Families of SOs Community Group
WE HAVE MOVED!!! ............................. ............................... ......................... ............................ ............................. .......................... HERE: http://support-for-families.boards.net ............. ................ ............... ................ ............................... .................Please create a profile...
I was on a sales call at a family owned business and they were talking about their son who just got a DUI. The mom was saying that he was a good person that just made a bad decision. I said in my sincerest voice, "yeah, some people claim that people who get arrested for DUI actually drive drunk many many times before they are arrested, good thing it's only a one time deal for your son." The dad smirked at me because he was furious with his son, the mom just agreed that it was only a one time thing and didn't get my subtle sarcasm.
There are some major parallels here between DUI offenders and sex offenders that I think people don't want to admit.
1. Not all sex offenders are pedophiles nor or all DUI offenders alcoholics. You can't paint either group with this broad of brush. Both sex offenders and DUI offenders that are pedophiles or alcoholics cannot be cured per se, but their disease can be managed, and can be managed quite well if the people are willing to work at it.
2. Both cause great harm. I think the harm done to victims of sex crimes is as immense as it is understated. You can't always see it, but it's like an iceberg in the ocean. The victims of drunk driving are a lot more obvious. Each year 10,000 people die from drunk driving and according to MADD 290,000 people were injured in 2012 from drunk driving.
3. Both have lower than average recidivism rates. The average in the US according to the BJS for all crime is 67.5%. About 1/3 of all people arrested for DUI have a previous arrests for DUI on their record. Though highly debated, the recidivism rate for sex offenders is actually quite low, the lowest compared to any other crime besides murder. Certain sex crimes have a much higher rate of recidivism, ie rape, or targeting boys as their victims.
4. There are some big similarities in CP and people convicted in stings to people arrested for DUI who didn't harm anyone but were just arrested. In the case of CP or a sting, the argument is that they didn't harm anyone yet, but they are going to harm someone in the future. The same argument can be said for people who were driving drunk and didn't harm someone, if they continue doing what they are doing they will harm someone.
Where they are different:
1. A difference in mens rea, or the guilty mind. Sex offenders usually knowingly commit their crime. DUI offenders negligently or wrecklessly commit their crime, when they get into their car drunk they didn't intend to kill or harm someone. Objectively it's worse that the sex offender knowingly committed their crime, but tell that to the victim's family of a drunk driver, they are just as dead whether or not there was intent to harm.
2. We punish sex offenders much more harshly while DUI offenders get a slap on the wrist. Most states have a diversion program for first time DUI offenders.
3. DUI statistics are not as high as they should be. According to the national traffic safety administration there some studies that estimate that in 2010 there were 112 million episodes of drunk driving and only 1% were arrested. It is posited that sex offenders have a lot victims but they just all do not come forward. In some situations that is true, but to say that all offenders once on the registry reoffend at a much higher rate than their recidivism statistics suggest is a little insane. Where is any evidence to suggest that? One would think being put on a public registry and being constantly hassled by the public and the police would make it much tougher to commit more sex crimes wouldn't it? At the same time once you are convicted of a DUI it is much tougher for police to pin point you individually. DUI offenders aren't held to the same level of scrutiny as sex offenders are after arrest and sex offenders still have a much lower recidivism rate.
My response to "there is no fixin broke" is that there is also no fixing people who cannot think for themselves. There is no fixing the fear mongering politicians who get re-elected for being tough on a crime problem that is less of a problem now than it was 20 years ago. There is no fixing the public who gladly hands their civil rights away so they do not have to feel scared even though crime is down. And there is no fixing the media who highlight the worst in our society 24-7, if it bleeds it leads mentality is the death of us.
How we as a society deal with DUI's just shows how hypocritical we are. It's okay to kill and maim people by driving drunk, you'll get a slap on the wrist.
There are some major parallels here between DUI offenders and sex offenders that I think people don't want to admit.
1. Not all sex offenders are pedophiles nor or all DUI offenders alcoholics. You can't paint either group with this broad of brush. Both sex offenders and DUI offenders that are pedophiles or alcoholics cannot be cured per se, but their disease can be managed, and can be managed quite well if the people are willing to work at it.
2. Both cause great harm. I think the harm done to victims of sex crimes is as immense as it is understated. You can't always see it, but it's like an iceberg in the ocean. The victims of drunk driving are a lot more obvious. Each year 10,000 people die from drunk driving and according to MADD 290,000 people were injured in 2012 from drunk driving.
3. Both have lower than average recidivism rates. The average in the US according to the BJS for all crime is 67.5%. About 1/3 of all people arrested for DUI have a previous arrests for DUI on their record. Though highly debated, the recidivism rate for sex offenders is actually quite low, the lowest compared to any other crime besides murder. Certain sex crimes have a much higher rate of recidivism, ie rape, or targeting boys as their victims.
4. There are some big similarities in CP and people convicted in stings to people arrested for DUI who didn't harm anyone but were just arrested. In the case of CP or a sting, the argument is that they didn't harm anyone yet, but they are going to harm someone in the future. The same argument can be said for people who were driving drunk and didn't harm someone, if they continue doing what they are doing they will harm someone.
Where they are different:
1. A difference in mens rea, or the guilty mind. Sex offenders usually knowingly commit their crime. DUI offenders negligently or wrecklessly commit their crime, when they get into their car drunk they didn't intend to kill or harm someone. Objectively it's worse that the sex offender knowingly committed their crime, but tell that to the victim's family of a drunk driver, they are just as dead whether or not there was intent to harm.
2. We punish sex offenders much more harshly while DUI offenders get a slap on the wrist. Most states have a diversion program for first time DUI offenders.
3. DUI statistics are not as high as they should be. According to the national traffic safety administration there some studies that estimate that in 2010 there were 112 million episodes of drunk driving and only 1% were arrested. It is posited that sex offenders have a lot victims but they just all do not come forward. In some situations that is true, but to say that all offenders once on the registry reoffend at a much higher rate than their recidivism statistics suggest is a little insane. Where is any evidence to suggest that? One would think being put on a public registry and being constantly hassled by the public and the police would make it much tougher to commit more sex crimes wouldn't it? At the same time once you are convicted of a DUI it is much tougher for police to pin point you individually. DUI offenders aren't held to the same level of scrutiny as sex offenders are after arrest and sex offenders still have a much lower recidivism rate.
My response to "there is no fixin broke" is that there is also no fixing people who cannot think for themselves. There is no fixing the fear mongering politicians who get re-elected for being tough on a crime problem that is less of a problem now than it was 20 years ago. There is no fixing the public who gladly hands their civil rights away so they do not have to feel scared even though crime is down. And there is no fixing the media who highlight the worst in our society 24-7, if it bleeds it leads mentality is the death of us.
How we as a society deal with DUI's just shows how hypocritical we are. It's okay to kill and maim people by driving drunk, you'll get a slap on the wrist.
when i moved here to tn in '94' is was an everyday thing to see arrests in the paper for dwi, multiple dwi's, driving while suspended or driving while revoked. the suspensions and revocations were because or previous dui's.
slap them on the wrist and let 'em go to do it all over again....
I have known drunk drivers that have killed children, maimed all their passengers, or themselves. Get 3-5 of them with out going to prison, although that has changed recently. Most of them never seeing a stitch of treatment or counseling. Most of them have been repeat offenders with a low getting caught rate for a couple of decades. Then there are some that drive drunk once and get busted, then never do it again because of their perceived risk.
Here in Wisconsin, we can't forget that there are several repeat drunk driving offenders that are in our legislature and senate too. They may not get caught every time they drive, but if they have been caught once, then according to the logic applied to all other offenses, they have been breaking the law for years without getting caught.
After looking at the recidivism rates for DUI/OWI offences here in WI, then comparing them with the SO recidivism rates, the numbers indicate that if you have drunk and driven before, especially if you aren't caught but even if you are, you are more than 70% likely to do it again. They have even tried a DUI registry here in Janesville, WI. http://host.madison.com/news/local/on-wisconsin-janesville-police-hope-online-map-will-shame-repeat/article_544c6e90-6107-11e2-b680-0019bb2963f4.html
I personally don't think that it is working. I am not sure it would ever work to be honest, shaming isn't a motivator for many folks and they will just continue down the same road cause why change if the shaming never really stops.
Like negative reinforcement, it only works for so long. The more effective and long lasting training methods for both human and beast is positive reinforcement tempered with negative reinforcement but always going for the positive reinforcement first before resorting to the negative.
Does that mean folks that like slasher movies will become a serial killer?
So we actually agree in this issue advocate, California may be slipping into the ocean!
The words I used 'the argument can be made', not that I think it's true.
back when Bill Smith was a senator in upstate NY, he was a big drunk in our county and actually lived not to far from where i lived. his daughter, died on her wedding day, she was hit and killed by a drunk driver. oh boy did he ever get the book, no actually the whole flipping library thrown at him.
gov smith then became the BIGGEST pusher and advocate for drunk driving laws going. 2 weeks after he drove the first tough law into effect, guess who we, (the vol fire dept i belonged to) pulled out of the ditch drunker than a skunk? and trust me it wasn't the first time by far either. and it sure wasn't the last either. never once do i recall that he ever got a ticket or anything for drunk driving. even after all the "tough/hard" laws were passed.