If you kill someone drink driving of course you should go to prison but I am surprised at the number of people who think that everyone who is caught driving over the limit (and doesn't injure anyone) should go to prison for a lengthy period of time. That doesn't happen in this country, we would have to build extra prisons.
I've already said Lyndsay shouldn't be allowed to drive but as I'm repeating myself now I will leave the thread and the rest of you can yell 'jail her' to your hearts content.
Why do you feel that the result of someone's drink driving should be the criteria for whether they go to jail or not? There's no sense in that approach. A drunk driver who kills someone has not acted any more selfishly than one who hasn't; it's largely chance which one takes a life. And the driver who killed someone is less likely to re-offend. It's a nonsense; it has nothing to do with justice or with making the roads safer and is there only to satisfy the (understandable) vengeful feelings of the victim's family.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't say jail is the right option on a first offence, unless it's at the very worst level; a driving ban should be the first resort. But if they defy the ban or re-offend, then I think it should be jail.