The only way I could see letting something expire would be if they went a really long time with no convictions. Maybe the 10 year thing or a graduated schedule that if you have 5 within 3 years, then you have to go more like 20 before they are not looked at any more.

But I'm really fine with not letting them expire ever. It most likely just means they didn't get caught, not that they weren't driving drunk.

never let them expire - it should be a felony for your 2nd offense - then once a felon, always a felon - Wisconsin needs help - I wish someone would listen.

If the person convicted of OWI first offense goes through a class for OWI and meets all attendance requirements and has no further offense the original should expire after 10 years.

It only takes on time driving impaired to kill someone else or themselves. I think they should lose their license for 1 year at least for their first offense (there are no excuses) and the second offense should be a felony with required prison time.

Wisconsin is the land that invented drunk driving. If I wasn't supposed to drink and drive - why does the bar have a parking lot? Up-North the #1 sport is driving to the bar in your truck, car, quad, motorcycle, snowmobile, or boat and drinking - for long periods of time. Notice how the bars are often conveniently located in the middle of nowhere? The time spent bar-hopping, often from County to County is described in the terms of how many beers can be consumed in the vehicle while traveling. That is the Wisconsin I know and grew up in.

Times change - and it's time for the drinking and driving culture in Wisconsin to end. You won't stop the drinking - but the driving needs to be punished. Wisconsinites need to conduct their drinking where they won't drive, or find an alternative to drunks operating a motor vehicle. The costs for drinking and driving are too great.

Technology to the rescue - "The long-term transportation funding bill just approved by Congress includes funds for researching alcohol-detection technology that could eventually be standard equipment in all new cars."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-06-29/alcohol-detection-technology-standard-cars/55927610/1

Continue...

And of course, here comes a group to lobby against this technology - defending your right (?) to drink and drive:

"The American Beverage Institute (ABI) is a restaurant trade association that protects the on-premise dining experience and defends the right to drink moderately and responsibly prior to driving."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fll873k4RME&feature=plcp

There is no right - to drink and drive - on the public highways.

What about considering washington state's three strikes you're out law? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_strikes_law

There's something called responsibility. I think if it has been 10 - 20 years since your first one than that shows a pattern of maturity and should be allowed to expire. If you know you can't handle alcohol, and let's face it, those that can't know darn well who they are, then please do your drinking at home until you decide to admit you have a problem and do something about it. Alcoholism is a disease and should be treated as such but in Wisconsin it seems to be a badge of glory to drink and brag about drinking. I love our great State but we are doing an injustice to our citizens with our pathetic laws.

Why not extend the IID [Ignition interlock Device] requirement time to 10 years upon the third conviction?

Some of the people posting here obviously don't drink. If you want severe punishment for drunk drivers, the there should be severe punishment for texting and driving, talking on the phone and driving, and penalties for people that are just lousy drivers. Some of the older folks driving should have their license revoked too..

So if I'm a serial killer and I haven't killed anyone in 10 years, those don't count?

Wisconsin has always had a drinking culture and has a 'laissez faire' approach to alcohol consumption. The approach to dealing with the problem has been rather anemic at best. To amend the OWI record for repeat offenders makes absolutely no sense. I am all for making the consequences for OWI even more draconian. We tolerate behavior from alcohol consumption that we wouldn't tolerate in any other circumstance.

just saying be careful what you ask for - we will put a lot more people out of work and unable to get a job if we make OWI a felony - we will need more prisons and then you have more on Govt' assistance - see there is a trickle down effect to everything - need to come up with solutions that make sense not just easy

I think security or bouncers at every exit door at every bar gives a breathalizer before you're allowed to drive home would be beneficial. If you exceed the limit, you're obligated to take a cab at your own expense.

Given the stigma attached to drunken driving, even for those who've gone for 10-15-20 years without a similar violation, I don't know how you can argue it shouldn't be erased from the record. The analogy someone above tried to draw to a serial killer is idiotic.

The odds that someone who's gotten busted for it, went through the system, paid a penalty and possibly went through treatment of some sort won't reoffend are actually better than are those for the person who's driven drunk for years without ever getting caught. If the folks that make decisions based on driving records could be trusted to use logic rather than emotion, I'd say leave the offense on the record for life. Since that's not the case, consider whether or not you really want someone who got an OWI for blowing just the limit after being pulled over for having a tail-light out to have that on their record and used against them for the rest of their lives. The law won't differentiate between that person and the one who's completely blitzed, driving on the wrong side of the freeway and who, thankfully, doesn't get in a wreck before being apprehended.

I am biased here and I will tell you that up front; I lost a grandson to a drunk driver.

