents involve alcohol then tell us what is their average BAC. And please tell us how to avoid the other fifty per cent of idiot drivers. Millions of people drink and drive and get home safely every day. This does not make it right but it certainly is not a crime. Have we forgotten what the word accident means? An unintentional act not intended to cause harm. Perhaps we should arrest everyone who has had a family member cause an accident after all they would statiscally be a greater risk as well. Drinking or not it should make no difference if you carelessly injure another person there should be punishment. Under current law if a sober moron runs into you after you had two glasses of wine with dinner they walk and you pay.

Alcoholism is a disease and anyone who drives with a fourth offense needs to be put away, they have not hit bottom yet. Ask Bill W.

DUI certainly IS a crime. We have laws that make it a crime. To take the attitude that drinking and driving "only slightly" increases your odds of having an accident is irresponsible. And, yes, alcoholism is a disease. Alcoholics need treatment. Treatment, however, only works if the alcoholic wants treatment. It is said that alcoholics will only stop drinking when they hit "rock bottom." Perhaps stiffer fines, jail time, etc will help them to find the bottom quicker and encourage them to seek treatment. If nothing else, it will help to keep them off the roads where they could hurt or kill others...including themselves.

I had a DUI in 1995. If I was convicted of another offense now would it be considered a first or second offense?

Joseph:

Prior offenses are only used for enhancement if they were within the last 10 years, I don't think that has changed under the new law. So, it should be a first offense.

The fines and the jail time should both be stout, but I feel that the license suppension is where the major punishment comes in. Especially, if the convicted has a job or in school. It is very humbling to have to "catch" a ride everywhere you go, or walk.
I am glad I have learned my lesson about drinking and driving. Because I know that if I continued down the path I was traveling I would not be here today, or would have hurt someone else. I could not live with myself if I was to take someones life out of my own selfishness and carelessness. The sad thing is that majority of folks who do drink and drive will not cease until they get caught. I have watched it happen over and over again. It is a hard lesson to learn, but a good one. It sucks, do not drink and drive. Take a lesson from someone who has been through it all, learn an easy lesson. If you have a drink,stay put or find alternate transportation.

This is rediculous. There is a big difference between an alcoholic and someone who has a couple drinks at dinner. A person should be able to go out and have a couple beers with dinner and drive home without worrying of a DUI. This is not defending people who go out and drink excessive and drive, which is wrong. It should be less based on the fact that someone drank as opposed to their coherentness. It makes it to where less people want to go out for dinner. Not many people want to choose soda or water with dinner. Most would prefer a couple glasses of beer and wine. Remember just because someone has a couple of beers, doesn't make them an alcoholic. If someone chooses to label everyone who drinks an alcoholic, then they are oblivious to reality.

To me the problem drivers are highly intoxicated and typically in one car accidents late at night on secondary roads where they hit a tree or turn over in a ditch. Most lives lost to DUI arise from this type of behavior. Studies have shown in many these wrecks may in fact be suicides from depression from personal issues and alcohol abuse. The DUI laws really do nothing to stem this type of behavior, but rather, for the most part target the non problem, .08 to .11 social drinkers who have the misfortune to be stopped and then pay the excessive fines and insurance costs. Until this state and all other states find a way to remove the problem drinkers from the roads, anyone drinking and driving will be blamed for the whole problem and pay the price.