Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site grkermi.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!grkermi!andrew
From: andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers)
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.politics,net.legal,net.auto
Subject: Re: DWI Crackdowns
Message-ID: <519@grkermi.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 28-Jul-85 20:25:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: grkermi.519
Posted: Sun Jul 28 20:25:01 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 31-Jul-85 01:36:00 EDT
References: <202@SCIRTP.UUCP> <378@kontron.UUCP> <586@ttidcc.UUCP> <237@SCIRTP.UUCP> <601@ttidcc.UUCP>
Reply-To: andrew@grkermi.UUCP (Andrew W. Rogers)
Distribution: net
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 30
Xref: watmath net.flame:11386 net.politics:10158 net.legal:1919 net.auto:7456

In article <601@ttidcc.UUCP> hollombe@ttidcb.UUCP (The Polymath) writes:
>In article <237@SCIRTP.UUCP> todd@SCIRTP.UUCP (Todd Jones) writes:
>>> _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.  ... etc.
>>
>>In other words, the severity of the penalty depends on the cost of the
>>vehicle used to commit the crime. If I am in my clunker '71 Toyota and
>>you are in your Dad's '86 Mercedes, we both get pulled and blow a DWI
>>worthy breathalyzer reading, I lose my clunker and you get written out
>>of Dad's will. This seems harsh in some cases and wrist-slapping in others.
>
>If you're driving a clunker chances are it's all you can afford.  Taking it
>away  from  you  may  cause you more grief than taking away dad's Mercedes,
>which he can probably afford to replace...

Anyone who could afford an '86 Mercedes could also afford a '71 Toyota (or
similar clunker) _specifically_ for driving after drinking!  Wake up - there
has never been a law that the rich can't somehow circumvent, buy their way out
of, or at least minimize the impact of!  Just ask E.F. Hutton - or Ted Kennedy!

AWR

P.S: Have you Boston-area netters ever noticed that the roadblocks around here
are set up in places like Revere [non-Boston netters substitute your local
blue-collar town] but not in, say, Wellesley [non-Boston netters should be able
to guess what to substitute here] ?  Apparantly there's a difference between
Joe Blow downing a few too many Buds at the Celtics game and J. Blowe III
downing a few too many G & T's at the Hunt Club tailgate picnic!  Has anyone
noticed such 'selective enforcement' in other areas?