Every day persons consciously take the decision to drink copious amounts of alcohol and then get behind the wheels of vehicles. Though this has proven time and again to be a dangerous and often fatal combination, persons pay no heed, or perhaps they labour under the mistaken belief that it cannot happen to them. And this is why road collisions, particularly those in which lives are lost, or people are injured, ought not to be classified as accidents any longer.
When someone drives him/herself to a venue where s/he expects to be served or to purchase alcohol and knows s/he will not only partake, but imbibe beyond a legal limit and intends to then drive him/herself home or wherever, that person is deliberately making the vehicle s/he is driving a killing machine, or at the very least one that can cause damage or sometimes irreparable harm. An accident is an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance, or an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance. A person would have to be from Mars not to know that the imbibing of alcoholic beverages causes the loss of motor skills and as a result severely hampers motoring skills. Therefore, collisions that occur as a result of persons operating vehicles while under the influence of alcohol are not accidents.
It is also a well-known fact that ‘Dutch courage,’ which comes about through alcohol intoxication brings with it a false sense of infallibility and super-humanness – the drunk driver truly believes that s/he is capable of driving safely. Hence anyone who intends to drink alcohol must put systems in place that would prevent him/her getting behind the wheel of a vehicle. The selection of a designated driver – someone who remains sober while others drink alcoholic beverages and then drives them to their destination has been implemented with some success in various jurisdictions. While it has been spoken of here, having a designated driver has not really become a part of the local party culture.
A senior police officer pleaded guilty to driving under the influence on Tuesday last and was fined $15,000, after he drove a vehicle while inebriated last Saturday and caused two collisions involving other cars. One of the cars swerved from the vehicle Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Kenneth Bernard was driving and hit a lamppost, while the other one hit the car the policeman was driving. Fortunately, no serious injuries resulted from the collisions, but there was damage to all three cars.
As an officer who has sworn to uphold and enforce the law, ASP Bernard has failed miserably at his job. He readily pleaded guilty; however, this should not been seen as an act of contriteness, the fact is that he had already been found to be over the limit on the breathalyzer test. In addition, the fine imposed for DUI, while expensive as drinks go, is low enough to encourage offenders to plead guilty, pay it and walk free, which the Police Mounted Branch officer has done.
ASP Bernard and the 36 drivers charged with DUI in Berbice over the Easter weekend, as well as the countless others who do it every day are still free to repeat the offence if they have a mind to; believe they can beat the system or feel that they will not be caught the next time.
In other jurisdictions, penalties for DUI can include compulsory suspension of a driving licence for varying periods depending on various circumstances including the age of the driver, the level of the driver’s blood-alcohol concentration, and whether or not it is a first offence. The temporary suspension of licences varies from 90 days to three years. And more often than not mandatory education and awareness sessions accompany these penalties.
Guyana can do much more to curb drunk driving, but first our law-makers would need to step up to the plate and lead by example.
