Register should stop publishing DUI lists

Home » Opinion » Commentary

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Comment

By Don Whitworth

DUI coverage

November 26th, 2009

DUI arrest in North Napa

November 18th, 2009

Collision leads to DUI arrest

November 11th, 2009

DUI patrols out Saturday

November 6th, 2009

Accident spurs DUI arrest in American Canyon

November 3rd, 2009

October 2009 DUI Report

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it is my understanding that despite numerous complaints and objections, the Napa Valley Register editorial staff insists on publishing the names of persons arrested for misdemeanor offenses within the county, mainly, that is, for driving under the influence of alcohol.

As we all know, alcohol is a legal drug and this very valley derives millions upon millions of dollars annually, as well as huge amounts of tax dollars, from the sales of Napa Valley wines. I and many others strongly object to the publication of the names of persons arrested for misdemeanor DUI violations.

Most people misunderstand what a DUI charge even is. It is not “drunk driving” as is the common misconception. It is driving “under the influence” of alcohol or drugs, and at the current level of .08 being the legal limit for blood-alcohol content, even two beers or glasses of wine for most people is enough to get you arrested.

You need not be “intoxicated” to be arrested for DUI.

The fact is that most persons arrested for this reason are hard-working, responsible, tax-paying citizens. The laws are currently quite brutal regarding DUI. On a first offense, the charge results in being taken to jail, sometimes having your vehicle impounded (at no small expense), the loss of one’s driver’s license, very stiff fines, often community service work, lawyer’s fees, required attendance at a DUI educational program (again, at no small expense), as well as the social stigma attached to it. Losing one’s driver’s license on a first offense causes great imposition on most people, making it very difficult to get to and from work to pay for the immense expenses involved.

Many cities publish “police blotters” but do not print the names of those charged with misdemeanor crimes. Because the Register chooses to do this, it often results in the loss of a person’s job in addition to all the other penalties surrounding a DUI charge. I personally know of three people who have lost their jobs in the past year due to their names being published in the Register. This cripples a person’s ability to pay all the costs involved and often punishes spouses and families also, who are innocent victims of the financial devastation. Punishment for driving under the influence is often more severe than that of far more serious and violent crimes, such as assault, spousal abuse, etc. Not to mention that studies have shown that cell phone use and texting while driving are actually much more dangerous than driving under the influence, as is excessive speeding. Yet those “crimes” warrant far less severe penalties and probably almost never result in the loss of a job.

Please do not misunderstand; I am not defending driving under the influence of anything. However, I feel that the current penalties are definitely punitive enough already without having to add insult to injury by publishing the names of persons charged with this offense. The damage can be totally devastating to entire families when one loses their job because of the Register’s decision to inflict even more punishment than the law requires, especially in this economy where good jobs are scarce.

I strongly encourage the Register to reconsider its policy and refrain from publishing people’s names. Listing the offenses such as “a 25-year-old female was arrested on suspicion of DUI” informs the public without destroying the offender. It is not the Register’s job to pass judgment on offenders, nor to inflict penalties outside of what the courts have deemed as “appropriate” punishment. The Register seems to think it should be the “judge” instead of the journalist. This policy should be changed. I encourage others who agree to make it known to the Register and let the courts, not the newspaper, do the sentencing. Thanks for your consideration.

(Whitworth lives in Napa.)

73 comment(s)

Skip M. wrote on Sep 16, 2009 4:46 AM:

" Here's a thought; If you don't want your name to appear on a DUI list, DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE!

Many communities publish "John Lists" for people that get popped in prostitution busts. If you don't want your name on one of those lists, steer clear of the hookers.

We see people's names are listed when they are arrested on SUSPISION of drug posession. They too are innocent until PROVEN guilty. But we can avoid this type of noteriety by staying away from situations where one is more likely to get busted.

There are simple solutions to each of these scenarios. If you want to drink, stay home, or take a taxi. If you want to - boink - and don't have a partner, there are internet sites that are in the business of connecting boinkers.

If you want to get high, not that I am promoting illegal activity, be descrete.

Every person I know that has ever been arrested for anything, including speeding tickets, had one thing in common. Each was execising poor judgement at the time of the arrest. A lack of common scense can net a whole lot of trouble. "

glenroy wrote on Sep 16, 2009 6:36 AM:

" I'd have to agree with Don.... the NVR should publish 2nd offenders on up... "

reader wrote on Sep 16, 2009 7:06 AM:

" Woops! It sounds like somebody got arrested for a DUI.

Keep our roads safe. Don't drink and drive, period!! "

treeman wrote on Sep 16, 2009 7:25 AM:

" Continue publishing DUI!
Skip M is completely correct and I concur.
The publication IS a deterrent.
Napa Register; keep up the publication! "

whoa cowboy wrote on Sep 16, 2009 7:41 AM:

" Maybe I'm wrong, but the list they publish is of convictions, not arrests. "

krusty wrote on Sep 16, 2009 8:29 AM:

" Don, there is a simple solution to avoiding the problems associated with being convicted of a DUI. I think you already know what that is.

I have a hard time defending those convicted of a DUI. It was a decision they made. Granted, they may have not been in the clearest state of mind when they made that decision, but they now have to pay the consequences. "

NAPANATIVE wrote on Sep 16, 2009 8:40 AM:

" I for one commend NVR for publishing what they have. It is one more way to help educating people that drinving "under the influence" is intolerable. If you chose to get behind the wheel after one or two, or even more, you have just made a conscious decision, to not only put you life but others in danger. You made that choice, no one else. Judgement is what gives us the ability to make correct choices, and if instead you make a bad choice, jusdgement tells us to take the responsibility for our actions. Before you get behind that wheel, think about your mom and dad, your kids, your friends, and most of all your life. Is it worth the end result of a tragic happening? Or losing your job? Or being embarrassed? What is more important than that? LIFE! Life is what we make of it, I chose to live my life long enough to watch my daughter grow into a beautiful woman with good judgement, because that is how she saw me. "

winewoman wrote on Sep 16, 2009 8:43 AM:

" I'm with you, Don. The sole purpose of the list is to shame and ridicule. People just love to scold and pontificate. "

sprklsunshine wrote on Sep 16, 2009 8:51 AM:

" Here we go again. Don't do it and you won't have to worry about it, unless of course you have the same name as someone else. Que reasonator. . . "

realitybites wrote on Sep 16, 2009 9:52 AM:

" Well writen.

For all the vengeful haters who insit on holding others up for ridicule for a victimless crime - judge not lest ye be judged. Who hasn't sped, or driven while talking on a cell phone, changed lanes without a turn signal? So that we can all be safer, why don't you spiteful people who want to shame others put your own names in the paper voluntarily? Nazi Germany had lists too, as did Salom. What's next, pitch forks and torches - let's round um all up so we can publically humiliate them some more. The fact is the Napa Valley thrives off drunk drivers. You cannot visit two wine tastings without being impaired - this is just plain hypocracy and publishing the names of DUI offenders is just spiteful, mean spirited and vengful. Shoot, the NVR can't even print the name of the H1N1 victim - but we'll make sure to let you know when someone get's a misdeameanor, victimless DUI. Ridiculous! "

KK wrote on Sep 16, 2009 9:53 AM:

" The August DUI's are out, and someone with the same name as me is on the list.

It's a way bigger problem than I imagined. Aside from people in my personal life bringing it up, I've had people at my work ask me about it!

It's humiliating. Thanks Register. "

alucawanza wrote on Sep 16, 2009 10:05 AM:

" Why is it published in the first place? The offenders receive their just punishments.
Someone close to me was arrested many years ago for attempted burglary. His name was printed in the newspaper. All charges were dropped when it was discovered that he was not attempting burglary. His exoneration was never printed.
I think this list appeals to the baser characteristics of human curiousity. Let's rise above this. "

napagirl76 wrote on Sep 16, 2009 10:09 AM:

" first off read the list most people on them are from Napa, so there goes some of yours theory about it being wine tasting tourist. Second to realitybites you say "victimless" several times in your comment. I want you to say that to a family that has lost a loved one to a drunk driver. i want you to look in their face and say "hey it was his first time, he only had 2 glasses of wine no big deal we wont charge him. we dont want to make his life any harder then it has to be". The bottom line is if you drive drunk you are breaking the law. I know people who have been on that list and let me tell you they learned their lesson and now they are the first ones to volunteer to be DD. If you dont want to be on the list then the simple way to stay off it dont drink and drive and if you dont like the list of names in the paper DONT READ IT! "

treeman wrote on Sep 16, 2009 10:22 AM:

" "You GO napagirl76!

Responsibility,accountability, and credability for your own actions, need to be adheared to in this society.
The register simply helps you hold yourself to hopefully self imposed values! "

tripnote wrote on Sep 16, 2009 10:51 AM:

" 200lbs, 6 drinks in 3 hours, waited an hour and blew .10
Waited another hour, blew .08, waited another hour blew .06. Drove home.

I felt fine and would have driven after the first hour.
I bought my own breathalyzer off Amazon for $40 - saved thousands and my name is NOT the paper thank you. "

Bauhausfan wrote on Sep 16, 2009 10:51 AM:

" "For all the vengeful haters who insit on holding others up for ridicule for a victimless crime - judge not lest ye be judged."

The absolute absurdity of someone writing this statement is beyond the pale. I don't quite get how someone being "under the influence" and driving a car or truck with the distinct possibility of killing or maiming someone is somehow a "victimless" crime. I guess because only some of the time people are killed or maimed it is somehow victimless? Or mostly victimless until it isn't. "

Raven wrote on Sep 16, 2009 11:09 AM:

" this list is a sign of our endless obsession with what our neighbors are doing...just like printing marriage dissolution...not to mention simply being arrested does not mean anyone is guilty of anything.

deterrent effect....show us the data...have rates changed at all since publishing this list began....? "

msdemo wrote on Sep 16, 2009 11:13 AM:

" Since I was hit head on by a drunk driver I think it is a good idea. And yes it does shame the driver but other methods don't seem to work on some people. Some of us are too eager to forgive and keep it secret. I want to know. "

EverE wrote on Sep 16, 2009 11:21 AM:

" Napa Register, please keep printing the list. I like the message that it sends, which is in part,"Don't drink and drive in Napa." This is not a crime without victims. I absolutely do not want for my family, my friends, or any more people ever to be hurt or killed by a drunk driver. Shame? Ridicule? You bet! Far more acceptable than death.

