Phill Casaus: In DWI fatality rates there is no good news

Albuquerque Tribune

By Phill Casaus
Saturday, August 25, 2007

When the subject in question is DWI, the (shot) glass is never half-full.

It's always half-empty.

And that's the problem.

And that's why you never hear law enforcement leading the cheers when even moderately good news on New Mexico's DWI front presents itself for a statistical lineup.

Oh, the folks with badges nod approvingly and clap politely; an opera audience after Act I. Yes, sure, of course, absolutely, they're appreciative of progress - no matter how achingly slow and incremental.

But swinging-from-the-chandelier happy? Sorry, pal, they've been to this roller coaster before - down one year, up the next. Been to the horrific and gory crash scenes. Been to the court dates and court cases and court delays.

"To a lot of people," says Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White, "(DWI) is just a blur."

So here's the most recent freeze-frame of DWI in New Mexico, according to stats released this week by the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration: In 2006, 136 people were killed in traffic accidents involving at least one vehicle operator with a blood-alcohol content above 0.08.

That's down 13 fatalities from 2005, when 149 people were killed in DWI-related crashes. An 8 percent decrease is a mark of success, to be sure - assuming you're not a family member or friend of one of the 136.

Problem is, we're always connected to the victims, because DWI is the ultimate there-but-for-the-grace-of-God kind of crime. Random. Terrible. Terrifying. I could be next. You could be next.

White, who occasionally rides with his DWI units, says he is close to his wits' end. He has seen the evolution of progress and doesn't dismiss it for a moment. But he questions whether it's really enough. Really, really enough.

He raises the specter of the Final Frontier on DWI penalties - making a first-time offense a felony punishable by mandatory jail time.

"I'm not saying I'm committed to (the proposal), but I think we should discuss it," he says. "They (drunken drivers) just don't care. There's not a single person in a bar tonight who says, `I know I've had too many beers and I might end up in that photo array in the newspaper.'

"No. They don't do that," he concludes. "After the fact, they regret it. But that didn't stop it."

First-time jail time is not exactly a new idea. But to many, it's the nuclear option - in part because some see it as Draconian and counterproductive.

Others wonder what it would do to a court system already choking on DWI cases. Knowing jail would be in their future, first-time offenders would not plead out their cases, says Albuquerque police Chief Ray Schultz. They'd go to court.

"Then it'd be 99 percent (going to court)," he says. "It'd be, `I'll take my chances on a case . . . even though I might be guilty as all get-out.' They'd have nothing to lose by going to trial."

Schultz, no less offended by DWI's frequency than White, ticks off the long, slow march New Mexico has made in fighting the problem. He remembers the war over drive-up liquor sales, over ignition interlock devices. He agrees there has to be a push on first-time offenders - they don't make for as many sexy headlines as the folks who've been arrested 14 or 20 or 28 times - but says new interlock laws and increasing heat on liquor establishments need to be given some time.

Just not too much time.

"If we don't see results, then maybe we can look at mandatory (penalties)," he ventures.

I can hear the sweep of the clock, and so can you. Tonight, someone is going to drink and drive. Pray that none of us becomes part of the next round of "good" news.