Police begin stepped-up drunken driving patrols this weekend
College students getting in a last party before school starts and revelers gearing up for the Labor Day weekend should think twice before they drink and get behind the wheel of a car, Michigan State Police warn.
Police will be out in force now through Labor Day looking for suspected drunken drivers.
Photo courtesy of the Michigan State Police
The extra patrols start at 8 tonight in the areas of Carpenter Road and Washtenaw Avenue in Pittsfield Township, Main Street and Old U.S. 12 in Chelsea and Michigan Avenue and Dell Road in Saline Township.
The extra effort to catch drunken drivers will continue on Saturday along Interstate 94, US-23 and M-14 in Washtenaw County as well as at Main Street and Wabash in Milan and in the areas of Michigan Avenue and Carpenter Road in Pittsfield Township and Ecorse and Harris roads in Ypsilanti Township.
Participating agencies in Washtenaw County include Michigan State Police, the Washtenaw County Sheriff’s Office and police from Ann Arbor, Chelsea, Milan, Pittsfield Township and the University of Michigan.
For a complete list of stepped-up enforcement areas throughout the campaign, go to the Office of Highway Safety Planning website.
Last year, 357 people were killed in impaired driving crashes in Michigan, including 10 of the 21 people who died in alcohol and/or drug-related crashes during the Labor Day holiday.
Motorists convicted of a first drunk driving offense face up to 93 days in jail, up to a $500 fine, up to 360 hours of community service, 6 points on a driver’s license and up to 180 days’ license suspension.
Convicted drunken drivers are also subject to a $1,000 fee for two consecutive years. Anyone who refuses a breath test the first time is given an automatic one-year driver’s license suspension.
Motorists convicted of drunken driving for the first time with a .17 blood alcohol content face increased penalties including the possible installation of an ignition interlock device preventing the car from starting if the driver has been drinking.
The stepped up enforcement is paid for with federal traffic safety dollars earmarked for drunken driving and seat belt enforcement. The enhanced patrols are in addition to scheduled shifts.
Comments
AAFish
Sun, Aug 21, 2011 : 12:53 a.m.
Drunken driving is bad. There is not much controversy about that. And people want to have drunken drivers severely dealt with. Not too surprising. (And it's politically popular, too.) But -- y'know what? There are frequent OTHER driving offenses that are every bit as lethal as drunken driving. Running stop signs and red lights, cutting right out into a cross street with no regard to traffic, making left turns into nearby oncoming traffic. One of them that I can think of -- and committed by many, if not most, -- is speeding. People seem to think that speeding is --somehow -- a joke -- and the more they can speed, without getting caught, somehow denotes a badge of honor. If one really considers the facts here, and truly thinks analytically, it becomes obvious that speeding carries EXACTLY THE SAME hazards as drunken driving. Yes, I'll say it again -- EXACTLY THE SAME. In each case, the driver is not allowing sufficient time to react to emergency situations that may be encountered ahead. In the case of the drunk driver, reaction time is slowed and judgement is impaired. In the case of the speeder, the distance in front of the vehicle in which one CANNOT stop is greatly increased. (How many people know that the car's stopping distance is not proportional to the speed, but rather, to the SQUARE of the speed? That is a very big difference.) It all boils down to Newtonian Physics. (Which was discovered over 300 years ago -- why do we still not learn?) But -- it's so-o-o-o much more morally satisfying to condemn drunken drivers (which, truth be told, includes a good proportion of the population) than to admit that one's own driving habits just -- might -- be every bit as bad.
Shauna Mote
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 4:40 p.m.
I was hit by a drunk driver six years ago. I lost both legs above the knee at the scene of the accident and I came very close to losing my life. The driver was a second time offender (with a long list of "other" convictions") who's attorney orchestrated a plea bargained so he got five years. He walked away from prison last year while I got a life sentence as an amputee who has difficulty walking anywhere. How fair is our system? Not at all. To all of you who think drunk drivers are treated too harshly I say this... Try living your life with a severe injury. See how it impacts you and your loved ones. See mothers and fathers losing their jobs because they can no longer do the job they did before. See these same people lose their homes because disability pays minimally. See a young child lose their life or a normal way of living. Drinking isn't the problem, driving under the influence is. Choose to drink if you want to, but don't get behind the wheel of a car. That's where the problem is. Use public transportation, call a friend, sleep it off on a park bench or don't drink if you have to drive. You have choices, use them. The drunk who hit me had a choice but I didn't get to choose. He made the choice that I now live with. I don't think the drunk driving laws are harsh enough. One strike and you're out!