When I scan the list I always hope to find that the majority of people charged are not from Napa. But so far I have always been disappointed. "

napabicycler wrote on Sep 16, 2009 11:30 AM:

" If we're voting: I vote keep the list.

Victimless crime? Ever heard of MADD? Tell them its a victimless crime. "

littlered56 wrote on Sep 16, 2009 11:40 AM:

" Years ago there was a popular youth sports coach. His name appeared on the front page of the NVR for appearing in court for his 7th dui. People were shocked and upset cause he use to drive kids to games etc.
I hope the NVR will continue to post the information. If people cared about obeying the law they just would not drink and drive. "

newlocal wrote on Sep 16, 2009 12:26 PM:

" NVR should publish SEX OFFENDERS too! "

reason-ator wrote on Sep 16, 2009 12:47 PM:

" The dui list has gotten longer since it's been published. Innocent people are victimized by a feature that has done nothing to curtail drunk driving.

This list is all about giving gossips something to talk about behind people's backs.

You won't truly appreciate this list until someone asks you about a DUI they think you have when you have never had one. And then you start to think about all the people who THINK you have a DUI and don't have the guts to ask you about it, but can ask everybody else.

The NVR will always be a small-town tabloid as long as they stoop to this level. Now, I personally can't accept anything the NVR pubishes as fact until I see it verified by a legitimate newspaper.

The NVR has strived to be at this level, because it's easier than being good. "

Skip M. wrote on Sep 16, 2009 1:17 PM:

" realitybites: DUI is victimless UNTIL that DUI driver hits and decappetates your mother, child, or anyone else you might know. Then it is murder.

Speeding is victimless UNTIL, that speeder loses control and crashes into a minivan, killing a family on their way to church.

Running a stop sign or traffic light is victimless UNTIL, that control violator hits and kills your grandmother as she was crossing in the crosswalk on her way to the market.

Many crimes start off victimless, until someone is harmed. "

realitybites wrote on Sep 16, 2009 1:29 PM:

" This isn't about safety - it's about public ridicule. Otherwise the NVR would post the name of every driver under 24 and over 55 - since they cause the most accidents. A DUI is a victimless crime - unless there is an accident which causes injury, just like speeding, texting and cell phone use while driving and illegal lane changes, etc. PUNISH THOSE WHO ACTUALLY INFLICT INJURY ON OTHERS. Who is the victim when there is no accident?

Blood / breath ration changes from person to person and even changes in the same person depending on a wide range of factors. Your $40 devise is set to a ratio that may be inaccurate depending on what you ate, how much you drank, what you drank, how you drank it, whether you've been sleeping, etc.

No one said the majority of offenders on the list were from out of town - which is why it's so hypocritical - Napa Valley promotes and thrives off of drinking and driving - that's how Napa Valley became such a huge tourist attraction - wine tasting - how do you get to the winery and then from winery to winery - YOUR DRIVE.

A public list is what they did in Nazi Germany people. Public humiliation is what they did to alleged "witches" in Saom. "

realitybites wrote on Sep 16, 2009 1:36 PM:

" Skip M - now your getting it - punish those who actual inflict injury. The "until" argument can be used for everything - so you should be punished because we know your gonna speed someday - you should have your name placed in the paper because we all know that someday your gonna speed and some day there will be an "UNTIL" situation. Does everyone who speeds kill? Does every DUI result in death? Punish those who actually take away the rights and freedoms of others.

To make everyone safe, we should all be required to give blood at every traffic stop to make sure your not on perscription drugs or alcohol or steroids or . . . Ridiculous.

The roads aren't safer as a result of this list. That's like saying the Puritan men were safer because they knew who the adulterer was. "

wined0wnnapa wrote on Sep 16, 2009 2:11 PM:

" Since NVR is hiding this behind the veil of public safety..... Can they please support their claim with whether or not DUI's have gone down. If were going to be humiliating people I would at least want there to be some positive outcome.

Please post names of all people written citations for texting / cellular phone use. I find them just as dangerous as drunk drivers. Also please post names of all sex offenders in napa and when they were last checked by their parole officer. Also please post names of all people reported to CDC for any type of communicable disease like HIV or STD's. This is information the public can use. "

angwindeac wrote on Sep 16, 2009 2:59 PM:

" " I personally know of three people who have lost their jobs in the past year due to their names being published in the Register. "
--Maybe you all should have used cabs to get your friends home.

This country needs to embarass people, nothing else seems to work. It is common sense not to drink and drive or text or use the cell but we now have enough folks that believe it is there right to do these things with no thought to others that this kind of thing is necessary. Don't like it don't do stupid things that endanger the rest of us. "

msdemo wrote on Sep 16, 2009 3:00 PM:

" I believe this list is only the persons convicted of DUI, not arrested. I'm sure arrested list would be muchhhhhh loooonger!

It seems it is very hard for some to say Yes I did and Yes I was wrong but I learned a good lesson. "

YoungNapan wrote on Sep 16, 2009 3:01 PM:

" This is a tough argument... before my brother died from drinking and driving, my siblings and I probably would have thought that him getting a DUI, not being able to drive himself to work, getting his name printed in the register, would have been the worst thing to happen to him... and for us somewhat, for the shame and stigma that goes along with it. However, instead, out of all the years he spent naive, thinking that he was committing a "victimless" crime and thinking that nothing would ever happen to him or anyone else if he were to sneak home drunk in the middle of the night... instead of ever getting caught by the police, he took his own life and almost his best friend's who was in the passenger seat next to him. Having the police wake my parents and myself up at 3:30 am to tell us that my brother was killed in a car accident... is the horror I'm reminded of whenever I think of drunk drivers and their naive behavior. We would do anything as his family for him to have been caught by the police and ridiculed if necessary than to have lost him forever.

Except guess what, realistically... ridicule isn't what these drunk drivers are thinking of when they commit the crime. What they're selfishly thinking of is how they need their car in the morning and the inconvenience of picking it up. If the data and stats show that this publishing of names doesn't help, then quit it.... "

YoungNapan wrote on Sep 16, 2009 3:10 PM:

" maybe a better, more effective community effort can be made to support and applaud DD's... maybe billboards reminding people not to drink and drive while they're on their way up to go wine tasting upvalley... I may have lost my brother to drinking and driving, but i'm also realistic to the facts and what really cause people to drink and drive or what prevents them... for those few people who have had a DUI, they will be more careful. But what about those people who are naive and think they can drive after having a few and learn on their own, the hard way... and then a year later, push their luck one more time... nobody's perfect, so let's get smarter here people. If the stats don't show evidence toward a drop in convicted DUI's since they were published, then what is the real purpose of publishing them? Is it a filler due to lack of other interesting topics to write about? Is it for the nosey neighbors? Where does the line get drawn if now people are comparing it to sex offenders? I'd hate to say it... but if the stupid person didn't harm anyone and it's their first offense, then it isn't newsworthy... let them deal with the courts for their sentencing... "

post-it wrote on Sep 16, 2009 3:48 PM:

" The NVR could be more fair and instead of singling out just the DUI misdemeanor convictions to print all misdemeanor convictions for the month. Then we would know the names of every criminal and their crime. "

realitybites wrote on Sep 16, 2009 4:09 PM:

" Not only does the NVR publish the names of DUI convictions, they also find in newsworthy to post the names of every DIVORCE FILING in Napa County. Talk about public ridicule. "

Praetorian wrote on Sep 16, 2009 4:58 PM:

" Let us harken to an old Anglo Saxon tradition of Medieval Justice:

The common view of the medieval justice system as cruel and based around torture and execution is inaccurate. Most criminals received gentle sentences merely meant to shame them, with the punishments often carried out in the open. The majority of lesser medieval offenses were punished by shaming the criminal publicly. Fastening the offender into stocks wasn't considered barbaric and was seen as a much better alternative to spending the time in jail.

If of legal drinking age, having consumed your alcoholic beverage of choice and you have any doubts...don't drive. Call a cab, call a friend. You are, after all an adult, know right from wrong and have the right to free will. If you are guilty of an infraction and it goes on the PUBLIC record and a local paper deems it worthy for printing so be it. Perhaps the spectre of the negative social implications will act as a deterrent and force some to consider the ramifications of their actions and take some responsibility. "

John Richards wrote on Sep 16, 2009 5:01 PM:

" msdemo wrote: " Since I was hit head on by a drunk driver I think it is a good idea."

So if you had been hit by a driver chatting on a cell phone, you agree that cell phone users should also have their names published on a shame list? Where does it end? "

krusty wrote on Sep 16, 2009 5:22 PM:

" Maybe in order to make it fair the NVR can avoid posting any names under any circumstance. No more honor roll listings, no more wedding announcements, and no more obituaries. Everyone can be John Doe or Jane Doe, as long as giving the sex of someone isn't considered too much information. "

Skip M. wrote on Sep 16, 2009 6:21 PM:

" realitybites: Given you logic, if I take a gun and shoot at your house, it's a victimless crime and no big deal. But if I use that gun and shoot your child, now it's a crime worth enforcing.

An automobile is a deadly weapon when used inappropriately. DUI, and Speeding are the same as taking that gun and shooting in the direction of your house. These crimes put the public in harms way. This is why we enforce the law. This is why those who choose to be irresponsible run the risk of getting their name in the paper. "

3030 wrote on Sep 16, 2009 6:44 PM:

" IS THIS REALLY A DEBATE?...."Don't drink and Drive" not rocket science!!!! "

savenapa wrote on Sep 16, 2009 7:11 PM:

" I'm more conservative than almost everyone on these blogs, but I have to agree with the author on this one.

