"Top Gun DUI / Drunk Driving Defense Attorney Newsletter - Myles L. Berman - Top Gun DUI / Drunk Driving Defense Attorney

888 - 4 - TOPGUN

MYLES L. BERMAN'S
"TOP GUN DUI DEFENSE ATTORNEY"® BLOG©

June 2008

In Indiana, as part of a sentence after being convicted of drunk driving causing serious bodily injury, a woman was required to leave the wrecked car in her front yard until she completes three years of probation. The woman also had a blood alcohol level of a .317, nearly four times the legal limit in Indiana. This was also her third drunk driving offense. What the sentencing judge probably did was create a traffic hazard as a result of the distraction caused by placing the wrecked car in the woman's front yard for three years.

From Canada comes another example of government using drunk driving prosecutions to generate money. In Ontario, a new law will allow the courts to impound a vehicle involved in a drunk driving offense if the vehicle was either owned or driven by somebody whose license was suspended for drunk driving at least twice over a 10 year period. After the vehicle is sold, anyone injured in a drunk driving incident can apply for compensation to spend the proceeds. It wouldn't surprise me that the government in Ontario takes a substantial portion of the proceeds before any compensation is paid to any victim. There is an exception to the forfeiture in that the vehicle can be released to the owner if the owner agrees to install an ignition lock that requires the driver to pass a breath test or agree that convicted drunk drivers will not have access to the vehicle. It would not surprise me either that there are also fees in order for an owner to retrieve his vehicle, in addition to the fees to install the ignition lock.

It looks like Alabama may be one of the first states in the country to require DUI convictions to stay on a person's record for life. Almost all states have a limit as to when prior misdemeanor DUI convictions can be considered when there is a new offense occurring within a certain number of years. In Alabama, a new law would make it clear that anybody who has three prior drunk driving convictions and picks up a fourth drunk driving offense during their lifetime, the forth offense can be charged as a felony. In California, a fourth DUI offense within 10 years can now be alleged as a felony. I am sure that in the near future California will also eliminate the 10 year window and will have DUI convictions stay on a person's record for lifetime. Consequently, a fourth offense picked up during a person's lifetime will be considered a felony.

To subscribe to this BLOG, click on "Get on Myles L. Berman's 'Top Gun DUI Defense Attorney' ®BLOG© Mailing List" found on Myles L. Berman's main web page. Mr. Berman's website is http://www.topgundui.com.

November 2007

Since 1994, I've maintained a presence on the internet. I guess it's time to modernize so I've changed my newsletter to a blog.

The latest gadget to break into the DUI / DRUNK DRIVING industry is a machine that measures eye movement using infrared light. In California, the California Highway Patrol and City of Orange are interested in the machine. The cost appears to be $3,500 for a hand held machine, $35,000 for a stationary one eye machine and $55,000 for a stationary two eye machine. With an estimated 500,000 police cruisers in the US and hundreds if not thousands of police agencies as potential markets, hundreds of millions of dollars are believed to be involved. The fact that the machines are even being looked at confirms that traditional methods of prosecutions such as breath and blood testing are not sufficient. In addition, I doubt very seriously that judges and/or juries will automatically accept the scientific premises in which the machines are based.

The Salinas, California, Police Department is setting up an unusual Thanksgiving checkpoint. They will be giving away between 150 to 300 turkeys to drivers who pass through their DUI / DRUNK DRIVING checkpoint as long as they don't get arrested for DUI / DRUNK DRIVING. For those drivers who choose to avoid the checkpoint, perhaps they can receive a chicken!

September 2007

Most people think that as long as they drive under “the legal limit” they will not have to worry about a DUI / Drunk Driving arrest. This is a misperception that could not be further from reality. While in almost all states, the legal limit is .08, people who drive below the legal limit are often times arrested for DUI / Drunk Driving. A police officer in Tampa, Florida was known as one of Hillsborough County’s most aggressive DUI / Drunk Driving arresting officers. In one year alone, the officer arrested 58 people whose alcohol level was below a .08. In 43 of those 58 cases, there was no demonstrated visible impairment while they were driving. In many instances, investigators found that his police reports were inconsistent with what was depicted in his cruiser’s video camera. The officer also failed to activate his audio and video equipment in 40% of his stops from October 2005 to October 2006. Needless to say, the Hillsborough State Attorney’s office concluded the officer hurt his credibility by filing inaccurate police reports that also omitted significant details.

