Preventing DUIs top priority for police

Before you pick up the first drink, get a designated driver or don't pick up that drink at all....

So basically the police just follow the shiny object? Last week their top priority was to prevent gang activity. Now it is to prevent DUI's. I noticed Santa Cruz just received 1 Million dollars in stimulus money. I hope a lot of it goes for public safety. We have to have strong police presence for a long period of time before things will really change. It is unfortunate because other programs could use the money also. But that is what happens when crime problems have been neglected for so long.

I also think this is something we all have to look out for and be willing to report. A friend saw a mother at school last week - noticeably drunk. Before she could get help, the mom drove off with her kids. But I am proud of my friend for scrambling to try to stop her.

In all cases, downtown, driving, if we also say enough is enough, stay aware, report what we see (without being crazy about it), we can make a difference too.

The incident in Richmond has re-opened my eyes about turning away. I live here because I want to be in a small town. I want you all to bust my kid if she's doing something wrong. I like seeing my doctor and my dentist at the grocery store.

We need to band together to create change.

The grants give the public a false sense of enforcement as it is only done a few times a year.

What is needed is Law Enforcement leaders that lead and enforce with judges that convict. Seems like the pay is more than fair and the troops are not supervised or managed correctly.

GPS for patrol cars that reflect idle time (City Council viewed) and statistics that represent the pay Officers get. Hence, you don't work, we get someone who will, managers and admin included.

Take back our town one step at a time.

"So basically the police just follow the shiny object"

I find it amusing that the newspaper prints a story and you draw this conclusion.

"The grants give the public a false sense of enforcement as it is only done a few times a year"

You appear to have also formed your opinion based upon the news you are sold. Grants typically span a two year period, and are much more then an occasional DUI checkpoint.

A First Time DUI should be a FELONY along with mandatory treatment for alcoholism. A second should require mandatory prison time along with prison program for alcoholism. Drunks drive whether or not they have a license. These bozos only care about their next drink and not about anyone else on the road. To the bozos talking about illegals - this isn't the forum - we are talking about drunk drivers. Stay on the subject or Go elsewhere.

Someone tell the planning commission...

When was the last time a high-risk liquor license was removed from anyone?

catch those f_ers wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, great idea. Illegal alien checkpoints should be mandatory at every intersection in the county. We need to get all these F-ers out of here immediately. They are bringing SC County and the state of CA down the $hitter with their 3rd world poverty and criminal behavior. For every 1 honest hard working illegal (and there are some of course), we get 4 evil, knife-wielding, thief, gang-banging criminals. Once we catch all these criminals and send their a$ses back, we will see the crime rate drop exponentially--no doubt about it.

Well now, you sound like a solid, definitive source of bias-free statistics.

Mandatory 30 days in jail for first time DUI offenders. Why do drunk drivers have to kill someone before they get in serious trouble? First time DUI's get fines, classes,& license suspensions. And many still drive drunk. Sitting in county jail for a month might make em think!

DUI laws are way to lax. Six months in jail, fines, treatment, license revoked and charged with a Felony the first time!

Sit in any court room during the mornings and will will see what really happens to drunk drivers. Very little jail and lots of community hours or cleaning up the grounds around the county jail. Yea it is a big priorty.

Not that it would be applicable in every case, but I think it would be helpful for our county to look at increasing public transportation. There are so many bars and clubs downtown, and buses stop running at 11PM. Recently I was in Portland, and not only do they require that all drinking establishments serve food all night, but they keep buses running till 3AM and they are free after 9PM.

GMan wrote:

A First Time DUI should be a FELONY along with mandatory treatment for alcoholism. A second should require mandatory prison time along with prison program for alcoholism. Drunks drive whether or not they have a license. These bozos only care about their next drink and not about anyone else on the road. To the bozos talking about illegals - this isn't the forum - we are talking about drunk drivers. Stay on the subject or Go elsewhere.

So if my 125 pound wife has two glasses of Merlot with her salad then gets pulled over for failure to use her blinker, is found to be .09%, she should be judged a felon? Thrown in prison? I'm so sure that would serve absolutly no purpose.

Are DUIs and unlicensed drivers a related problem?

If someone has had 10 DUIs in another country, and they are driving here without a license, how would we know?

I don't see how our current policy of allowing unlicensed drivers works in concert with DUI prevention.

DUI checkpoints?

How about license and registration checkpoints?

Of course, a sanctuary city would never allow license and registration checkpoints.

One has to wonder, is a sanctuary city in the best interest of your safety? Sure doesn't seem like it.

Amy wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually, the numbers are more like for every 1 honest hard working illegal, we get 15 knife-wielding criminal illegals from Mexico that totally abuse our system, getting endless social service handouts and free education and healthcare--at the expense of CA taxpayers. Maybe 1 to 20. But I'm biased too and don't give a **** about these criminals. I too want them deported ASAP!

I can see how it's all confusing to you. You see, picking lettuce with harvesting knives is not illegal in California.

Top priority wrote:

So basically the police just follow the shiny object? Last week their top priority was to prevent gang activity. Now it is to prevent DUI's. I noticed Santa Cruz just received 1 Million dollars in stimulus money. I hope a lot of it goes for public safety. We have to have strong police presence for a long period of time before things will really change. It is unfortunate because other programs could use the money also. But that is what happens when crime problems have been neglected for so long.

The news highlights the problems already being attacked by police agenices. CHP has always gone after DUI drivers (800 arrests this year already in the county). Other agencies have been attacking gang activity for years, it's just that after the multiple crimes the news has reported on it.

Count on it wrote:

<quoted text>
I can see how it's all confusing to you. You see, picking lettuce with harvesting knives is not illegal in California.

Actually most of that currently being done in employment is illegal. I don't think there's much confusion about that. But there is certainly a huge amount of duplicity on the subject from your ilk.

Local logic wrote:

<quoted text>
So if my 125 pound wife has two glasses of Merlot with her salad then gets pulled over for failure to use her blinker, is found to be .09%, she should be judged a felon? Thrown in prison? I'm so sure that would serve absolutly no purpose.

Yeah she should because alcohol and operating a moving vehicle is a recipe for disaster. Zero tolerance for this behavior. She's not special is she? There something about her that allows her to break the law with impunity? She's not Maria Shriver by any chance?

Thank you for your post. I appreciate the thought behind it. Tired of ranting/raving judgmental posts where "holier than thou"s sit on their high horse instead of looking at the reality of our culture. Like it or not we're all a part of this problem. Unless you abstain 100% from alcohol and always have - you are part of the problem too.

5genSC wrote:

Not that it would be applicable in every case, but I think it would be helpful for our county to look at increasing public transportation. There are so many bars and clubs downtown, and buses stop running at 11PM. Recently I was in Portland, and not only do they require that all drinking establishments serve food all night, but they keep buses running till 3AM and they are free after 9PM.

tortoise wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah she should because alcohol and operating a moving vehicle is a recipe for disaster. Zero tolerance for this behavior. She's not special is she? There something about her that allows her to break the law with impunity? She's not Maria Shriver by any chance?

That's right, black and white only. Please. It's either all good or all bad. We can't deal with anything more complicated than that.