[oceanplexian]

> If you got a DUI, your mugshot and arrest record may be public record and can be displayed. If you got into a custody battle and your court case was public, that can be displayed.

The problem is you’re changing the social contract. 25 years ago a DUI wasn’t a life sentence; it wasn’t something someone could find a record for something you did when you were 19 on a website 40 years later.

Now, it’s a life sentence. It will impact your ability to get gainful employment for a lifetime. I’m sure people who have a hard-on for criminal justice love this, but I think it’s unfair and detrimental to a healthy society.

[roenxi]

DUI can also be a life sentence because you kill someone or die. I know a dude who will never walk again. He has employment problems whether or not his employer knows why he is crippled [0]. We're grateful that he hurt himself and not some bystander. This is a major infraction.

I have some sympathy for anyone discriminated against for something they did long ago but the solution here is to educate HR departments to only use relevant criteria when assessing candidates. Or, in other words, reset the social contract a little.

[0] Bonus rant: this fact is why I've always been consistently vocal that the people trying to put so much liability on self-driving vehicle operators that it'll slow down deployment need to take a long hard look at themselves. We need to get humans away from the wheel ASAP and if a couple of people die on the way there those are lives better spent than what we do now.

[glimshe]

A friend of mine lost his daughter to a DUI driver. DUI needs to have dire consequences, especially if involved in killing/disabling others.

However, we should use the justice system to deliver the right punishment instead of condemning people to an extrajudicial, de facto life sentence in all cases. The US is too liberal with making information public, while in most countries it's almost impossible to know who had a DUI in the past.

[stetrain]

There is also a huge distinction to be made between being arrested for something and being convicted of it.

Any cop can arrest you for DUI, with or without evidence. You get a mugshot, a public record, and a booking charge of "DUI".

Whether you get immediately released with charges dropped, or have to fight it in court and are later declared innocent or have the charges dropped, that initial public record and mugshot next to the words "DUI" now lives forever in various public archives.

[robertlagrant]

> DUI can also be a life sentence because you kill someone or die

This doesn't require your record being kept forever, though. You're already dead or guilty.

> the solution here is to educate HR departments to only use relevant criteria when assessing candidates

This won't work. You don't decide what's relevant.

[asah]

no need to argue:

IN ADDITION to removal attempts, we SHOULD ALSO influence (regulation, societal pressure, etc) how HR/etc departments use data they find online about a person.

[ghaff]

In general, there's a lot of information that has been considered public as a matter of law (often for good reasons) for a long time. Making this information available on the web rather than in some dusty county clerk's office arguably changed things. But we've mostly shrugged and let the information remain public even if it's just a click away (or at least a nominal background check payment away).

[breadwinner]

A few years ago, I unregistered to vote, because some websites make your name, address, and age public if you're registered to vote. So I no longer vote. My privacy is more important than my ability to vote.

[sokoloff]

As an employer, I’ve had many hundreds of people work in my group over the years, meaning I’ve had scores of people with DUIs.

I run a software shop, not a trucking company or airline. Whether you had a settled DUI in your past doesn’t change your ability to write code now, which is what I’m hiring you for.

Why would I care about an old DUI?

Beats me; I don’t.

[mschuster91]

Thing is, you as a small shop don't care... but large corporations, they get so many applications that they use background screening to filter down the load to something that their HR can handle, and in some cases (especially in government, aeronautics and medical) client contracts require regular checks of employees.

[sokoloff]

If they’re already filtering on things unrelated to the job, they could just as well throw out whatever percentage of applications was needed to get down to a load their HR could handle.

[bryanrasmussen]

the things unrelated to the job are things they can then say are related to moral character and make you a better hire overall.

Also any prior arrest record - DUI for example - can affect your permissions to work on projects with high security clearances and thus a factor that might not be relevant to small shop would at any rate be potentially relevant to large corporations who are the ones getting government contracts that require high security clearances.

[pseg134]

It fine to think that way. The problem is restricting other peoples right to free association if they do not want to hire them . Having a DUI is not a protected class.

[light_hue_1]

We are literally not changing the social contract at all.

A DUI is so serious it's impossible to expunge in most states. Yes, it is a life sentence in the sense. It will always come up again.

[stetrain]

The problem is that an arrest and a mugshot is not a conviction.

The record of the former is still public even if the charges get dropped or the arrest was unlawful. And will appear on web searches or be surfaced by all of the background checkers that HR uses.

[ferfumarma]

You raise a great point. But honestly: if you got a DUI in your youth you deserve to answer for it. It might or might not keep you from getting a job 10 years later, but you put people's lives in danger. If it does affect you: too bad. Drunk driving has always been a life sentence for its victims.

I would find your argument more compelling with a different example like shoplifting or vandalism: still deeply anti social, but not killing innocent people who are just going about their business.

[wayfinder]

Once you meet enough people you realize DUI has nothing to do with driving ability.

One of the most to-the-book buddies I know is also the worst driver I know. He once had a gnarly accident where he flipped his car a few times because he had to look at his GPS briefly. I hate sitting in his car. He insists on always being the driver too because you can tell he finds driving overwhelming but thinks he’s actually good at it. Lol.

I have another buddy who does have a past DUI. He’s extremely coordinated and I have never felt unsafe in his car.

At the end of the day, if I had to choose someone to suspend their license forever, it would be my first buddy. I don’t care if he has a clean record. He simply was not gifted hand-eye coordination and is already a menace while sober.

[ryandrake]

To be pedantic, DUI by itself is not killing anyone, it's the crashing that tends to do the killing. You don't know the circumstances behind someone's DUI conviction, which could range from being drunk plowing into a bus load of school kids to being drunk in your parked, non-running car without the keys. There are many ways a determined and creative cop + justice system can successfully convict one for DUI that don't involve harm to anyone.

[Xylakant]

I could conceivably get a DUI conviction for riding my bike sufficiently drunk here in Germany.

[vinckr]

You can get a DUI in Germany for crossing a red light on foot while drunk - even lose your license.

But luckily criminal records are not public in Germany so its not a life sentence.

[hef19898]

I know people who lost their liscense for riding their bikes while drunk. Rightfully so, luckily in my younger years I was never cought the few times I did so myself.

[danw1979]

In the UK, drunk cycling is an offence with a maximum (but not usual) penalty of £2500, but you can’t be forced to take a blood alcohol level breath or urine test as a cyclist… so you’ll just get a charge of reckless cycling instead. Neither drunk or reckless cycling has any effect on your driving license.

So basically, as long as you’re not so impaired you’re an obvious danger to others you’ll probably get away with it, which might explain why it’s such a popular alternative to getting home from the pub.

[BestGuess]

problem is that stance is like a vicious cycle. Can't get worthwhile employment screws everything from your family to your social life, worse if you can't drive anymore too, and all that is right back into why those people would be alcoholics or using other drugs and stuff in the first place.

my thing is I'm all for justice but not justice that creates more of the same problem in others or the same people giving them even more reason to give up with, well, it's like branding people on the forehead. Why be surprised when the outcast keeps doing outcast stuff when they're never allowed to be anything but an outcast? it's like if society shot itself in the foot then is outraged demanding to know who shot it in the foot.

tryin to say it feels good but just feelin good don't fix nothin

[deprecative]

What the other person seems to want is revenge or some arbitrary punitive action against someone, perhaps decades, after they've already been through the legal system and answered for their actions.

[BestGuess]

seems to me like that's what we've got right now sadly

[watwut]

The fine or minor jail time and your license being taken for period of time is answering for that driving under influence.

No reason to continue punishing people forever, that is destructive for society. This ideology of as large punishment as possible is something I find off-putting.

[kiba]

Drunk driving is a systematic problem, caused by drinking culture and car dependency.

A DUI conviction is something you could judge someone personally, but causes mayhem on a societal level.

[lazide]

And yet, most people somehow never get DUIs. Weird, isn’t it?

[kiba]

If it was easy to live in a society without drunk driving, then it would be done. Saying that some people don't get a DUI conviction is tantamount tolerating the conditions our society is in.

[lazide]

For some reason, I only ever hear this argument from folks with DUIs.

Near as I can tell, approximately 1% of licensed drivers get arrested for DUI a year, and most have repeat offenses.

That doesn’t strike me as any more of a society wide ‘impossible’ issue than anything else?

One thing I have noticed though - problem drinkers are amazing at making it always someone else’s fault.

[kiba]

For some reason, I only ever hear this argument from folks with DUIs.

For the record, I don't drink.

One thing I have noticed though - problem drinkers are amazing at making it always someone else’s fault.

It is their fault and they also have an addiction problem. And it is also a societal wide problem.

[wierd-eye-loser]

Hey look a fascist cunt. You go to jail and pay fees. That is your sentence cunt

[willy_k]

Go back to Reddit please