Posted on 07/23/2002 3:26:13 PM PDT by chitownman
Taking their car away will stop them but I do think that maybe it should be taken for the length of the suspension at least for the first time. The second time take the car.
a.cricket
Bunk. Cancer is a health problem. People don't just *become* drunk. They do it to themselves. It's a matter of choice, no matter what pop-psychology says.
Maybe encouraging the public by giving them more tools to avoid them getting in the situation in the first place. Such as an accurate(if there is such a thing) hand held brethalyzer to check their limit before they drive.
Yes, by all means, the government ~should~ provide hand-held breathalyzers for anyone who wants them, and VCRs, and cable TV, and prescriptions drugs, and, hey, maybe even the car itself. /sarcasm. Nah, maybe we should just stick with personal responsibility.
I don't see how increased criminal penalties is going to solve the problem.
After his third DUI, my brother-in-law was finally told that he was going to jail if he didn't straighten out. He joined AA and hasn't had a drink since. Seems like the simple thread of penalty was sufficient in his case. My guess is it will be in others, too. And assuming it isn't, then why in the world do we have criminal penalties in the first place? To protect society? Removing a drunk's car is certainly a viable way to do that. To penalize the offender? Again, removing a drunk's car is certainly a viable way to accomplish it.
In addition, by not advertising the consequenses enough and slipping in extreme, unconstitutional penalties such as confiscation of one's personal property, the state is doing nothing but making money on unsuspecting drivers who may be "actually be in control while driving", but legally over the limit.
Yes, I'm sure this is just a money-making proposition. It's not like drunk drivers actually pose a hazard to society. (Need I close my tag??)
FP
I drink alcohol. I drive.I dont do both at the same time.I remember a time, decades ago, when it was perfectly acceptable to drink and drive.That time has long since passed. We ALL know better now.There can be no excuses.
I am truly gratefull that I never injured anyone back in the "good old days" when it was just A-OK to get hammered at a bar and drive home.The only "first time DUI" is an idiot finally getting caught by the police doing what they normally do, and we ALL know that. The second time offender is not a "victim".
Speaking as one who knows the financial burden of DUI (endured two via ex-husband)I have absolutely no sympathy for vehicle confiscation cry-babies.If you dont learn the first time DUI that anything less than $1500.00 minimum legal cost, is a better choice(taxi-hotel-designated driver)you are way too ignorant to drive on the same roads the rest of us drive.Ask a few convicted DUI vehicular manslaghter convicts if they would rather their vehicle had been confiscated before they killed that innocent stranger.
Have a nice day, and call a cab or a friend!
I am not driving!
In part, after prison, lifelong(?) registration, community notification and in some locales self-identification. None of which apply to the repeat DUI offender.
In a case just a few miles from here a woman who had numerous DUI convictions, drunk again, plowed into and killed a woman out on an evening stroll with her husband along the roadway. Perhaps her prior punishments were't stiff enough.
If you live in the great State of New Jersey, you'll surely be aware of the Division of Motor Vehicle's (DMV) inability to perform basic tasks properly. For example, about ten years ago, my wife was involved in a very minor fender bender in a neigboring community. While she and the other driver were inspecting the cars for damage, a police officer came by and made out a report (no damage was done, nor were any insurance claims filed)
Four months later, I get a notice from the DMV that my license is now suspended for failing to respond to their previous notice (which we never received). It seems that the officer, in filling out the report, transposed the insurance company code on my Proof of Insurance Card, and when the reports went through, the company code he used showed that they did not have a policy with that number, so the DMV suspended my license for having a vehicle without insurance.
To make a long story short (too late), I called the police department and the Sergeant and I figured out what happened in less than two minutes. All he needed to do was to make a copy of my insurance card to clear it up, but.....sheesh, officer, how do I bring you my card, the state says my license is revoked?
Anyway, I drove up there and straightened it out, but since my license was technically suspended, I could have lost my car because of an error in processing....Draconian penalties must be reserved for specific offenses, those which are potentially injuroius to the general public.
Here are some facts to chew on. A 1990 study completed by the Department of Motor Vehicles revealed that 65% of all suspended license drivers and 71% of all revoked drivers were likely to continue driving during the suspension/revocation period.
"14% of all intoxicated drivers in fatal crashes have a current suspended or revoked license." National Traffic Safety Administration.
A recent study commissioned by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety found that 8,400 people die each year in accidents involving drivers illegally operating vehicles.
Just what do you consider "potentially injuryious to the general public?"
8,400. That is a lot of dead general public. As for your case, maybe you should have let your wife drive you up there, hmmm?
a.cricket
I think we should pass a law tomorrow requiring the politicians who passed this law have an IQ of 130 or we recind the law. Just an arbitrary figure, seems reasonable. We don't need any science tests here.
I drive 30,000 miles a year, I have to drive defensive all day to avoid idiots not paying attention, cell phone moms in suburbans turning around yelling at kids while swerving across 2 lanes, seniors in permanent daze going 35 on the highway. I'll take a woman driving home from a work happy hour with 2 glasses of wine in her anyday of the week over the nonsense I see. Normal social behavior is not criminal. .15 BAC level is criminal.
My grandaughter was almost killed by a drunk driver putting her in the hospital for 6 weeks.
A friend's 21 year old son was killed by a drunk driver. No insurance again.
My son was picked up for drunk driving and he never drove again when drinking. And he was an alcoholic who died from it (and cancer) at 37. His taxi bill was pretty high, but he did not drive.
I don't think confiscating vehicles will solve the problem but it sure can't hurt.
Why respond to #55, and not my #45 ?
Give up your vehicle now! If you truly do not understand the "public will" in this matter, you would be well advised to barricade yourself into your own safe "space" and protect us all from your illogical choices.
But OTOH, give it a few months, and the "public" will enjoy the target practice amid those who enjoy this society, and those who dont....
Several years ago, my ex-wife's employer put on a drunk driving awareness class for employees and their families. The DWI limit at that time was .10.
Forty people, women and men, all of whom thought they could drink and drive, were given an obstacle course to run in their cars. It was an average suburban street, kids playing ball, etc. All forty people passed the test. From 90lb women to 250lb men, no one failed. After two mixed drinks, or two bottles of beer, your choice, in one hour, ALL FAILED!! EVERY ONE!
The tests were real world tests, kid chasing a ball, car backing out, etc. All were BELOW the legal limit. They could not have been charged at the time.
From that day, until I quit drinking entirely, I decided a taxi was cheap insurance. Just start out in a taxi, while you are thinking with an un-impaired brain. This frees you up from even worrying about where your car is the next day. It's right there in your driveway.
BTW This may not be a scientific test, but, ALL FORTY PEOPLE FAILED,That was good enough for me.
That's awful. I hope your friend has been able to find some peace. As for me, I was lucky - I lost only part of my left knee to a drunk driver. The rest of my friends in the car we were in were killed, and the drunk walked away without a scratch.
And I agree with you - take the damned cars.
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.