The FIRST OWI conviction should be allowed to expire, after a 5-year period without any further OWI issues. After that, you should do at least a year in jail, have your driver's license revoked and receive at least a $1,000 fine along with the completion of an alcohol treatment program that YOU pay for before you are allowed to drive.

Wisconsin has more drunk drivers than all other states!

0.08 is too low of a threshold; the current BAC system makes it easier to convict people, even when they’re not a problem on the road. OWI charges are devastating to the average person. Let’s stop wasting their money, and while we’re at it, stop wasting ours.

AWD -

My close friends and family have ONE RULE when it comes to alcohol and driving, regardless of where the state sets its BAC level.

IF you had alcohol today, you do not drive today... no exceptions!

One OWI, 10 years. Everyone should get a chance to show they've learned their lesson.

I absolutely agree Craig. I believe the heaviest punishment should come when they get their second OWI. If someone gets a second drunk driving within that initial 10 year period, to me that's a cry for help. That's what they should be hit with a substantial fine and sometime behind bars.

I am not against drinking, but I am against stupidly repeating the same mistake multiple times. If one has that problem, get flexible about a few things. Don't even drive to taverns. Drink at your own home. Live where there is good mass transit and learn to use it, like certain parts of Milwaukee or much of the city of Chicago. Pre-arrange a designated driver. Move to be within walking distance of your favorite tavern or entertainment district Crawling home a short distance is better than the horrible consequences of driving in such a state.

These multiple OWI offenders should simply alter their lifestyle if they cannot or choose not to control their continued excessive alcohol consumption. Felonies and prison terms will alter a lifestyle much, much more.
The multiple offenders seem to be those that cannot break the link between driviing and drinking, The roadhouse, the car out in the parking lot, habitual over consumption , all combined seems to be the prevalent pattern for these pathetic multiple repeaters.

It would be interesting to know what his BAC was ........... the .8 is very low yet the punishment is the same as someone with twice that !!!

It would also be interesting to see what the average BAC is for DUI offenses ...

We need to get the Really drunk ones off the road who are driving wrong way, etc ... but I do not believe the average DUI is anywhere near that level --- and more equivalent to talking on cell phone which studies have equated to about a .12 level

I have no issue with a first OWI that did not involve an accident and the driver was under 1.5 BAC to expire after 5 years of good behavior. We all make mistakes and I hope a lesson is learned.

After the first OWI, WI needs to prevent these people from driving. Real jail without work release needs to be part of the equation. Long sentences with long probation periods with part of the probation criteria to be drug tested and 100% free of recreational drugs and alcohol.

Cell phones, texting, eating while driving are different issues. So is smoking pot and driving. I'm fine with anything that deters this activity too.

I work in the bar and nightclub industry and I have lost my father 2 days after Christmas to drunk driver that could have been stopped and wasn't. It would have been his first offense but he was killed also. Everybody makes a mistake but when that mistake can take the life of an innocent person and destroy the lives of the family's involved there should be real consequence to their actions. Second offense should be a felony period. They got a second chance and blew it! They apparently did not learn their lesson from the slap on the wrist from the first so guess what, now it's time to pay the piper. It shouldn't matter how long ago the first offense was, you already had your second chance don't squander it!

There are a couple of dumb laws that actually encourage drinking and driving:
\
1) Alcohol purchases are prohibited from a liquor store after 9:00 PM --- that leaves out the option of someone picking up some beer to enjoy at home without driving -- they have to go to a tavern. I think liquor stores should be able to sell the same hours as taverns, to encourage folks that after maybe a couple at the tavern to socialize, they can pickup a 6 pack and drink it at home without driving.

2) If someone starts to drive and realizes that they may have had a couple too many, they cannot just pull over and sleep it off --- they will get a ticket for drunk driving, even if they are not driving --- that would encourage that person to try to sneak home without getting caught, when the best solution would be to pull over and stop driving --- when someone is too tired to drive, they can pull over and take a nap, why shouldn't they be able to do so when they realize they have had too much to drink ?

You can sleep it off, you have to remove the keys from the ignition to display your intent to NOT drive drunk. Lock em in glove compartment, etc... If they are in the ignition you will be arrested for INTENT to drive under the influence...

At some point in people's lives when they've stayed out of trouble for a long enough time (10 years is what most of the world uses) there should be some way for them to get a clean slate and not continually have the past brought up and used against them. As it is right now we keep track of every infraction for all eternity and it never stops being brought up again until not just until the person dies, but long after that as well... In this penal based society called Wisconsin even dying won't clear a persons record these days.

Everyone makes mistakes. That's why the first conviction isn't a felony. If you haven't learned after that, too bad. They should never expire. There are too many innocent people out there being killed by repeat drunk drivers. Why give them a break? What kind of a break is given to the people they have killed?

First time is an oops...a mistake. Second time and after should be felonies. And never excused.

Up front, I do believe that the personal responsibility of the drinking driver carries by far the paramount responsibility, but there are steps that others can take, and should, both morally and legally, and too often don't.

I recently published an account of a fellow arrested for his third offense while driving through Wauwatosa after spending 12 hours in the same nearby Milwaukee tavern, where he admitted having consumed nine beers, four mixed drinks and three shots. He blew a BAC of .22. He was drinking with a group of "friends" who knew his history of alcohol abuse and arrests, yet they did nothing to curtail his drinking or to stop him from driving. He was served by the establishment an average of one drink every 45 minutes for 12 hours straight, yet no one on staff or in management did anything to meet their legal responsibility of avoiding overserving him.

Another driver arrested a month before had been at the same tavern, also with friends. He blew a .153 BAC on a breath test and was arrested. All three of his passengers volunteered that they believed they could drive, but when they took breath tests, they registered .145, .149 and .227.

The drinking culture is not only an individual act but one of group-think, or "group can't think," after a few rounds that turn into a binge. Friends keep buying, bartenders keep pouring, and everybody keeps driving.

Our state has the worst drunken driving problem in the country. Makes no sense to weaken our existing laws. If you were convicted once this may deter you from doing it again

I think they should expire. I had 3 in a 5 year span. I decided to turn my life around. Went to rehab, started AA afterwards and sober for 2 years and am an Alcohol Counselor. However, my record will always haunt me.

They should if u turn ur life around like I did.

People need to use the resources available to avoid driving impaired. When I used to frequent my local hangouts, I did not drink alcohol. I drank soda. I also offered my services to take you home in my local bars I was at. Not one took up my offer to drive them home.

Absolutely not. It doesn't matter if your last conviction was last week or 15 years ago-- if you kill someone because you're driving drunk, the outcome is the same. Especially since the odds are good that just because you haven't been caught, doesn't mean you haven't done it. When you're caught and convicted, that stays with you-- the number keeps increasing.

How many times is too many? As the mother of the victim of a drunk driver accident I have to say "ONE TIME IS TOO MANY". There is no punishment harsh enough or any fine that will compensate for the grief that is caused to the victim and the victims family. If you drink and drive (I don't care how many drinks you've consumed) you're guilty for life. If it ruins your life, tough. It was your decision and you live with the consequences. If it happened to you or your loved one, you'd sing a different tune. Make it a felony!

In MY case I was charged with a OWI but a few weeks later was dropped by the DA because my BAC was 0.045. I was coming back from an Admirals game with my girlfriend where I had two 24 oz beers in a period of a almost 4 hrs. I was pulled over on St Paul ave in Waukesha for going 33 mph on a 25 mph zone, (even though I was not given a speeding ticket). After asked if I told I did have 2 large beers. I was then given a breathalyzer and the officer verbally told me I was over the limit, but never showed me the result. He drove me up to the hospital which was literally 2 minutes away and was given a blood test. Even though I wasn't convicted of OWI is still shows on my record all because an under qualified officer didn't do his job correctly. I was almost almost 50% UNDER the legal limit. I am Hispanic however, I wander if THAT had anything to do with it.

@Jbw the fact that you consider people that make "serious mistakes" "inferior" to you is pretty pathetic, in my opinion. People are different, right? Some people weren't disciplined growing up, some were disciplined and some were disciplined differently, right? There's an old saying "Smart people learn from their mistakes, wise people learn from the mistakes of others", which I absolutely agree with, but it doesn't make people "inferior". Those whom makes "serious mistakes" can be better than you and in other aspects, but it doesn't make them superior nor it makes us inferior. We are not "inferior" to Michael Jordan because he was a better basketball than all of us, Ive never cheated on my girlfriend, he admittedly cheated on his. but that doesn't make me superior either.

Just because a person hasn't been "caught" in 16 or whatever amount of years, doesn't mean they haven't driven drunk. I know quite a few people in this boat who even brag about it.

The way the law is set, owi will be on you record forever. There's no point to debate if it should or should not be, because its not going to change. Perhaps there should be other ways to solve the problem, such as using alcohol sensers in vehicles or tagging the persons identification as someone who should not be served alcohol in a bar. There's so much hypocritical behavior regarding drinking and driving. Bars over serve and the advertisements target people promoting drinking as a part of our culture. I personally have decided to not drink because I know that this is the one way that cops can get me, even though I may not have committed a traffic violation, they can always find a reason to make a stop and turn the stop into a serious infraction by catching you coming from a bar. The DUI laws are designed to make money for local governments. The allowance of law enforcement to use just about what ever reason they want to make a stop is a violation of our rights. But again, it's not worth arguing, because the better action is to stay out of the bars, never drink and drive and you are safe from the unfair laws.