A few years driving ban and community service is standard punishment for a second drinking driving offence, pretty much across the board. It's a shockingly lenient punishment.

I'm of the opinion that even a first offence drink driving is serious enough to warrant a custodial sentence & some jail time.

Courts are so lenient I'm surprised his punishment wasn't a new Lamborghini.

The judge made the decision in accordance with sentencing guidelines. Another judge will therefore have to adjudicate exactly the same, and in line with the law.

He'll be out on the drink celebrating as we speak

Hope they don't send him to a nursing home with sexy old folk

Prison is way over the top imo for this. 2 year ban and 100 ours is a good punishment.

Anyone whether rich or not should have the book thrown at them for drink driving.

Only idiots do it FFS I have a great idea I'll have a few beers that impare my judgment and then get behind the wheel of a potential killing machine

Anyone that does it is a grade a twaaaat

comment by Feyenoord Champions (U1250)
posted 17 seconds ago
Prison is way over the top imo for this. 2 year ban and 100 ours is a good punishment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You tell that to someone whose family have been wiped out by a drunk driver

comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 34 seconds ago
Anyone whether rich or not should have the book thrown at them for drink driving.

Only idiots do it FFS I have a great idea I'll have a few beers that impare my judgment and then get behind the wheel of a potential killing machine

Anyone that does it is a grade a twaaaat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's where the phrase comes from. 'Don't drink and drive, take crack and fly'.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Feyenoord Champions (U1250)
posted 5 minutes ago
Prison is way over the top imo for this. 2 year ban and 100 ours is a good punishment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you be happy with this had he hit someone you know?

Think it’s fair to say the popular view is that drink driving laws should be tightened. But the common misconception, (as noted by the OP) amongst the public is that judges are too lenient.

Judges rule in accordance with current legislation. If the statute book does not allow a Court to jail a person for a particular offence, they can’t.

If that is standard guidelines well there is your answer as to why people still drink and drive in abundance. Start locking them up BEFORE they kill or injure some innocent Joe/Jane and watch how quickly people stop doing it.

I have no doubt that there would have been a few less drunk drunk drivers getting in their cars this weekend had they seen Wayne Rooney banged up for 3-6 months today.

As it stands now, the number of drunk drivers on the road this weekend will now be that little bit higher since drink drivers have just been given the UK courts backing to "Crack on"

"You could have killed someone's child...yet again. But hey since you didn't that's ok then." Really isn't the message we should be sending. Especially about an offence so blatantly avoidable it's ridiculous. Only a selfish who couldn't care less about other people commits this crime TWICE! Why anybody would want to see these people out of prison is beyond me. It could well be you or one of your loved ones (maybe your kid) that the next drunk MORON kills or cripples.

I guarantee there is nobody who's had to go through that or witness it. Who thinks prison is too harsh. Do people really need to be staring at a coffin or wheelchair of someone you love before they'll agree we need to start locking drink drivers up for risking people's lives. Whether they actually take one or not.

comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 9 minutes ago
Think it’s fair to say the popular view is that drink driving laws should be tightened. But the common misconception, (as noted by the OP) amongst the public is that judges are too lenient.

Judges rule in accordance with current legislation. If the statute book does not allow a Court to jail a person for a particular offence, they can’t.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think people know that the judges are only dishing out sentences from pre- defined sets. When people say it's too lenient- it's the stature book that they're really referring too.

comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 9 minutes ago
Think it’s fair to say the popular view is that drink driving laws should be tightened. But the common misconception, (as noted by the OP) amongst the public is that judges are too lenient.

Judges rule in accordance with current legislation. If the statute book does not allow a Court to jail a person for a particular offence, they can’t.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. I did actually think it was something they could physically do. It's a guideline so I'd expect discretionary power for the judge. If you're saying they flat out CAN'T lock him up for that offence then it is about legislation.

I felt the 2nd offence element meant they can sentence him to the maximum sentence possible if they so choose and figured that was jail. I dam sure know they have the power to have sentenced him harder than they did. Can't help thinking he's been given two "First offence" sentences. Surely a lifetime ban is an option if the court chooses. But it chose to let him back in a car in 18months. JOKE

Why didn't he pay for a taxi or uber back to her gaff? should have seen some jail time imo

I remember reading in other parts of Europe there were plans to install alcohol ignition interlocks.

Means drivers can only start the engine after a breath test. The technology is there, and given the costly price to have the ignition locks fitted, would be a good preventative measure for offenders.

In regard to "discretionary power" a judge cannot jail someone if the law does not permit it. In regard to Rooney I understand the level of blood/alcohol was not enough to allow the judge to give a custodial sentence.

He was earning £300k per week there is no excuse. He can easily afford a driver.

Anyone caught twice drink driving should be put in jail. They are risking others lives. It is completely out of order that he just gets a further ban. He didn't understand his last punishment so stick him in jail.

Ok fair enough. But I'm sure they had scope to sentence him far more harshly if short of jail. This really is a slap on the wrist, sending completely the wrong message. With a bit of luck his fame might just swing a backlash. A government currently desperate for public brownie points might just take a look at the legislation.

£170 pounds

Hope that won't hurt his family maintenance.

Whilst not condoning Rooney actions, has anyone seen the levels of overcrowding in UK prisons?

Most are already overcapacity. At least with community service he’s providing assistance to the taxpayer rather than being a costly drain, (circa 40k per year per detainee).

With around 85,000 drink driving convictions in England and Wales alone the costs to (an already overstretched) public purse would be massive.

comment by Comrade Corbyn (U21629)
posted 8 minutes ago
£170 pounds

Hope that won't hurt his family maintenance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Being reported he was fined. Transpires he wasn't. The £170 related costs (court etc).

comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 32 seconds ago
Whilst not condoning Rooney actions, has anyone seen the levels of overcrowding in UK prisons?

Most are already overcapacity. At least with community service he’s providing assistance to the taxpayer rather than being a costly drain, (circa 40k per year per detainee).

With around 85,000 drink driving convictions in England and Wales alone the costs to (an already overstretched) public purse would be massive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are people less deserving of a custodial sentence than a drunk driver right now. Prison overcrowding wouldn't be that affected if it was done right. Lock the first 100 up nice and high profile and watch future numbers plummet rapidly. This crime only still goes on because a high proportion of people are safe in the knowledge they won't see a jail cell.

If we can't lock them up then a SECOND offence should be an automatic lifetime ban and anyone caught drink driving at any time should mandatorilry have their vehicle siezed and crushed. Again so much fewer people would do it if they knew getting caught would cost them their car.

They should make the drink drive fine relative to your weekly earnings, they do that with speeding no?

If you're a drink driver you're a drink driver until the day you are caught.

They don't just wake up one morning and say "I repent".