Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekcrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!tektronix!tekcrl!terryl
From: terryl@tekcrl.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: DWI Crackdowns
Message-ID: <217@tekcrl.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Aug-85 17:18:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: tekcrl.217
Posted: Fri Aug  2 17:18:02 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 4-Aug-85 10:14:19 EDT
References: <378@kontron.UUCP>, <5800014@convexs>
Lines: 26

>_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.  
>****************************************************************************

>"No exceptions":

>Fine, so now someone steals my car, goes joyriding, gets drunk, gets caught,
>and my car is sold...

>Fine, so now I'm stationed overseas, my family is here, my brother-in-law 
>uses my car without me knowing it, leaves a party, etc...

>Fine, so now someone rents a car, etc...

>Under Texas law, the OWNER of a vehicle is liable for any and all damages 
>caused by any driver of the vehicle, if operated with the owner's permission --
>all it would take would be one court case to show that this included DWI as 
>well as "damages."  Please note that "with the owner's permission" part.
>That's important...

     The point that is always being made is that let's not take responsibility
for our own actions, which is really sad. It appears to have started by making
bars and taverns responsible if they serve alcohol to already intoxicated
patrons, and maybe that was a good idea, but with what people are proposing
here takes it to too far of an extreme.