In Sunday's third installment of a Post-Dispatch series on loopholes in Missouri's drunk driving laws, we learned that the state law that mandates a one year-suspension of driving privileges for drivers who refuse to take a breathalyzer test often is a joke.

In earlier installments in the series, a team of reporters led by Joe Mahr and Jeremy Kohler informed us that the law that says persistent drunk drivers will be charged with felony counts and put into prison often is a joke, too.

The idea that drunk-driving convictions will show up on drivers' records, especially for repeat offenders? Again, a joke.

Are we seeing a pattern here?

Despite hard work by some police officers, prosecutors and judges — but sadly, not all of them — and despite the deaths, injuries and heartache caused by drunk drivers, Missouri's drunk driving laws too often are a joke — particularly in the St. Louis area.

Friends don't let friends drink and drive. The legal system does.

Take the breathalyzer deal. It's supposed to be automatic: Blow a 0.08 BAC (blood alcohol content) or higher, and you lose your license for 90 days. Refuse the breathalyzer, and you lose your license for a year.

But how do they convict you without evidence of your BAC? They have to haul you to the station, get a warrant to draw blood, get a somebody to draw it, label it, test it and store it properly.

The procedure is so cumbersome that it is used only in the most serious cases. The rest of the time, defendants lawyer up — and there are thousands of traffic law lawyers who know how the system works. They file an appeal with a circuit court, meaning their clients can continue driving until the case is heard.

And when the case is heard, where's the evidence? Maybe the defendant first flunked a field sobriety test, but cops and other witnesses have to be found. It often becomes a he-said, she-said deal.

So between July 1, 2008, and June 30 of this year, St. Louis-area prosecutors made 1,395 deals. In return for guilty pleas, fines, community service and, sometimes, alcohol treatment programs, the defendants keep the DWI off their records and get to keep driving.

Maybe, for first-time offenders who don't hurt or injure someone, this can be defended. But many repeat offenders have had previous DWIs erased in plea bargains, so it's hard to know who's really a first-time offender.

There are solutions, as we've noted before, but all of them would cost money: an improved statewide database; more cops and prosecutors and circuit court judges allocated to drunk driving cases; more enforcement by the Department of Revenue; more special drunk driving courts like the one in St. Charles County and more treatment programs.

Gov. Jay Nixon has summoned lawmakers, prosecutors, cops and judges to a "summit" on the problem for Wednesday. Here's an idea:

At $2 a gallon, Missouri has the fifth-lowest tax on hard liquor among the 50 states. And, thanks to powerful brewing interests in both states, Missouri and Wisconsin have the lowest beer taxes (6 cents a gallon) among all 50 states.

Missouri should raise its liquor and beer taxes to cover the cost of serious drunk driving enforcement. Anything else is just a joke.