POLITICAL: The definition of DUI and the Gooferment empowering penalties


Listened to D&D (DEMINSKI & DOYLE) on 101.5 FM the other day.

And, gave them the following “feedback”. (Their webpage prevents cut’n’paste. Argh!)

*** begin quote ***

D&D on “drinking and driving”

I think the penalties are wrong and counter-productive.

First, if drinking and driving are soon bad, then my generation should have died out.

Second, “they” keep lowering the “limits” to capture more revenue. It used to be 1.25 for “DRUNKEN driving”. Now, it’s 0.80 for “DRINKING and driving”.

Third and probably worst, it confuses the definition of “crime” — something that causes death, injury, or damage to property. A driver, who is snagged for the first time in a random stop, has not hurt anyone.


*** end quote ***

In a short feedback square, it’s impossible to lay out what is so totally wrong about the biased question. It was designed to get folks talking about increasing the suspension time and prison time for DUI.


Even the hosts readily and quickly admitted that their question had no chance of “solving the problem” (i.e., folks drive while on the suspended / revoked list and breath interlock devices can be bypassed).

So, let’s go into a little depth.

Historically, “Drinking and Driving” was a not a “big deal”. In fact, unless there was an accident, it wasn’t enforced.

The politicians and bureaucrats want to get into our pocketbooks to drain more wealth for their unconstitutional activities. More money is always needed!

SO let’s start with reinstating the Fourth Amendment, and end the random capricious checks for “DUI”.

If there is an accident, an injury, or Heaven Forbid a death, then there has been a crime. The accused should be tried and forced to make restitution.

If it’s just an accident with property damage, then the individual should be put on notice that the NEXT time there will be SEVERE penalties. An injury or fatality goes directly to an enhanced punishment!

For a second offense, jail time should be mandatory.

Subsequent offenses should have suitably longer imprisonment.

That will END the problem with a minimum expense to the taxpayer.


# – # – # – # – # 

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: