6 Days Suspension For Being Designated Driver?

[Wintermoot]

yes! if he wasnt driving his friends could be in a accident

 

[FalloutJack]

A designated driver cannot be convicted of any alcohol-related laws. He did not drink, he did not partake, and he is responsibly taking care of those who did so that nobody ELSE is doing something illegal AND ESPECIALLY NOT GETTING INTO AN ACCIDENT, which is the solid point of these laws. To punish the person looking out for others is shameful and ridiculous and I hope he sues the fuck out of anyone who raised a finger at him. Yes, even the school.

According to the OP, he had a BAC of .15, and there were open containers in the car. While it isn't DUI, it most certainly could be possible that he was actively drinking while driving. Open containers are illegal, designated driver or not.

Ah, well in order to be considered legally a designated driver, you must not be drinking. Case in point, if I were to be breathilized NOW and somehow alcohol registered, I would say there is some sneaky shit going on. So, in this state, there is no police officer who could question my driving people around for this practice, say.

 

[crudus]

The difference is that the taxi driver or the bus driver may not have known he had a robber in his vehicle, whereas in the OP's case there was no ambiguity and the driver knew very well that his passengers were doing something both illegal and against the rules of the school. There's no sketchiness there whatsoever.

Even in your example that is the case. Afterword it is "I was taken hostage". Regardless, is it really right for the school to punish the only person in the scenario actually doing the right thing(even off school property but that is something else entirely). I don't disagree with the open container law, but this is definitely a situation where leniency should be shown.

 

[BonsaiK]

The difference is that the taxi driver or the bus driver may not have known he had a robber in his vehicle, whereas in the OP's case there was no ambiguity and the driver knew very well that his passengers were doing something both illegal and against the rules of the school. There's no sketchiness there whatsoever.

Even in your example that is the case. Afterword it is "I was taken hostage". Regardless, is it really right for the school to punish the only person in the scenario actually doing the right thing(even off school property but that is something else entirely). I don't disagree with the open container law, but this is definitely a situation where leniency should be shown.

I don't understand the first part of your post at all. You'll have to rephrase the first two sentences if you want me to respond to that bit.

The person wasn't doing the right thing, he was transporting people who were breaking the law. Punishing him is absolutely the right thing to do, this way the next time he's in that kind of situation he'll have to good sense to tell them to GTFO of his car. Experience is a great teacher.

 

[StBishop]

that's fucking bullshit.

Also... Yeah that's it. Schools have no right policing kids during vacations... Hell, if it's not on school property and after school hours they also ought to not have any say in what students do.

This nanny'ing and, "You can't raise your own kids" attitude makes me sick.
But you are paying out the ass for it so.. whatever.

Incorrect.

The school, being private, has every right to demand a code of conduct from their pupils. Especially so for prestigious schools, Like Eton College in the UK.

If you get arrested, or in any trouble with the law, the school doesn't want to be associated with you. Similar to how sporting clubs will give internal fines and punishments to their players in addition to legal ramifications of their actions, because they want to have the image of discouraging certain behaviour.

OT: It makes perfect sense, and your friend broke the law, regardless of whether it's strictly within the guidelines of your schools drinking policy they have a right to punish him.

I wouldn't let someone in my car with an open can/bottle, because it's illegal. I also wouldn't let someone ride in the car without a seatbelt on. Same reason.

First friend, I don't even think it's a question.

There is a rule. He blatantly broke it. He was punished. End of story.

 

[Plurralbles]

that's fucking bullshit.

Also... Yeah that's it. Schools have no right policing kids during vacations... Hell, if it's not on school property and after school hours they also ought to not have any say in what students do.

This nanny'ing and, "You can't raise your own kids" attitude makes me sick.
But you are paying out the ass for it so.. whatever.

Incorrect.

The school, being private, has every right to demand a code of conduct from their pupils. Especially so for prestigious schools, Like Eton College in the UK.

If you get arrested, or in any trouble with the law, the school doesn't want to be associated with you. Similar to how sporting clubs will give internal fines and punishments to their players in addition to legal ramifications of their actions, because they want to have the image of discouraging certain behaviour.

OT: It makes perfect sense, and your friend broke the law, regardless of whether it's strictly within the guidelines of your schools drinking policy they have a right to punish him.

I wouldn't let someone in my car with an open can/bottle, because it's illegal. I also wouldn't let someone ride in the car without a seatbelt on. Same reason.

First friend, I don't even think it's a question.

There is a rule. He blatantly broke it. He was punished. End of story.

I meant the last sentence to kind of bar comments like this. If the guy doesn't like it, he can just not go there. He'd be saving a bundle and if he wants the school to not punish people for offenses normally irrelevant of a school, then he can cast that vote with his wallet.

 

[LandoCristo]

I'm going to disagree with the majority here, and say your that while your school may have overstepped a little by suspending the guy who wasn't even drinking, they have every right to expel kids who drink even off-campus during non-school hours. If it's a private school, they have an image to keep up, and if that image is going to be harmed by having a bunch of drunk high-schoolers running around, ruining their rep, they have the right to kick you out.

 

[crudus]

The person wasn't doing the right thing, he was transporting people who were breaking the law. Punishing him is absolutely the right thing to do, this way the next time he's in that kind of situation he'll have to good sense to tell them to GTFO of his car. Experience is a great teacher.

If he did have the "good sense" to leave them to their own devises people could easily have died. Making sure everyone gets home safely while breaking the law (minor ones) sounds a lot better than risking them getting themselves or others hurt. If he didn't transport them and they did get hurt would people be saying "you did the right thing"? No, they would be saying "why didn't you drive them home"?!

 

[Drakane]

Since he was in control of the vehicle it is his responsibility for all items with in. Open container of a friend is still your open container. Making this an alcohol related offense and giving the school justification for the suspension. Sucks, but from a logical stand point that is how i see it playing out.

 

[Quinadin]

I'm not going to say the punishment is wrong, he still made a "bad move" and I know in Illinois if you're under 21 and caught having alcohol in the car (opened or not) you are breaking the law, I don't know what it's like in Gorgia, but the severity of it is uncalled for. A week no school is a very high for him being responsible. So the punishment... probably should have been 1-2 days and this should not count as his first offense again the reason being he is showing great responsibility in making sure no one got hurt and everyone made it home safely. Really one of the smarter students I've heard of, so a round of applause for him. Let's just hope he goes to a movie next time.

So should he have been punished. I would say no but I understand what the school is going for. Was he treated unfairly, definitely.

 

[BonsaiK]

The person wasn't doing the right thing, he was transporting people who were breaking the law. Punishing him is absolutely the right thing to do, this way the next time he's in that kind of situation he'll have to good sense to tell them to GTFO of his car. Experience is a great teacher.

If he did have the "good sense" to leave them to their own devises people could easily have died. Making sure everyone gets home safely while breaking the law (minor ones) sounds a lot better than risking them getting themselves or others hurt. If he didn't transport them and they did get hurt would people be saying "you did the right thing"? No, they would be saying "why didn't you drive them home"?!

To which my response would be "too bad for them, they had the option of getting a ride home in my car as long as they did NOT carry open alcohol containers, they chose not to take up this safe legal option and instead chose to keep their alcoholic beverages, so I did not take them home - it's not my responsibility what their stupid asses did afterward".

 

[Ashcrexl]

according to actual state laws, i believe if you allow underage drinking to happen without making at least an effort to stop it, you are also wrong. being a DD actually encourages underage drinking around you. so, according to the law, your school was right.

whether underage drinking laws are actually valid or not in terms of morality and basic human freedoms... well, that's another thread, probably.

 

[Aesthetical Quietus]

They should have punished the driver less severely, maybe 2-3 days, because he still was with the drunk guys, knowing full well what they were doing. And still was breaking the law, sober or not.

/snip

I understand what you two are saying, but the same situation happened last year to a classmate of mine and he received no disciplinary action.

They should at least be consistent in their punishments, no?

Yes, they should be consistent.

I personally don't think he should be punished at all. He can't stop his friends from drinking, sure he can leave them but as many of you have probably discovered Alcohol leads to impaired decision making. So essentially he's being punished because he decided to make sure his friends didn't do anything stupid or life-threatening (like driving drunk). To me, being around Alcohol that is readily accessible (open beer cans, etc) and staying sober is something you should probably promote. People will be people, there will always be people who break the rules no matter who is with them, punishing the person making sure that their stupid decision making doesn't lead to anything bad seems just utterly stupid to me.

But he comitted a crime by letting them drink in his car from the sound of it. Where I live he would have been charged with a crime equivilent to drinking and driving. You are responsible for what people in your car do.

Ah, okay, that explains it a little. Over here, unless you're in an Alcohol-Banned section, you are allowed to have it in your car, even open, as long as the driver has not drunk anything. Alcohol-Banned sections mean no open bottles and thus no drinking inside of it. Get caught and you loose the Alky and get a fine.

Get caught over the limit and driving and your name is published in the paper with your breath reading and occupation and you spend a night in jail and get demerit points and a fine.