In the never ending effort to clamp down on DUI / Drunk Driving / DWI, a Zamboni (ice cleaning machine) operator was arrested in New Jersey for DUI / Drunk Driving / DWI after it was reported by a fellow employee that the Zamboni was speeding and nearly crashed into the boards. A New Jersey Judge ruled the Zamboni driver can not be prosecuted for DUI / Drunk Driving / DWI because the Zamboni can’t be used on the highways nor carry passengers. Look for states to be more creative in their ability to prosecute people arrested for operating any type of vehicle in any place at any time.

This year, California prosecutors announced they received a Federal grant in the amount of $3.6 million to reduce DUI / Drunk Driving in the State of California. Funding is to assist in the hiring of prosecutors to train other prosecutors on how to better handle DUI / Drunk Driving prosecutions. The ultimate goal is to increase the 77% conviction rate of all DUI / Drunk Driving arrests in the state of California. In addition to convicting more people for DUI / Drunk Driving, the state also hopes to generate more sources of revenue as a result of court fines imposed upon a DUI / Drunk Driving conviction.

To subscribe to this newsletter, click on "Get on Myles L. Berman's 'Top Gun DUI Defense Attorney' ®Newsletter© Mailing List" found on Myles L. Berman's main web page. Mr. Berman's website is http://www.topgundui.com.

November 2005

Consistent with the relentless attack on people who drink and drive, the State of California recently passed a law creating a 3-year pilot program for Sacramento county beginning next year. Any person who gets arrested for DUI with a prior within 10 years will have their cars impounded for thirty (30) days upon arrest. In addition, there will mandatory counseling and referrals to treatment. The driver will be entitled to an impoundment hearing, however, I am sure it will be an uphill battle. While no state money will be funding this pilot program, the person behind this new law is using it to raise $3.5 million dollars. As I have been reporting for years, drunk driving prosecutions is big business.

A judge in the State of Virginia has ruled "per se" laws that presume someone with a .08% or higher is intoxicated is unconstitutional because it denies the defendant the right to the presumption of innocence. While the judge in Virginia clearly followed United States Supreme Court precedent, the prosecutors are trying to punish him by withdrawing all drunk driving cases assigned to him. Groups that have a financial interest in promoting tough drunk driving laws are up in arms over this decision. These groups' abilities to terrorize judges, prosecutors and state politicians is legendary.

Not to be outdone, New York has jumped on the "get tougher on drunk drivers" bandwagon. In New York, it will be a felony if a drunk driver hurts or kills someone regardless of what actually caused the accident. Prior to this law, the State of New York had to prove the alleged drunk driver was criminally negligent in causing the accident. So if someone is driving under the influence and a pedestrian darts out between 2 cars in front of the driver, the driver can be charged with a felony. Once again, the drunk driving laws in this country are being used to take away our constitutional rights.

May 2005

If your children are under 21 and are taking cough medicine, do not let them drive a car. In California, cough medicine is now considered an alcoholic beverage. Since California is a zero tolerance state for persons under 21, any amount of alcohol from whatever source could result in a one year suspension. I expect to see more of these types of cases where prosecutors will seek to convict anyone who they perceive is under the influence of anything especially if there is an accident. Once again, using the facade of protecting our freeways through DUI enforcement, the government is further eroding our civil rights.

Last November, the United States Supreme Court concluded that a DUI causing injuries is not a "crime of violence" for purposes of deportation. You may recall some years ago I mentioned how federal courts are considering DUI cases causing injuries a crime of violence. I reported then that this was another example of the government overreaching based on drunk driving enforcement. Those of us who practice in this area know that subjecting somebody to deportation due to a DUI conviction causing injuries often times lead to extremely harsh and unintended penalties that is contrary to American jurisprudence.

The State of Wisconsin has expanded the ability to prosecute drunk driving cases in areas that were originally unintended. Driving a car under the influence on a frozen lake will now subject Wisconsin drivers to being prosecuted for drunk driving. Again, under the facade of "protecting the public," the reach of the government will eventually encompass every square inch within the United States. What is most unfair about the government expanding its powers is that the citizens are not aware of the expansion until they get caught up in this nationwide DUI dragnet.

October 2004

It appears as though the Los Angeles Police Department Crime Lab is under attack again. Almost 1,000 drug cases are having to be re-analyzed because one of the chemists has botched evidence in at least 47 drug cases. This is not a new phenomenon where crime labs conduct themselves in a shoddy and unscientific manner. Crime labs all across the State of California, as well as the United States often times are investigated due to corruption so that Prosecutors can convict people, many of whom are innocent, regardless of valid scientific principles. If not for the zealousness of criminal defense lawyers, crime lab corruption would never see the light of day.

Even though deaths as a result of drunk driving are dropping substantially all across the country, organizations that promote zero tolerance are scratching their heads trying to figure out new ways to raise money to support their “non-profit” status. I can honestly state that these prohibitionists have now finally hijacked the last state legislature in the country. In July, the State of Delaware became the 50th state to lower its legal blood alcohol limit to 0.08%. I would not expect any other state to lower the limit beyond 0.08% because the Federal Government has apparently decided that 0.08% should be the law of the land. Interestingly enough though, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill allocating $20,000,000 for advertising in connection with drunk driving. It wouldn't surprise me in the least that some of these “non-profits” are going to be the recipients of the bulk of the $20,000,000.

Hurray for the State of Indiana! Recently, an Appellate Court held that a tongue stud was a “foreign substance” that should have been removed from the defendant’s mouth at least 20 minutes before the breath test was administered. Tongue studs are not the only foreign substance that could lead to an erroneous blood test result. We have seen false high test results on people who have dentures, fillings, bridges and other types of dental work. While sometimes we view ourselves as true champions in defending liberty, the client in Indiana was the “real stud.”

May 2004

The City Council of Los Angeles is looking into vehicle forfeitures for anyone arrested for DUI in the City of Los Angeles. This is a grandstand play which has no basis in law or fact. New York City’s similar program has been found to be unconstitutional. There are no studies to connect vehicle fortitude upon arrest, and drunk driving law enforcement. The real purpose of this proposal is revenue raising which is consistent with our government’s attempt to inflame us in order to take away our rights and fill government treasuries.

According to the 2004 Annual Report of the California DUI Management Information Systems, Department of Motor Vehicles, in 2002, there were 1,416 alcohol related fatalities with a total of 179,663 DUI arrests. This amounts to .0078% of total DUI arrests where there was an alcohol related fatality. The same source indicates that again in 2002 there were 32,013 alcohol related injuries. It is this statistic that is misleading the public more so than any other. If a driver is sober but a passenger has alcohol in their system and a passenger is injured than this is also considered an alcohol related injury. Even if someone suffers a minor injury, it is also thrown into the overall statistics. The point is that our government is inflating, overstating, and exaggerating the extent of DUI statistics for the sole purpose of taking away our civil rights and increasing their revenue base.

Finally, while it is well known that police officers hide adjacent to bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, the Los Angeles Police Department is now taking these tactics to a higher and easier level. Instead of patrolling the streets, LAPD has assigned police officers to lurk near the homes of convicted drunk drivers who are on probation, and look for violations of probation. This new policy has netted some arrests but one has to wonder if this is a reasonable use of valuable resources. I also wonder how the LAPD targets the neighborhoods in which they are looking for suspected drunk driving probation violations.

March 2004

We caution many clients who are arrested for "DUI With an Accident," there is a strong possibility insurance carriers will not cover for damages as the insurance carrier may consider drunk driving a non-covered claim. Just because somebody is arrested for "Drunk Driving" doesn't necessarily mean that person was the actual cause of the accident. Unfortunately, as we all know, insurance companies will use any type of excuse to not have to pay a claim. Recently, this occurred in New Haven, Connecticut. A Federal Court ruled that insurance companies can exclude from coverage expenses occurred as the result of intoxication. What makes this situation even more devastating is that damages arising from a "Drunk Driving" case may not even be dischargeable in bankruptcy.

The newest push as a result of drunk driving prosecutions in the United States will be prosecuting people who are "driving while drowsy." As many of you know, over the years I have written about how our government has used drunk driving laws to erode our civil rights. Legislation has been, and is continuing to be introduced all across the country to make it a criminal offense to drive while drowsy. I have no doubt law enforcement agencies all across the country will use a "Drowsy" investigation as a pretext to detect people who are drinking and driving. I'm just wondering how police officers are going to create tests to determine whether or not someone is drowsy. It wouldn't surprise me the least that some company comes up with some kind of "drowsy-o-meter" to measure a person’s level of drowsiness. I'm sure such device will be based on the same "voodoo science" that breath testing machines use in attempting to calculate a person’s alcohol level.

The congressionally created public company accounting oversight board will now require accounting firms to disclose drunk driving convictions from accountants who are now being strictly regulated as a result of the corporate fraud that has gripped our country over the last few years. While this may sound like good policy, it is really unfair to accountants who have already been convicted of drunk driving. Disclosure to the federal government of drunk driving convictions was not a punishment that was previously imposed, and therefore people who thought that drunk driving convictions would go unnoticed obviously could be penalized. In addition to the disclosure issue, it remains to be seen whether or not drunk driving convictions will then be disclosed to the public. After all, if disclosure was good enough for our President, it must be good enough for the rest of us!

June 2003

With the government’s continuing onslaught on the social drinker, the State of California is seeking to expand the authority for sobriety checkpoints to also include polluting cars. Once this law goes into effect, look for pollution checkpoints which will give the government arbitrary authority to stop any vehicle whose emissions are visible. For those of you who thought sobriety checkpoints were a good idea, don't complain if you get caught up in this web of deceit visited upon us by our government.

As if polluting vehicles isn't enough, California is also looking to pass a law banning use of handheld cell phones while driving. This is another layer of law enforcement’s ability to continue to stop vehicles under another pretext and harass the social drinker. The government’s justification for this law is that people need to keep both hands on the wheel in the event of the need to take emergency evasive action. From the government’s point of view, this is nothing more than a revenue raising proposition.

It appears as though the Federal Government is running into a brick wall with some states who are resisting the attempt to make DUI Laws uniform throughout the country. Somehow officials are calling the Federal Government’s efforts “blackmail” because the Federal Government controls the disbursement of hundreds of millions of dollars for highway funds. Groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving have been very effective lobbying Congress to enforce states into passing Draconian drunk driving laws. MADD has correctly figured out that it is easier to go to one governmental agency such as the Federal Government than to have to approach 50 different state legislatures. Fortunately, there are still some states left that believe wholeheartedly in our civil liberties.

April 2003

As the war has now been launched against Iraq, there has been much said concerning the erosion of our civil rights. This “hot botton” issue will never have a resolution. One thing is for sure, in a democracy, there will always be a substantial percentage of people who disagree with the majority. The fact of the matter is, the majority rule. With that in mind, law enforcement is not only on a heightened alert, but also is out in full force. As a result, I anticipate a significant rise in drunk driving arrests. This increase will add an additional burden to our already strained judicial system. Courts will be clogged, jails will be bursting at the seams, police departments and prosecuting offices will be overwhelmed with a significant increase in volume. I'm afraid that these conditions will exist well after the war against Iraq ends.

A positive byproduct of the war on terror will be the weakening of the stranglehold that groups like MADD have on our government. Not only does our government not have the resources to prosecute drunk drivers in the manner in which MADD proposes, the government is forced to be in a position to refuse MADD’s further attempts at blackmail. The recession will leave governments unable to pay for the costs of detection, prosecution and incarceration of hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens who otherwise would have been caught up in the politically motivated but morally corrupt drunk driving enforcement in the United States. When our government is able to base its decision on legally correct principles of law and not on threat of blackmail, we will truly have a free democracy, which our men and women in the armed forces are now fighting to preserve.

December 2002

First there was "Dram Shop" (businesses who become civilly liable when they sell alcohol to people who then go and cause a DUI injury and/or death). Now there is "Scam Shop" where states are holding parents criminally liable for DUI accidents and/or deaths caused by teenagers who drink at their house. In Philadelphia, 42 year old Judith McCloskey was convicted and sentenced for involuntary manslaughter. MADD was thrilled that this prosecution was brought by jumping on the band wagon and touting this prosecution to parents all across the country.

Speaking of MADD, did you know that nearly one-third of their $45,000,000 budget goes towards salaries, pensions and benefits? MADD is now advocating the greater use of checkpoints to snare the innocent social drinkers and lowering the legal limit to .06, .04 as well as .00. While this may sound politically correct, it is contrary to reality and our civil liberties. Since DUI deaths are down 40% from 1982, MADD is looking for more angles to raise their revenues. I must say I tip my hat to them for their ability to hijack our government and raise revenue at the same time.

Finally, Santa Clara County, California prosecuted a woman for DUI with an accident. What was unusual about this case was that the trial took place in a local high school cafeteria. Of course she received a lighter sentence after she was convicted since she agreed to the location of the trial. I guess the government likes to serve something more than that food to the high schoolers.

June 2002

I am happy to report to you our Mock trial co-sponsored by the National Drunk Driving Defense Task Force® and Chicago-Kent College of Law held on April 27, 2002 in Orange County, California was a success. Attorneys came in from all over the State of California as well as Nevada. For the first time, three police agencies sent police officers to attend our seminar. The feedback from the police officers was very helpful and appreciated. We also had a number of people from the general public who attended. It was a most enjoyable experience and we are in the process of making arrangements for our annual Mock Trial to be held next year.

April 2002

As I have been stating for years, the government is using the area of drunk driving in order to erode our civil liberties. Recently, there was a case out of Massachusetts where the defendant was stopped for no reason other than "homeland security". What was so outrageous about this case is that the prosecutors argued the stop was legal due to the threat of public safety as a result of "homeland security". Fortunately, the court correctly ruled that there is no "homeland security exception" to the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. This is just the beginning of a major assault by the government under the pretext of "homeland security" in order to further erode our Constitutional rights. It is our constitutional way of life here in the United States that the terrorists attacked on September 11th. Any further erosion of our constitutional rights can clearly be placed in the "win" column for the terrorists.

According to the latest statistics put out by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for the year 2000 regarding alcohol related fatalities, 60% involved no alcohol. Nine percent involved low alcohol levels. Clearly, the overwhelming majority of alcohol related fatalities have nothing to do with drunk driving. Organizations such as MADD would have us believe otherwise and are continuing to capitalize on drunk driving fatalities in order to hijack our politicians, judges and prosecutors. Young intoxicated drivers are more likely to be involved in fatal crashes than adults over 34 years old. However, adults who are over 34 years old are the most productive members of society and can suffer devastating consequences that were originally designed to target a small number of people. Unfortunately, our laws do not take into consideration the age of the defendant when a more mature individual is caught up in this net of revenue generating by the government at the expense of our civil liberties, freedoms and American way of life.

January 2002

Recently, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that DUI is not an "aggravated felony" for purposes of sentencing. As many leaders in our field have been saying, drunk driving is not a crime of violence. Organizations such as MADD have been using a previously held legal decision as a basis for saying that drunk driving is a crime of violence. While some may argue that it is a crime of violence, there is no legal justification for saying so.

Recently, the Los Angeles Times reported that California Highway Patrol drunk driving arrests have declined almost 50 percent since 1990. This is both good news and bad news. The good news is that people are now starting to feel that our roads are safer as a result of the aggressive tactics by zealous advocates for stiffer penalties for drunk driving. The bad news is the same zealous advocates will put more pressure on law enforcement agencies in order to increase the number of drunk driving arrests which will in turn help these groups justify their existence. The truth of the matter is that people are not drinking and driving any less than they had before but for many different reasons law enforcement is not as vigilant as it has been in the past in arresting suspected drunk drivers. In many geographic areas, local law enforcement agencies are deferring the detection and arrest of suspected drunk drivers to state highway patrols. State highway patrols do not have sufficient resources in order to patrol the freeways in the same manner as local law enforcement agencies used to patrol. The bottom line is that in areas where DUI arrests have decreased, not only will the zealous advocates look to increase funding to increase the number of arrests but law enforcement agencies will also request for increased funding in order to increase the number of arrests.

December 2001

From Philadelphia comes a story about a tenured teacher whose three convictions for drunk driving have resulted in her being terminated because of "immoral conduct." While I understand the desire to have the teacher dismissed, taking drunk driving convictions from a legal perspective to a moral perspective is the next direction our country is moving on its assault on its citizens.

From Salem, New Jersey, comes a story of a man who is being prosecuted for manslaughter, vehicular homicide, and aggravated assault by auto. The Salem man went to the police station to pick up his friend (whom police had arrested and booked) and brought him home. His friend eventually got in a vehicle which resulted in a drunk driving fatality. Again, this is a political prosecution because the police knew that the driver's blood alcohol level was .21% but yet released him to the custody of someone else. There is no question that the police department should have never released the person arrested originally for drunk driving until the guy had an opportunity to sober up.

On a final note, anyone who has been keeping up with this newsletter over the years can tell you that it's been discussed many times that through the guise of drunk driving, our government has been chipping away at our civil liberties and the fourth amendment in particular (unreasonable search and seizure). As the legal challenges will continue to mount as a result of the new powers that government has taken to fight terrorism, one will be hard-pressed to find a government theory that did not have its origin in drunk driving detention, arrest, and prosecution.

November 2001

Interestingly, states are exercising their independence towards the federal government by rejecting the federal government's desire to lower the legal limit to .08% nationwide. The states' general position is that lowering the limit to .08% nationwide will not reduce nor deter drunk drivers. What has worked over the years is stiffer penalties. Our experience is the overwhelming majority of our clients are first time offenders who got caught up in the DUI dragnet. It seems as though Mothers Against Drunk Driving has run up against a brick wall in squeezing the federal government into forcing the states to lower the legal limit. Therefore, look for Mothers Against Drunk Driving to change their focus on creating even stiffer penalties across the board.

This just in from California. Would you believe that drinking kava (made from the root of a kava plant) can form a sufficient basis in order to convict for driving under the influence? The answer is absolutely yes according to a case that came out of San Mateo County, California. The court reasoned that it makes no difference what the substance is as long as it can "affect the nervous system, brain, or muscles" which impairs the ability to drive. What this means is that anybody can be prosecuted for driving under the influence if they have any chemical substance in their system which somehow a jury can be convinced that it impairs the ability to drive. Once an arrest is made, the government will go to any length in order to gain a conviction. This makes good press and helps raise more revenue!

March 2001

We now have a national standard for drunk driving limits which is now a .08 nationwide. One 4 oz. glass of wine, one can of 12 oz. beer and 1.25 ounce of hard liquor equals a .02 for a 150 lb. male. So 4 drinks and off to the hoozcow you go.

Cops are now using flashlights that have an alcohol detector. It's called the PAS III Sniffer. It costs $600 and the cops love it. If you don't want to get snuffed out, don't drive at night.

Traffic fatalities from drunk driving have decreased by 30% from 1989 to 1999. Alcohol was involved in 7% of all crashes in 1999. That 7% includes any amount of alcohol, even if it is .01%. (Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)

According to NHTSA, there were approximately 1,400,000 people arrested for drunk driving in 1998. This translates to $1,400,000,000 in fines the government can collect ($1,000 average), $280,000,000 in alcohol program revenue ($200 average), and $14,000,000,000 in insurance premium increases ($10,000 average). The grand total is $15,680,000,000 (Fifteen billion, six hundred eighty million dollars). Of course there wasn't a 100% conviction rate. Too bad for the government. They really need the money. (I forgot to include cops salaries and overtime in the above analysis.)

August 2000

From Sandusky, Ohio, comes a golfer who was drinking while playing golf and crashed his golf cart into a sign post. He too was arrested for DUI and was "carted" away.

The next wave of enforcement is starting right here in Los Angeles County. Cops in 50 police agencies have banded together to actively search for and arrest suspected drunk drivers. This is sort of like a rolling checkpoint funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety. Look for more of these rollouts both in California and the rest of the country. Just another form of government squeezing the cash cow of drunk driving enforcement.

July 2000

We have put two new links on our website for your viewing pleasure. They are Southern California DUI Checkpoints(tm) and Southern California DUI Cop Hideouts(tm). Please feel free to check it out.

Every once and a while, I like to publish the following penalty schemes for different countries. After reading it you will see why no matter how bad it gets here, the United States is still the greatest place on earth.

According to the California District Attorney's Association, the following countries impose unique sentences for DUI convictions. They are:

Australia
The names of the drivers are sent to the local newspapers and are printed under the heading, "He's Drunk and in Jail"

Malaysia
The driver is jailed, and if he's married, his wife is jailed too.

South Africa
A 10-year prison sentence and the equivalent of $10,000 fine or both

Norway
Three weeks in jail at hard labor, one year loss of license. Second offense within 5 years - license revoked for life

Finland & Sweden
Automatic jail for one year at hard labor

Costa Rica
Police remove plates from car

Russia
Revoked for life

England
One year suspension and $250.00 fine and jail for one year

France
Three year loss of license, one year in jail and $1,000 fine

Poland
Jail and fine and forced to attend political lectures

Bulgaria
A second conviction results in execution

El Salvador
Your first offense is your last. Execution by firing squad

June 1999

For those of you who think forced blood draws are illegal, think again. Columbia County, Wisconsin, now has a restraint seat in order to tie suspects down and extract a blood sample. Forced blood draws are legal, unless they "shock the conscience of the court." I will leave it to you to determine if the courts in your areas have a conscience.

As you all know by now, New York City is confiscating vehicles of people who are arrested for drunk driving. This confiscation occurs whether or not the person is convicted, before he has had his day in court or whether or not the driver actually owns the car. I suppose the government's next move will be to confiscate your house if that is where someone was drinking before they got arrested for drunk driving.

Finally, drunk driving arrests have dropped 20% nationwide from 1986 to 1997, according to a Justice Department study released on Sunday, June 13,1999. However, the number of people in jail or on probation for drunk driving has increased 90% during the same period of time. As if this is not enough, our rights will continue to be eroded, as long as there is at least one person killed as a result of a drunk driver. How else will groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving, insurance companies, breath testing manufacturers, DMV alcohol programs and others be able to stay in business?

April 1999

With the proliferation of DUI check points, local police agencies are now expanding into parallel narcotics check points. Federal courts are putting the brakes on narcotics check points as they unfairly infringe upon individual liberties. Too bad for the local police agencies involved since they now won't be able to confiscate any vehicles or money they find that can help pay for their "law enforcement" activities.

From Texas comes a billboard that says "JUST SAY NO TO SEARCHES! 915-728-5505." The billboard was a civic message provided by a local lawyer informing the public of their rights. The Texas Department of Transportation did not like the billboard and threatened to fine the lawyer $1,000 a day if it stayed up. The lawyer won a preliminary injunction against the Texas Department of Transportation prohibiting the Texas Department of Transportation from censuring him. Score one for the Constitution.

February 1999

Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, African Americans, White Americans and Asian Americans now officially fit the drunk driving profile. According to a report commissioned by the U.S. Transportation Department and sponsored by Mother's Against Drunk Driving, released in a conference on Monday, February 22, 1999, the research was based on a study analyzing almost 200,000 deaths in U.S. traffic accidents of all types from 1990 through 1994. The study also concluded that 46% of all traffic deaths occurred in accidents where someone had been drinking. Of course, this includes any passenger, witness, drivers with booze in their car, or other source where the driver was not a drunk driver. I tip my hat to Mothers Against Drunk Driving for their creative ways in which they are brainwashing the American public with false and misleading information in order to justify their existence.

Hats off to DADD (Drivers Against Drunk Driving), a Santa Monica, California-based, nonprofit organization, dedicated to hotels, bars, nightclubs and restaurants forking over donations to sponsor taxi rides home for people who have had too much to drink. This is good old American ingenuity at its finest. After all, the government has found a way to generate a multi-billion dollar industry off the backs of the driving public.

MYLES L. BERMAN'S"TOP GUN DUI DEFENSE ATTORNEY"® BLOG©