Wolf's Bane
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 10:34 p.m.
ABOUT TIME!!!
Basic Bob
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:48 p.m.
I'm going to make sure my license, registration, and insurance card are together, just in case they stop me. They'll be wasting their time on this one.
nixon41
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:43 p.m.
You know if we all obeyed the 10 Commandments & followed the laws we would NOT have problems.
KJMClark
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 1:01 p.m.
"We wouldn't have any fun either." ???????? You must have a really strange idea of fun. I can't think of anything I would think is fun that isn't legal.
West of Main
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:47 p.m.
We wouldn't have any fun either. Sorry, but it's the truth.
nixon41
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:38 p.m.
Do you always monitor what the police are doing? What do YOU do all day? Walk in their shoes just one day & then you'll know.
townie54
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:27 p.m.
THE ANSWER Mick is one of my police friends once told me is we dont care what it takes to slow them down or not drive drunk.If a sign or a warning works thats as good as arresting them
Joe Kidd
Sun, Aug 21, 2011 : 12:51 a.m.
How do they know it works if they don't catch anyone? That is like saying crime prevention programs work. How do you know if you have prevented a crime?
Roy Munson
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 7:57 p.m.
A coworker wants to go get two drinks after work today then go home. I had to decline. No way am I going to risk having a cop simply watch me pull out of the parking lot and get punished way more severely than someone else tonight who commits atrocities against another person. It all comes down to punishing the "crimes" that generate cash. I'll have my two drinks at home.
Joe Kidd
Sun, Aug 21, 2011 : 12:49 a.m.
Yes they do Nixon. It happens all the time. They watch for obvious drunks that stumble out and drive off. I know this from my career in law enforcement. I never did it, but I know a lot of officers do it. Of course they don't sit in the bar lot, they use the lot across the street and down the road a little. That is why if you are going to get drunk with a group of your friends you need a designated stumbler. A sober friend who goes out first, stumbles, acts like he is vomiting and eventually drives off, with the officer on his tale. Then your group leaves.
KJMClark
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 12:55 p.m.
Thank you for being responsible and not drinking and driving!
Homeland Conspiracy
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 9:38 p.m.
"Police do not sit in a bar parking lot or across the street to arrest people who drink" LOL!!!
West of Main
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:42 p.m.
Sure they do.
nixon41
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:41 p.m.
FYI Police do not sit in a bar parking lot or across the street to arrest people who drink. Get real folks.
John A2
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 7:48 p.m.
That's Great to Hear. Death in a bottle, evil spirits they are. They should just make liquor illegal and legalize Marijuana all together.
KJMClark
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 1:17 p.m.
Actually, what they should do is require a bit more technology in cars that detects erratic driving. Then the car would slow to no more than 45mph and put on the flashers automatically, until the car is shut off and turned back on. They could call it sleepy/intoxicated/medicated mode. Wouldn't be too hard to do, and the system could be made to detect maneuvers for bad road conditions vs. odd driving. It doesn't seem much more difficult than electronic stability control, which is becoming standard equipment on trucks and SUVs.
West of Main
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 9:04 p.m.
Agreed on your last point, but you do realize that the vast majority of people who consume alcohol do so responsibly?
Mike
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 7:30 p.m.
"The stepped up enforcement is paid for with federal traffic safety dollars earmarked for drunken driving and seat belt enforcement. The enhanced patrols are in addition to scheduled shifts. " - there's proof that your tax dollars are saving and/or creating jobs. "Motorists convicted of a first drunk driving offense face up to 93 days in jail, up to a $500 fine, up to 360 hours of community service, 6 points on a driver's license and up to 180 days' license suspension. Convicted drunken drivers are also subject to a $1,000 fee for two consecutive years. Anyone who refuses a breath test the first time is given an automatic one-year driver's license suspension. Motorists convicted of drunken driving for the first time with a .17 blood alcohol content face increased penalties including the possible installation of an ignition interlock device preventing the car from starting if the driver has been drinking. " - you are punished less for actually assaulting someone than for driving drunk, FYI
Atticus F.
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 7:06 p.m.
Notice how all of the drunk driving comercials feature a man being arrested. In all of my years, I have never seen a comercial depicting a woman being arrested. The reason: It's easy to watch a man getting arrested and haveing his life ruined, but seeing a woman being led away in handcuffs does not garner they same joy. If the comercials showed the truth, mothers losing their licenses, fathers losing their jobs, and children losing their homes, people would not take the same degree of joy in "getting tough on drunks".
KJMClark
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 12:53 p.m.
Actually, seeing moms lose their license etc. wouldn't change my mind one bit. I'd still be completely in favor of mandatory license loss. No one else should be at risk of severe injury or death because someone else was drinking and driving.
A2Woman
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:33 p.m.
You are correct, Atticus, it seems that men are the only ones depicted in advertising. However, as a volunteer for MADD for many years in this county, I saw first-hand the convicted drunk drivers who were court ordered to attend the monthly Victims Impact Panel. My eyes were opened, and it is not just the "stereotypical" men that attened these sessions. I saw many mothers, pregnant women, college students, MIP, and of course, even some of my neighbors from A2. It is very sad the number of men, women, and children who drink and drive.
Mike
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 7:43 p.m.
That is the truth; especially for first time "social" drinkers not to mention that they will have to choose between paying their mortgage and paying their insurance for years AND THERE IS A LIFETIME LOOKBACK PEIOD meaning if you had two drunk driving tickets when you were in your twenties and get a third when you are sixty it will be a felony and you give up many of your rights as a citizen - extreme. No easy answers but the penalties for drunk driving are extreme compared to physical assaults where you actually hurt someone on purpose with willful intent. Before all of you do-gooders pile on me, I am speaking from personal experience with a young family member who got two DUI's in high school and was assaulted and had his jaw broken in a racially motivated incident (he is not african-american as were his five assailants). The perpetrators got off scott free even after pleading guilty. By the way, my son began his drinking after the assault and now has to carry these convictions with him the rest of his life. So, I would have to agree with Atticus that the punishments are extreme.........
Nephilim
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 6:56 p.m.
I find it odd that you will post your anti enforcement messages here yet none of you are willing to post the same messages on the articles that appear here almost weekly of the people that killed or seriously injured by drunk drivers. Kind of funny how you try to relate stepped up enforcement with revenue generation. That's about the most illogical basis for your beliefs. I hope none of you or your family are ever injured or killed by a drunk driver. It is the most avoidable crime there is.
djm12652
Mon, Aug 22, 2011 : 9:16 p.m.
Addiction is an illness that should be handled by loved ones and/or people that care. An addict of any kind will not adfmit and want to change just because the state tells them too. I know, lost 2 nieces.
Polyjuce123
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 7:29 p.m.
If Michigan truly cared about saving lives, they would offer proper therapy to first and second time offenders, instead of charging them with a 2000 "driver responsibility" fee, and thousands more in court costs that does nothing to change their behaviors. What it does do is make the person more depressed and more susceptible to abusing alcohol in the future. Want to put a stop to "drunk driving"? Make interlock devices mandatory on all cars and charge a small fee. Better yet, make it illegal for any Establishment to serve alcohol that has a parking lot. Why is this not happening? Because annually in Michigan hundreds of millions of dollars are brought in by "driver responsibility fees" and associated fines. After 4 or 5 DUI convictions, its more than obvious that person has not received the proper treatment to change their habits. Other states offer much more intensive treatment options than Michigan, but what Michigan does have is some of the highest fines for traffic related costs. There is a fine line between correcting a abusive problem, and a state that capitalizes on a disease known as alcoholism.
Freemind42
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 6:35 p.m.
It must be time to fill their quota.
Joe Kidd
Sun, Aug 21, 2011 : 12:42 a.m.
Yes! The quota system was made illegal. Now officers can do more, as many as they want.
Homeland Conspiracy
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 9:33 p.m.
"They don't have quotas" LOL!!!
nixon41
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:42 p.m.
They don't have quotas !!!
Smart Logic
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 7:37 p.m.
No, it's time for them to start doing their jobs and fighting real crime.
Ricebrnr
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 6:28 p.m.
@Mick52 If the purpose was revenue generation then you would be correct. If the purpose was to "get" or "gotcha" people, then you would be correct. If the purpose was safety and not to get the "social" drinker but to get these hardcore super drunks/domestic terrorists off of our roads, then you would be wrong.
RJA
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 5:30 p.m.
I love the extra stepped up enforcement! I think all areas will be covered, lives saved and drinking drivers taken off the road. For those partying, leave the area sober, and not return until sober. Keep the penaltles HIGH, and comunity service sounds great for the first timers. We all know our streets and roads need to be cleaned up. Good Luck to MSP and all WCSD! Hopefully the enhanced patrols and scheduled officers can be on the look out for students walking alone in the wee hours of the morning too, and catch a few suspects being looked for.
Mick52
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 4:56 p.m.
I fail to see the wisdom of publishing the enhanced enforcement locations. Doesn't this give the drunk drivers notice on the areas to avoid?