Oh, and a conspiracy charge for when you get your sober friend to blow in your car's machine.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TX-LEO:
Does it bother anyone else, the use of "drunken" ?

This is a inaccurate term to use for DRUNK DRIVING.

There is no criminal offense of """drunken-driving""". It's even bad English.

It's "drunk driving", or driving while intoxicated, or driving under the influence of alcohol.

---

Not to nitpick, but "drunken" is a proper English word, according to Merriam-Webster. Technically, there is no offense of "drunk driving" either, since the term "drunk" is not used in the statutes. One could argue that the term "drunken" is actually more appropriate. "Drunken" is most typically used to mean "resulting from or as if from intoxication" as in a "drunken brawl" (or drunken driving). "Drunk" is used to describe the state of being intoxicated, as in "I was drunk after consuming a pitcher of beer." So more precisely, we should probably refer to a "drunk driver" engaging in "drunken driving."

Not to nitpick.

---

I disagree with using "drunken" is all.

It's not in the penal code, CCP, or TC of Texas and sounds like crap IMO.

I'm betting a good TX defense attorney would eat my lunch for using that term in any legal proceeding.

www.cop-talk.net

Perhaps that's why the crime is known as "drink driving" in several other countries that speak the Queen's English.

Don't know if I like that any better than "drunken," but there you go.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shannon Edmonds:
Perhaps that's why the crime is known as "drink driving" in several other countries that speak the Queen's English.

Don't know if I like that any better than "drunken," but there you go.

---

Perhaps they should just quote that beloved native Houstonian homeboy group of great reknown, Z.Z. Top, and call it "Driving While Blind", as in "Arrested For Driving While Blind" from the marvelous Tejas album.

The article

New law ups stakes for 1st DUI

Breath test required before starting car

August 24, 2007
chicagotribune.com

First time drunken-driving offenders now will have to pass a breath test every time they get behind the wheel, under legislation signed into law Friday.

The measure, among the strictest in the nation, would require an estimated 30,000 first-time offenders whose licenses have been suspended to blow into devices that measure blood-alcohol content. If alcohol is detected, the car will not start.

Known as breath alcohol ignition interlock devices, the gadgets also would test drivers periodically while the car is running.

"This is really a more humane punishment for DUI offenders," said Stephen Carr, director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving of Illinois. "In the past, DUI offenders have had their licenses suspended or revoked, which doesn't allow them to make a living or go to work. This would prevent [drunken] driving while allowing offenders to be contributing members of society."

Illinois is the fourth state to require the devices for first-time offenders, after New Mexico, Arizona and Louisiana, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

One of the bill's sponsors, state Sen. John Cullerton (D-Chicago), said the Illinois law will be the most stringent because test results will be monitored by the secretary of state's office.

Those who test positive for alcohol or try to disable the system could face additional punishment.

In 2006, Illinois recorded almost 500 deaths from alcohol-related crashes, according to information from the Illinois Department of Transportation. Supporters of the new law hope it will decrease that number, citing a 12 percent drop in alcohol-related fatalities in New Mexico after that state implemented a similar law in 2005.

About 3,000 Illinois drivers, primarily second-time DUI offenders, have the devices in their vehicles. That number is expected to increase to 30,000 once the law goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2009, said Susan McKinney, manager of the breath alcohol ignition interlock division of the secretary of state's office.

The locks, which are rented, cost about $150 to install, plus an additional $100 or so in monthly fees to cover monitoring by the device's manufacturer and the secretary of state's office.