Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wrong Target on Drunk Driving [New NC laws- costly penalties without conviction]
Carolina Journal Exclusive ^ | December 10, 2004 | By John Hood

Posted on 12/13/2004 8:50:56 AM PST by TaxRelief

RALEIGH -- For three years now, I've been hearing a lot of complaints from civil libertarians in North Carolina about the Patriot Act, lengthy imprisonments of enemy noncombatants, and other abuses of government power in the war on terrorism. On occasion, I've agreed with them. Now, it's time for all people of good faith who've worried about such abuses to come out against a bundle of similarly questionable proposals to fight the war against drunk driving.

Earlier in the year, media reports showed that a surprisingly large number of North Carolinians charged with driving while impaired (DWI) were acquitted at trial --and that this acquittal rate, around a third statewide, varied widely depending on jurisdiction and judge. Responding to these and related revelations, Gov. Mike Easley appointed a task force of public officials, health and safety experts, activists, and others to come up with a new strategy for combating drunk driving.

Now the group has prepared a long list of recommendations for the governor in expectation of passage during the 2005 legislative session. They include stronger efforts to keep those under 21 from getting access to alcoholic beverages, such as tougher penalties, more training for sales clerks, and tighter rules for selling beer kegs. The panel will also call for more sobriety checkpoints and greater access by officers to private clubs that sell alcohol.

Current law requires that those charged with DWI have their driver's licenses suspended for 30 days. Arguing that this does little to pressure defendants to plead guilty to the offense, the panel says that the suspension should now last until a DWI case is resolved in court. For drivers under 21 or previously convicted of DWI, the task force says that police officers should be able to install interlock devices immediately after a DWI arrest that would prevent the vehicle from being operated by anyone with alcohol on the breath.

One proposal had gained significant support among task-force members but not with the Easley administration: a $90 million hike in the excise tax on beer and wine, intended both to discourage underage drinking and to generate revenue for implementing the rest of the anti-DWI package. After some contentious debate, the panel has decided to recommend that a study commission be set up to examine the tax-increase option (Easley's folks have apparently already decided to propose some new taxes in 2005, just not those).

It's probably not fashionable to say so, but I find most of the task force's proposal to be wrongheaded, counterproductive, and deeply offensive. A months-long revocation of a driver's license is a serious, costly punishment. So is installing an interlock device on a vehicle that may be shared by several family members, including those never stopped for DWI. The state of North Carolina has no business passing laws to impose these penalties on people who haven't been convicted of a crime. Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

Furthermore, raising taxes on beer and wine to deter drunk driving and pay for its deterrence is an indefensible policy. I am a teetotaler. Thus I will pay little or none of the new tax. Yet as a daily user of the state highways, I will benefit from any successful effort to reduce the risk of drunk driving. Indeed, I will benefit just as much as will fellow motorists who are also beer or wine consumers. Why should they pay and I not pay? And why should the vast majority of drinkers, who do so responsibly, be targeted for a special tax because of the irresponsible actions of a few?

Perhaps it would be easier to understand the rush to embrace "solutions" if drunk driving was a growing problem in North Carolina. I see no evidence that this is the case, however. The problem appears to have been improving for years, perhaps because of past legislation and broader societal trends. From 2000 to 2003, total alcohol-related auto accidents declined by about 20 percent, even as population and vehicle-miles-traveled increased. Fatalities are also down 20 percent. This is no comfort to the loved ones of those killed by drunk drivers, but it is comforting to note that there are fewer such victims than there used to be.

If the real problem is too much judicial discretion in convicting and sentencing drunk drivers, let's address it. If DWI penalties need to be more draconian, okay. But what the governor's task force proposes to do represents a gross overreaching of governmental power--and deserves a commensurate level of condemnation from those who say they venerate individual rights, civil liberties, and equal protection under the laws.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; US: North Carolina
KEYWORDS: 5thamendment; alcohol; civilliberties; drunkdriving; dui; dwi; ncpolitics; ncstatutes; robertwoodjohnson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

1 posted on 12/13/2004 8:50:56 AM PST by TaxRelief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day; Helms; 100%FEDUP; 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; ~Vor~; A2J; a4drvr; Adder; ...

NC *Ping*

Please FRmail Constitution Day, TaxRelief OR Helms if you want to be added to or removed from this North Carolina ping list.
2 posted on 12/13/2004 9:32:35 AM PST by TaxRelief (Merry Christmas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief

Gee, to the non-statists among us, a 33% conviction rate would suggest better training of police officers so as not to arrest and inconvenience so many who are arguably innocent. These guys think it means they need to crack down. If they were smarter, I'd call them a$$holes, but as it is, that's an insult to a$$holes everywhere.


3 posted on 12/13/2004 9:42:57 AM PST by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief

Confiscate the car, suspend the license, lock the offender up for 11 months and 29 days, and then hold a trial.


4 posted on 12/13/2004 9:46:10 AM PST by Old Professer (The accidental trumps the purposeful in every endeavor attended by the incompetent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
Arguing that this does little to pressure defendants to plead guilty to the offense, the panel says that the suspension should now last until a DWI case is resolved in court.

Yeah, who cares if they're innocent or guilty. The unfair laws and rogue juries that give us an unfair advantage just aren't enough. Some of these shmoes still think they're entitled to be judged by their peers.

Why are people being penalized before conviction anyway, aren't they entitled to the presumption of innocence (even if you buy the "driving is a privelige, not a right" crap)? Also, extending the suspension till the case is resolved gives the court the opportunity to ratchet up the pressure by failing to deal with the case in a timely manner. Hardly an incentive we want to put in place.

5 posted on 12/13/2004 9:47:49 AM PST by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

That's actually not the case here in NC. The poor conviction rate is highly skewed by a handful of counties, with Cumberland being the worst. There are ongoing state and federal investigations into several judges and attorneys. Some attorneys have so thoroughly gamed the system and corrupted the judges, that they will guarantee a client they will be acquitted for the right price.


6 posted on 12/13/2004 9:52:27 AM PST by Right Angler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Right Angler

So obviously it's not the law that's the problem. If the judges are corrupt, get them off the bench and into prison with the ones they did convict. Don't think up more ways to compromise the civil rights of the residents of the state.


7 posted on 12/13/2004 9:56:23 AM PST by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

I concur that there is a problem with the judges not the system. I know that in Michigan only about 5% of the OWI cases go to trial. I think our conviction rate is much higher, but my personal experience suggests that if a person is borderline, a jury will not convict especially if a person performs well on video.
New laws, such as some of those cited, most likely will not assist. In my jurisdication we obtain blood if the person refuses the breath test. We have a streamlined process that only adds about 1 hour to the arrest time. There is a penalty if the person refuses the breath test that is in addition to any penalty received from conviction.


8 posted on 12/13/2004 10:11:03 AM PST by midcop402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
Sigh...gonna' have to start brewing my own beer again if this passes.

Funny story: Last week my neighbor got burglarized, and I went down there to help him commiserate. The Deputy Sheriff showed up and was filling out the paperwork, as I stood there with a beer in my hand.

Half hour later, I finished my beer, got in my pickup, and drove home.

Later that night, a little light bulb went off in my head and I told myself, "Geez' I might not oughtta' done that." I really didn't think anything about it at the time.

(For all the blue-noses out there, it was only ONE beer and I only live 1000 yds. away on private property.)

9 posted on 12/13/2004 11:50:07 AM PST by snopercod (Bigger government means clinton won. Less freedom means Osama won. Get it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
more sobriety checkpoints

I got caught in one of these one Saturday night, just trying to get my family home in my mini-van, and completely sober. It took an hour for me to get through it, and I went that way only because it is normally a short cut. I could have shot everyone involved with that #$#@% thing by the time it was done. These ought to be banned forever. If you read the Fourth Amendment, they are illegal, but then I'm only a peasant, certainly not a black-robed prince.

10 posted on 12/13/2004 11:55:06 AM PST by Hardastarboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
Confiscate the car, suspend the license, lock the offender up for 11 months and 29 days, and then hold a trial.

Boy. You really have that innocent before proven guilty thing down pat, don't you? Why not just go for summary execution and save the state the cost of dungeon time?

11 posted on 12/13/2004 12:00:06 PM PST by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard
more sobriety checkpoints

I got caught in one of these one Saturday night, just trying to get my family home in my mini-van, and completely sober.

Ain't you lucky! At least it was a "sobriety checkpoint.

Last time I was stopped in something similar, it was on a state highway, entering a town, with no way to avoid. Traffic was backed up about a mile, around two curves, and inching forward.

As we got around the second curve, we could see several fire trucks parked, with their lights flashing, but no smoke or sign of accident.

The firemen were all stopping traffic, and going from car to car, ASKING FOR DONATIONS to their 'firemen's benevolent fund'!

It caused about a 20 minute delay, and earned them more ill-will than donations.

12 posted on 12/13/2004 12:32:58 PM PST by ApplegateRanch (The world needs more horses, and fewer Jackasses!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

That was America then.

This is America now.

13 posted on 12/13/2004 1:04:03 PM PST by Lazamataz ("Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown" -- harpseal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Professer
Confiscate the car, suspend the license, lock the offender up for 11 months and 29 days, and then hold a trial.

If we hold a trial, the terrorists have won.

14 posted on 12/13/2004 1:04:53 PM PST by Lazamataz ("Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown" -- harpseal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: Lazamataz

I didn't think of that, of course you're right - let's just throw away the key.


16 posted on 12/13/2004 1:33:22 PM PST by Old Professer (The accidental trumps the purposeful in every endeavor attended by the incompetent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
My $0.02:

After a DUI conviction, mandatory sentence:

As it is, most animal poachers get more harsh punishment than convicted drunk drivers.

17 posted on 12/13/2004 1:49:16 PM PST by TChris (Repeat liberal abuser)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
Sigh...gonna' have to start brewing my own beer again if this passes.

That shouldn't be a "sigh." You would be doing yourself a favor!

18 posted on 12/13/2004 3:12:34 PM PST by Ides of March (Beware.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: snopercod

"(For all the blue-noses out there, it was only ONE beer and I only live 1000 yds. away on private property.)"

We still have a legacy of Puritanism in this country that avidly love to punish anyone for anything.


19 posted on 12/13/2004 3:27:05 PM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
I've always wondered who exactly decided driving was a "Privilege and not a right". Also, how can the DMV revoke a license without due process.
20 posted on 12/13/2004 4:19:01 PM PST by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson