Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttidcc.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe From: hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath) Newsgroups: net.flame,net.politics,net.legal,net.auto Subject: Re: DWI Crackdowns Message-ID: <586@ttidcc.UUCP> Date: Mon, 22-Jul-85 22:17:38 EDT Article-I.D.: ttidcc.586 Posted: Mon Jul 22 22:17:38 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 24-Jul-85 07:02:22 EDT References: <202@SCIRTP.UUCP> <378@kontron.UUCP> Reply-To: hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath) Distribution: net Organization: The Cat Factory Lines: 51 Xref: linus net.flame:10351 net.politics:9366 net.legal:1480 net.auto:6344 Summary: In article <378@kontron.UUCP> cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes: > >Why not just pull the license of a DWI? Because judges and juries are >reluctant to prevent someone from being able to get to work; if they >have a motorcycle license, they have no excuse. The courts frequently do pull the licenses of DWIs. The problem is that this has no appreciable effect. Anyone irresponsible enough to drive while drunk is certainly not going to balk at driving without a license, especially when drunk. A friend of mine's car was recently smashed by a drunk driver who was driving without a license in an unregistered vehicle that didn't even belong to him. Fortunately, my friend's car was parked at the time with no one in it. The police were remarkably disinterested. My solution to the problem: _Any_ vehicle, _regardless of ownership_, the driver of which is found to be in violation of the drunk driving laws is subject to confiscation and sale at auction. No exceptions. Proceeds of the auction to go towards funding the drunk driving enforcement program. Excess proceeds to go into a special fund for the aid of victims of drunk drivers. This approach has several advantages: 1. The program is self-supporting -- no tax increases required. 2. No new jails need be built. (We may need some new vehicle impound facilities, but frequent auctions should take care of that problem). 3. The penalty is sufficiently stiff as to make most people think twice about drunk driving or loaning their car to a known drunk. 4. There is enormous legal precedent for this strategy. The Feds have been doing it for years with vehicles used in drug smuggling. The only objection I can think of is that confiscation of a vehicle might put someone out of work. My answer to this is that drunk drivers _kill_. Being dead is about as out of work as you can get. If someone is going to suffer the loss of earning capacity I think it should be the drunk driver and his family, not his victims (who also have families). -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe) Citicorp TTI Common Sense is what tells you that a ten 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. pound weight falls ten times as fast as a Santa Monica, CA 90405 one pound weight. (213) 450-9111, ext. 2483 {philabs,randvax,trwrb,vortex}!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe