Powered by i.TV
February 10, 2012
 
CONNECT    

Kiefer Sutherland arrested for drunk driving

by Bob Sassone, posted Sep 25th 2007 1:18PM

Kiefer Sutherland24 star Kiefer Sutherland was arrested last night in Los Angeles for drunk driving, TMZ.com is reporting.

The field sobriety test given to Sutherland showed the star was two times over the state limit of .08. Too bad he wasn't three times over, that would have been 24 and would have been great promotion for the show, though the show doesn't start up again for a few more months so that probably wouldn't have been great strategy.

Sutherland probably would have been OK but he made an illegal U-turn. He was released a few hours after the arrest after posting $25,000 bail. If convicted he could serve at least five days in jail. This is his second offense in three years.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

10 Comments

Filter by:
bruce alm



Drunk driving. Dwi and dui. A license to drink.
Madd, sadd, radd, A.A., and alanon/al-anon related.

Copyright: 1987-2007 � Bruce Alm. Documentation is available upon request.

The answer to the problem of drunk driving, etc. could be this; a permit for the purchase and consumption of alcoholic beverages.

This would not only be a major assault on the problem of drunk driving, but would also have an effect on virtually all other crimes such as these;
murder, rape, assault, burglary, robbery, suicide, vandalism, wife beating, child beating, child molestation, the spread of aids, college binge drinking, animal cruelty, etc., the list is endless.

If this proposition was made law, there could be a major reduction in all these areas of concern, even though the emphasis concerning alcohol abuse seems to be drunk driving in particular.

There could also be many other positive results;

Families healed, better work performance, booze money spent on products that would help the economy (we've all heard of the guy who spends half his check in the bar on payday,) would spare many health problems, etc.

This new law could go something like this:

Any person found guilty of any crime where drinking was a factor would lose the right to purchase and/or consume alcoholic beverages.

For a first misdemeanor, a three year revocation. a second misdemeanor, a ten year revocation. a third misdemeanor, a lifetime revocation. Any felony crime, an automatic lifetime revocation.
Anyone caught drinking alcohol without a permit would receive a possible $1000 fine and/or jail sentence. those who would supply alcohol to people without a drinking permit (and possibly make money at it) would also lose his/her right to purchase alcoholic beverages.

What wife or husband would buy an alcoholic spouse a bottle?

What friend would give a problem drinker a drink at the possible cost of a thousand bucks and the loss of their own privilege? This could be a total discouragement to these would-be pushers.

This permit doesn't seem as though it would be a problem to put into effect. It could simply be a large X, (or whatever,) on the back of any driver's license in any state, to show who has been revoked, and cannot purchase alcohol.

Most people of drinking age have a driver's license, but one area that might be a problem could be New York City, where many people don't drive. This problem could be resolved, however, by a license-type ID specifically for the purchase of alcoholic beverages. All states have these already for the purpose of identification.

This would be a small price to pay for the saved lives of thousands of Americans each and every year.

After this, it would simply be a matter of drinking establishments checking ID's at the time of purchase.
In the case of crowded bars, they could simply check ID's at the door, as they do now.

Would this be a violation of rights?

There can be no argument here since they already check IDs of people who look as though they may not be old enough to drink.

This could be a good saying, "If a person who doesn't know how to drive shouldn't have a license to drive, a person who doesn't know how to drink shouldn't have a license to drink."

Here are some other pluses to this idea:

A good percentage of people in correctional institutions are there because of alcohol related offences . Because of this, court, penal, and law enforcement costs could drop dramatically. The need for A.A., alanon, madd, sadd, etc., could be greatly diminished as well.

What the alcoholic fears most, is the temptation to have that first drink, usually a spur of the moment type thing. Without the ability to do this, he/she is fairly safe. To start drinking again would almost have to be planned in advance, and to maintain steady drinking would be extremely difficult in most cases.

Even though A.A. members as a group don't become involved in political movements, it would seem as individuals they would all be in favor of a situation like this. Any person who wants to quit drinking, even if never having been in trouble with the law, could simply turn in their license for the non-drinking type.

A woman from MADD, on the NBC TODAY show, said "One out of every ten Americans has a drinking problem, and that 10% consumes 60% of all alcoholic beverages sold in the U.S." If this is true, there could be financial problems for breweries, liquor stores, bars, rehab centers, etc., as well as lawyers, massive amounts of tax revenue 'down the drain,' and so on. But it doesn't seem as though anyone would have a valid argument against a proposal such as this for financial reasons. To do so would be morally wrong, and could b

November 06 2007 at 12:32 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Kevin Bodenhammer

If I were Kiefer Sutherland I would be drunk ALL the time.His role in that horrible rascist show committing torture would drive any normal human being to drink. He will probably die of alcoholism because of guilt regardless of what that truth teller Billy boy Bush Clinton says about how great torture is. Keep boozing pal.
Kevin Bodenhammer

October 03 2007 at 6:52 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Alice

"Sutherland probably would have been OK but he made an illegal U-turn."

I'll share the best advice I ever received:
Only break one law at a time.

September 25 2007 at 6:15 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Bob Sassone

Karen: I mean he wouldn't have gotten caught if he didn't make that illegal U-turn.

September 25 2007 at 6:08 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Karen

"Sutherland probably would have been OK but he made an illegal U-turn."

And your pronouncement that he probably would have been OK, while having a blood-alcohol level twice the legal limit, is based on WHAT, exactly?

September 25 2007 at 5:40 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
r.r.r.

D'oh! Not cool at all. That sucks. :(

This doesn't surprise me though...if you see I Trust You To Kill Me...he loves to drink. But too many folks in LA drink and drive...it's crazy down here. :(

September 25 2007 at 5:37 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
farfisa

Son of a bitch! (somebody took 'dammit')
So, did stars used to get a pass and they just changed the policy?

September 25 2007 at 4:52 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Harry

Dammit, he put hundreds of lives at stake!

September 25 2007 at 3:01 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
ciscoguerrero

LEAVE KIEFER ALONE! (sniff)(sniff) Maybe I can be the next Chris Crocker. Where did I left my eyeliner man?

September 25 2007 at 2:11 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Oreo

Is this the new thing?

I think they should build some more jails and stick everyone who drinks and drives away for at least a year. That might get the point across not to do it!

September 25 2007 at 1:24 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Follow Us

From Our Partners