Besides, the Register might be hit with a lawsuit from PETA, ACLU, or ACORN for targeting a particular ethnic group in the DUI Files. "

pharper wrote on Sep 16, 2009 7:26 PM:

" .08 is just the legal limit; you can be under it and still be arrested and convicted of drunk driving. Just because you haven't hit .08 yet doesn't mean your motor skills and ability to drive haven't been affected by the alcohol. On the flip side, it is possible (though highly unlikely) to be at .08 and still get home without driving in a manner that would make a police officer suspicious.

Don't like it? Don't drive drunk. An employer has every right to fire an employee who is so irresponsible as to be driving drunk.

Would an acceptable compromise be to continue printing the list and disallow comments on it? "

realitybites wrote on Sep 16, 2009 7:43 PM:

" Shooting at a habitation is a felony, not a misdemeanor, victimless crime. The bullet lands somewhere, thus, there is a victim. The wine taster who makes it safely home - no victim.

Cabs don't operate throughout the valley. Not everyone has a "friend" to call to drive them.

How about a DUI check point on Saturday or Sunday afternoon on Hwy 29 between Yountville and St. Helena? You people who scream about the scarlet letter DUI list should use your pitch forks to prod local law enforcement to put an end to the drunk driving that occurs on a regular basis.

Follow the money - this isn't about preventing druken driving. It's about selling newspapers. "

Bimgroup wrote on Sep 16, 2009 9:48 PM:

" Come on folks, let's get real. Do you really believe that the NR cares about what good or bad the list does? It's all about selling papers. Printing this means that they have one less AP article to publish.

And for those of you who question wether or not there is profiling going on, just read the names. "

napa1957 wrote on Sep 16, 2009 11:00 PM:

" My adult son always offers to chauffeur when his dad and I go out. His motto is "$7000 and your name in the paper isn't worth it!". It's true, especially the "name in the paper" for all to see. I agree about putting a "check point" on the trail or hwy 29 on a weekend afternoon. We could get our local govt out of debt, or fund community projects with the revenue it would generate. I also get it about "profiling"...but, after all, those that were caught (whether they were singled out or not) WERE doing the crime! If they were stopped because of a set of criteria that pointed to a potential for DUI, who cares! Another drunk driver taken off the road before he/she kills your child/mother/grandparent. I don't see the downside there. "

Wine nurse wrote on Sep 17, 2009 11:21 AM:

" While I have to agree that having your name printed in the paper doesn't help the situation. However if one doesn't drink and drive one would NEVER have to worry about it. It is interesting how many will state "NVR never tells us anything is going on " but when they do then its "squawk squawk squawk" and life goes on

My daughters cousin was listed and her last name is not common at all she received many phone calls .In return called her grandmother who didn't know anything about it, oh well, he shouldn't have been drinking and driving. "

realitybites wrote on Sep 17, 2009 12:33 PM:

" Apparently you do have to worry about it if your name happens to be the same as someone who gets on the list - read KK. "Oh well" - we slander your reputation in the community - "oh well" - guess you should blame your parents for giving you the same name as someone who gets a DUI. "

3030 wrote on Sep 17, 2009 3:58 PM:

" SAVENAPA...did you really bring up ACORN??? Have you watched tv latley?.... "

savenapa wrote on Sep 17, 2009 5:24 PM:

" 3030:

Of course I know about ACORN! One has to be pretty serious to not know I was being sarcastic, especially since I brought up PETA as well. (people for the ethical treatment of Animals) Sheesh.... and to think people actually thought I was really broken up about profiling?

I have some Georgian swamp land for a great price folks@ "

megapixel wrote on Sep 17, 2009 9:21 PM:

" This is a silly debate. No one is arguing that people have the right to operate a vehicle while 'under the influence', as some of the posts imply.

The effectiveness of publishing the names depends entirely on correctly framing the question, 'effective in what?' If we ask, 'effective in shaming the offender' the answer is maybe.

If the question is whether publishing the names acts as an effective deterrent, the answer is no. I challenge anyone to submit sound data that will prove me wrong.

Rather than relying on a 'Thou Shalt, Thou Shalt Not' mentality we should foster, 'I Shall, I Shall Not' thinking that encourages an individual to behave as a responsible member of society who doesn't drive under the influence.

Publishing the names does absolutely nothing to contribute to a safer Napa. "

suze wrote on Sep 18, 2009 6:29 AM:

" I rarely read the drunk driving 'shame list.' I feel as if I am intruding into the lives of the people listed.

I absolutely agree with Don Whitworth, he has writtten a fine argument against the list.'
The Napa Valley thrives on the alcohol industry. The fact that it so damaging to society when used to excess seems to have no affect on our lawmakers allocating taxation.
We could fund education AND healthcare with more taxation on alcohol!
When one can get drunk for two dollars you know something is wrong with the picture.
Look at the punitive taxation on those who choose to smoke tobacco. Don't try to tell me alcohol only harms the person drinking it.

One thing that did strike me when I looked at the list is there are very few 'out of towners' (tourists) and an awful lot of Hispanic names. Hmmmn.

It would appear to me that there is a policy to protect the tourists who keep the economy of the valley going. THEY DRIVE DRUNK ROUTINELY - so why are so few intercepted by the CHP?

There will always be out of control people who drink to such excess they are a danger to all around them. This list is not going to stop them.
For a healthy adult who drinks wine or beer regularly, one or two glasses would not truly impair them. Many over the counter cold or allergy medicines would have more effect on judgement and reflexes.
The drunk driving laws are harsh and probably a good thing but this list is an unnecessary punishment. "

rborgo wrote on Sep 18, 2009 10:58 AM:

" Not only should it be published we should know what the alchol level was! "

grownhere wrote on Sep 18, 2009 4:33 PM:

" I want them to continue publishing DUI lists and include what their b.a.c. was. "

RN wrote on Sep 18, 2009 6:48 PM:

" ****An employer has every right to fire an employee who is so irresponsible as to be driving drunk.*** Hmmm...Don't think so, you may want to check the labor laws first. "

Skip M. wrote on Sep 18, 2009 8:46 PM:

" RN: Most people are employed under terms known as "At will employment". This means an employer can terminate the employment of such an employee for ANY reason that is not specifically protected. Dunk driving is not one of those protected conditions. In fact, if the nature of the employee's position involves driving, the operation of heavy equipment, or mass transportation, such an employee can be terminated for testing positive for alcohol in a random screening. In many cases, the employer's insurance requires this. "

Napa1021x wrote on Sep 18, 2009 10:47 PM:

" If you are driving drunk you should be subject to "shame and ridicule". "

LateNightLarry wrote on Sep 18, 2009 11:06 PM:

" Just be glad NVR isn't publishing all the other traffic convictions AND traffic stops. My daughter lives in a small town in Ohio, and the local paper there publishes every DUI ARREST, every traffic stop, every traffic accident (even hitting a deer), and just about every other law enforcement action. Note that I said DUI ARRESTS, not just convictions, every traffic stop, even if it doesn't result in a citation. AND they publish the names and cities for each person arrested.

The whole county there knows what you're doing, and when you've been caught with your hand in the cookie jar, so to speak. If you're stopped for speeding, your name will be in the paper next week, even if you're let off with a warning.

I vote to keep publishing the DUI convictions... that way I know who I don't want to ride with! "

megan1459 wrote on Sep 19, 2009 2:20 AM:

" to reason-ator, (wrote on Sep 16, 2009 12:47 PM) : You said the words that were in my head when i read this article. NVR seems to do nothing but provide people something to gossip about to all their friends, raise their noses, and ostracize the accused.
I do not condone drinking and driving whatsoever. But publishing these items in the NVR is just appalling. NVR claims to be an upstanding paper, yet continues to fuel the clique-of-napa-gossip fire.
To NVR: instead of trying to pave your way to being "unique" and "fresh", stick to methods that are proven to keep loyal readers! Possibly NVR could follow in the footsteps of the SF Chronicle. I rely on the info from the SF paper more so than that of my own town's paper. I would rather compromise locality for legit information.
I post on here only because it tends to reach the majority of concerned napa residents. "

proudmama2 wrote on Sep 19, 2009 7:30 AM:

" Even though there are good points on each side of this issue....I think it comes down to just plain selfishness....not being responsible for ones actions...not caring about our fellow man or woman. The idea of "it won't happen to me" is a fallacy. Yes, it could happen to you. Do you want to challenge that? Set things up so that you don't put yourself in a position where you are facing a family to say you are sorry that they lost their loved one...It is just not worth it.... Life is already short enough. "

savenapa wrote on Sep 20, 2009 11:25 AM:

" In my opinion, use of the word selfish has the same effect as the term racist. It pretty much attempts to close dialog on the matter. Then we no longer have to talk about it. How convenient. "

onethought wrote on Sep 21, 2009 10:51 AM:

" On the Aug. list 59 of the 97 had an alcohol level between .10 and .19 and 16 had higher levels. So that says these people did not have a couple beers and drive home. They are not victims of not knowing they were over the legal limit. They were just hoping not to get caught. we are supposed to feel sorry for people who knowingly break the law. What if one of these people were to drive your child someplace after a "few drinks". Maybe they made a mistake but most likely it wasn't the first time. There are people on the list that never want to be there again and there are people who don't care. They all got there the same way- by knowing breaking the law "

broke new mom wrote on Sep 21, 2009 1:32 PM:

" onethought:

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Some people are so obsessed with what others are talking about, but here is the thing- If you drive drunk, or impaired in any way- you take a risk of being caught, or dying in an accident.

Would you rather be shamed publicly, or be dead? Either way, you must suffer the consequences for your actions.

We are adults- not children that don't know any better. Take responsibility and stop worrying so much about people knowing what you did wrong. If you were that worried about all of Napa finding out- you should not have done it in the first place!

Get it together and grow up people! It's plain and simple and should not even be up for discussion. "

realitybites wrote on Sep 21, 2009 2:54 PM:

" Again - if you have the same name as someone on the list 'bnm' I guess you would say blame your parents for giving you that name. Nazi Germany had lists, so did Salom - sharpen up your pitchfork and break out the NVR, it's time to round up them DUI victimless offenders and make um pay. "

realitybites wrote on Sep 21, 2009 3:12 PM:

" No one is asking anyone to feel sorry for those on the list. I certainly don't feel sorry for you when you speed, text, forget to signal, talk on your cell phone or roll through a red light - but I don't see your name in the paper for those offenses, which are just as likely to result in an accident. Put away your pitchfork and torches. If your worried about someone driving you - perhaps you should voice your concern to the driver rather than rely on the Scarlet Letter NVR. "

areyoubitter wrote on Sep 21, 2009 5:13 PM:

" Keep the list. It would be like not posting police and fire (in which they only post about 5% of what really happens) It is a good idea to do anything as a deturant not to drink and drive. "

wheezygirl wrote on Sep 21, 2009 11:14 PM:

" Can't do the time, don't do the crime. If you commit a crime in Napa, you will be caught and prosecuted! "

napahawaiinapa wrote on Sep 22, 2009 3:02 AM:

" Today, I took the exit to what I thought was the Highway to Hell..looks like I took the wrong turnoff cuz everyone else made it to the Land of Judgment, and left me in the dust. Thanks for that!!! Gee whiz fellas, my innocent soul can't take many more trips to the Land of Brain Dead! Can you imagine what my vacation to Driving Without Alcohol was like? This sideways comment reminds me of the list of comments above..crazy!!! Why should we be allowed to drink at all? Last time I checked, a few sips of alcohol made my upper intestinal area, midway between my orifice of direct deposits, up around 'tattoo belly', quite warm and lazy-feeling. The next sip or two made my lips flap more loosely; I still don't understand what was so funny but I was laughing at anything, I didn't care. It was so funny I had to have more sips..next thing I knew, I heard myself say that I loved life..where'd that come from? and I think I'm supposed to get in a car and go somewhere. I need another sip of that stuff. Now I'm needing visual elements..i don't wear glasses. I've just lost my vision half-way, I think. That's funny..I don't care about my eyes either..I feel like a supa'sta'!!! Alcohol takes on the same role with all of us so why is alcohol part of our lives to start with? That's what we can talk about but NO, NO, NO..let's talk about alcohol..when a siren shoots you in the rear-view mirror, it should surprise you, not cause a direct deposit. You now need paper but not the kind that will remind you about deposits and DUI's!! I guess we need to think more.. "

napahawaiinapa wrote on Sep 22, 2009 3:29 AM:

" Those who agree with listing the DUI participants and those who do not agree should check out the third choice. don't drink alcohol! Is it really necessary? You know what that means if it is necessary so you best see what God has on his agenda cuz you are in for a sad empty life. When I was 21, I drove home drunk, but not before I made a complete idiot of myself like the other's at the bar. I do remember nearly blindness, but I did see 100 mph while driving home. When I staggered out of bed hours later I looked to see if I transported my car with me during my highway race. There it was, and all its horsepower. I couldn't believe it; I actually do not have a memory of my car after less than one hour of my arrival to the bar. Alcohol convinced me to do whatever I did and to do whatever I did would be nice for me to know..This happened several times..I'm not the fortunate one, those in my 'race' (not color) are; I have to live with being haunted by just that, not even wrecking, getting a siren in my rear-view mirror, or soiling my just purchased undergarments..I'm not making a joke of driving drunk, believe me...it is so, so, so horrible and any opinion or judgment will not make a change..stopping the alcoholic beverage consumption will!!! It's not even to cut-down consumption..alcohol is 100% proof that something very bad is going to happen, be it in the car, or on the toilet letting go of 'a little alcohol' then flushing before remember your teeth are false and got a little loose with ur lip and slipped away..did the point get across? "

Raven wrote on Sep 22, 2009 1:26 PM:

" so anyone who touts this list as a deterrent......do you have any facts to back that up? has the rate of arrests and convictions gone down since the list was published. It has been several years so there should be data but I have y6et to see any posted in support of the idea

there is this from the asnnouncement of the Napa County task Force on DUIs formed in september 2008...

