Do DUI Laws Really Make Sense?

IN the 1980s, Mothers Against Drunk Driving led the campaign to toughen the penalties for driving under the influence.

This led to a societal change in attitude toward drinking and driving -- and it also helped reduce highway fatalities.

A legislative committee led by Sen. Dan Foster, D-Kanawha, is now studying whether changes are warranted in West Virginia's DUI statutes.

Mark Neil of the state Prosecuting Attorneys Institute says his group is suggesting toughening the penalty for people who are severely impaired when they get behind the wheel.

The state's current legal threshold for presumption of drunkenness is a blood alcohol level of .08 percent.

The prosecutors' group recommends a new charge -- aggravated DUI -- that would carry heavier penalties for people caught driving with a blood alcohol content of .15 percent.

Neil cited studies that show most drunken driving fatalities involve extremely drunk drivers.

Certainly a driver with a blood-alcohol content of .15 percent is more dangerous than a person who barely meets the legal limit of .08.

The drivers at .15 percent or higher certainly need to be taken off the roads. An aggravated DUI charge for such drivers would take the worst offenders off the road longer.

At the other end of the spectrum, State Sen. Mike Green, D-Raleigh, a former police officer in Beckley, told Foster's committee that alternative sentencing

of the lighter DUI offenders to work details instead of jail would save counties money.

This might free up jail space to accommodate the longer sentences that drunker drivers would face if the prosecutors' recommendation is adopted.

Both ideas merit serious legislative consideration.

The goal is to come up with a cost-effective law that affords even more protection to innocent drivers and their passengers on West Virginia roadways.

Sphere: Related Content