Deewee

In 1997, I was convicted of an “OUIL”, which means “operating under the influence of liquor”. In short, I got a DUI, or “deewee” as the phonetic punsters like to say. It’s a funny, almost Seussian word for describing an event that is anything but funny. But you wouldn’t know it isn’t funny by seeing the sentences recently meted out to Lindsay Lohan and Nicole Ritchie, both convicted of multiple DUIs. Pundits and bloggers alike have no doubt already beaten this topic to death; to say that celebrities get a different kind of justice is to repeat what everyone already knows. However, I want to weigh in on this subject from what I hope is a different point of view, and I’m sure it’s one that is not going to be popular, but that’s OK. If Lindsay Lohan can spend one day in jail and perform 10 days of community service for a second DUI (cocaine possession is apparently not a crime in California), and Nicole Ritchie can serve 84 minutes in jail for a second offense, with no fines and no license suspensions, then I don’t have a problem with my unpopular views.

That rich people get a different brand of justice is an unfortunate reality and it pisses me off, and it should you too. But the bigger problem here is in the drunken driving law itself. We have laws in place because a society without them just wouldn’t work. There has to be accountability for transgressions. If you steal or kill or rape you should be punished. If you commit an act that harms another person, you are guilty. Read that again. If you commit an act that harms another person, you are guilty. We put people in jail for things they have done.

Remember George Orwell’s “1984”? You’ll recall that they had “Thought Police”, a force that found people guilty of thinking what the state considered wrong thoughts. In Orwell’s frightening (and not implausible) world, people were punished for merely thinking the wrong way. They were punished for things they might do. It’s ridiculous, right? Orwell was of course being satirical, but in a very prophetic way. He knew that it is a very small leap to go from crimes committed to crimes merely thought of. How could we possibly punish people for thinking or for crimes they might commit? Well, my friends, I’m no lawyer, but isn’t the drunk driving law set up to punish people for something they might do?

If you drink and drive you might hurt someone (and believe me when I say that there is absolutely no excuse for injuries and deaths caused by idiots who are drunk behind the wheel), you should be severely punished. If Lindsay Lohan had hurt or killed the woman she was obviously menacing, or if Nicole Ritchie had done the same to someone while she was driving on the wrong side of the freeway, we would be shocked and angry. But would we look the other way because they’re celebrities? Would their fame somehow mitigate their crime? They’re obviously stupid, but we can’t put people in jail for being dumb. How bad do you think our prison overcrowding system would be if every moron you know had to go to jail? But, by speculating on what they might have done, aren’t we behaving like Orwell’s thought police; aren’t we vilifying them for something that didn’t happen?

This argument is hair splitting, at best; drunk driving is a recipe for disaster, but not every drunk driver kills or hurts someone when they do it. I guess my main point is that if it were you or me who was caught behaving like these stupid spoiled whores (a nod to South Park) we would suffer consequences that quite often destroy us little people. You pay the state a fine and lose your license, but in many states you are additionally forced to do penance by attending alcoholics anonymous, a blatantly Christian organization, as if God can help you to not be so stupid. You are also punished by the insurance companies with higher rates for up to five years. If you want to change jobs, background checks can and do follow you and hinder you, perhaps indefinitely, with the fact that you’ve already paid your societal debt ignored. All this and more for being stupid and doing well…nothing. Again, I’m not a lawyer, but I thought that you could only be punished once for a crime that you actually committed.

If you or I or any regular person gets a DUI, we are looked upon as the dregs of society, a menace to all things good and wholesome, and we bear watching for the rest of our lives with the slavering state ready to pounce on us should we step out of line again. And, as everybody knows, if you get more than one DUI, you are punished for the new offense and the first one as well. It can ruin your life for years. Again, somehow, the constitution has been rewritten to make sure that we are punished twice for the same crime. But as we have witnessed the Lohans and the Ritchies can and do commit multiple drunken driving offenses, and the public watches eagerly because they are different than us, and the second or third offense might be the one that turns them around and boosts their career. I’m waiting for them to pull a Michael Vick and find Jesus, because I know He has nothing better to do than to make sure that celebrities are not held to the same standard as the little people.

As a final note, I want to say that I am not endorsing drunk driving. I am sorry for the people, good people who have lost a loved one because of another person’s stupidity. All I’m saying is that legislation that punishes for crimes that might happen is a dangerous thing. And in case it didn’t show, I’m angry that popularity is both a license for arrogant behavior and a viable defense for being an idiot.