• Napa County’s DUI rate is more than twice the state average
• Males comprise over 80% of all DUIs in Napa County
• Young adults between ages 20 and 29 have the highest rate of DUI in Napa County

http://www.co.napa.ca.us/GOV/Departments/50000/Forms/NapaCountyFormsDUITask%20Force20080910.pdf

according to the state the DUI arrest rates for 2007, the latest the DMV had on its web site, was 863 arrests per 100k drivers, which has been climbing from a low of 783 per 100k in 2002

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/about/profile/rd/duistats89_99.htm "

riley wrote on Sep 23, 2009 2:20 PM:

" I am fully in favor of listing the DUI's. So many innocent lives have been altered or ended by a drunk driver. And to be stopped by a CHP or Police officer must mean that there was something suspicious about their driving. It is very easy to have DD or call a cab,etc. My father was hit by a head-on drunk driver going the wrong way on a off-ramp from the freeway after already hitting a parked car. This was his 3rd DUI and he had already missed several court dates. My Dad was 89 and in excellent health until this happened. Our entire family was affected and to make matters worse, the drunk driver was released from a hospital and has not been found. His name was never listed in the Register and we fear that if he is found it will be because he has killed someone by driving drunk. "

realitybites wrote on Sep 23, 2009 2:55 PM:

" Drunk driving is wrong - granted. So is the Scarlet Letter list. It does nothing to deter drunk driving. It is not easy to call a cab in Pope Valley or other remote locations, or to have a designated driver at your becon call. Not every police stop is warranted by a showing or probable cause. Cops aren't saints. If you want to stop drunk driving in Napa County - get a DUI checkpoint on Saturday or Sunday afternoon on Hwy 29 between Yountville and Calistoga. The people on the DUI list didn't kill anyone - stop the public ridicule and witch hunts. Speeding, cell phone use, texting, illegal lane changes and running red lights cause just as many accidents. Punish those who inflict the actual injury, not those who commit a victimless crime. "

Lexme2 wrote on Sep 23, 2009 2:59 PM:

" What about all the tweakers?! Napa must be setting records for the most tweakers per capita. "

oldtownnapa wrote on Sep 29, 2009 1:14 AM:

" I agree wholeheartedly with this opinion. Thank you for your courage in submitting this letter, Mr. Whitworth.

riley:

The publication of this List doesn't prevent drunk driving/ drunk driving injuries. It won't save anyone from injury or death from a drunk driver- unfortunately.

What it does do is lump together a month's random smattering of people found driving "legally impaired" (not "drunk" but "over the limit") across the spectrum to really really really drunk. None injured anyone else, however or it'd be a felony. Some didn't even get a DUI conviction- some got a wet & wreckless, for e.g. listed beside others that drove over double their bac. Listing these names in conjunction with repeated commentaries that discuss drunk driving related injuries/death creates projected blame unfairly placed. These stories stir the ire of the reading public and connects in their minds the image of a horrible, wrongful death to the distinct crime here of driving over the limit- and then puts their names out there at the same time on the same page. The arguable result is that those listed will suffer discriminatory results and unquantifiable animosity within our community for a crime they didn't actually commit... another reason to stop this List. "

Skip M. wrote on Sep 30, 2009 1:25 PM:

" Oldtownnapa: Publishing rape, murder, theft, assault, or embezzlement arrest and convictions does not necessarily have a deterrent effect in those cases either. In fact, in many cases, the notoriety of these cases spawns more such events from copy-cat perpetrators. Should the register stop reporting these crimes and convictions as well?

The news business is just that, a business. Media companies such as NVR are in business to sell a product. That basic product for the Napa Register is newspapers. The companion product for NVR is advertising. In fact, I would be willing to bet that the subscription or news stand price does not reflect the true cost to publish and distribute the Napa Register. My guess is that the real profit$ are in the adverti$ing revenue. If you really want NVR to stop publi$hing the DUI li$t$, go to the companies who’s ad$ appear on that page and tell them that you will no longer do bu$ine$$ with them as long as their ad$ appear on that page. If enough people do that, NVR will drop that feature because it will be bad for bu$ine$$. However, if, like me, you find the DUI list to be a good public service, you might want to seek out the companies that adverti$e on that page and buy their product$ and $ervice$. And as you are conducting business with these establishments, tell them you are doing so BECAUSE their advertising sponsors the DUI list. Like mo$t thing$, it all come$ down to the bottom line. "

oldtownnapa wrote on Sep 30, 2009 11:47 PM:

" Skip M-

Rape= Felony
Violent Crime
Victim

Murder=Felony
Violent
Specific Intent Crime... Unlawful Killing of Another w/ Malice Aforethought
Victim

Theft (if over $400 or 2nd Petty Theft or more)=Felony
Specific Intent... Take Property of Another
Victim

Assault= Misdemeanor or Felony dependent on gravity
Violent Crime Against a Person
Victim

Embezzlement=
Felony
Specific Intent... to Defraud
Victim

DUI or Wet-Reckless=
NOT a felony...
NOT a violent Crime...
NOT specific Crime...
NO Victim

In sum, it is a LESSER crime than those you cite and thus not a proper corrollary.

So, to be FAIR, NVR should publish lists inclusive of all convicted of reckless driving violations- running red lights; excessive speeding & FRANKLY: texting while driving. It is wrong to stigmatize this group only.

For all of you harping that it is "public record"- well so are those other violations. Further, public records are typically on back pages - not referenced/listed on the very front. "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: