A prominent and detailed editorial in the Providence Journal makes the claim that Rhode Island has the laxest drunk driving laws in New England.
The editorial describes a specific horrifying case where the defendant kills a gas station attendant in a hit and run. He later fights off a police officer who came to arrest him, wrestles away his gun, shooting him in the back, and stealing his police cruiser.
In the case of the deadly hit and run, the defendant isn’t charged with a DUI, though he had a history of previous DUI arrests, one conviction for DUI, and two convictions for refusing the breath test.
As disturbing as this case is, the editorial largely misses the point. The fact that he may have an alcohol problem and be prone to drunk driving is almost irrelevant to the fact that he is a dangerous criminal. Even chronic multiple offense drunk drivers to not typically kill people and evade arrest by fighting off and shooting police officers.
It is hard to imagine that harsher penalties and additional DUI charges, or even a suspended license would have had any impact on a person like this.
Whether or not there is a case to be made for changing Rhode Island’s breath test refusal laws and penalties, or extending the lookback period in 2nd and 3rd offense DUIs, the argument is not served by citing this extreme case.
Typical people arrested for drunk driving in Rhode Island are not hardcore criminals. Most people make a single mistake, and never repeat. Of course some people have serious alcohol abuse problems and do repeat offend. Are there better ways to treat chronic alcoholics and enhance public safety? That could well be.
Everyone agrees that drunk driving is a dangerous activity, but citing extreme and aberrant situations does not clarify the need for DUI reform.
