DUI license plates

[zakur]

Story (http://www.newarkadvocate.com/news/stories/20031231/localnews/141866.html)

A new law that took effect last week in Ohio requires special license plates for people convicted of driving while intoxicated who are allowed some driving privileges (basically just to and from work).

A quote from a MADD representaive said she hopes the special plates will deter drunken driving and "and maybe it will serve as a type of a warning to other motorists on the roadways, so maybe they'll be more careful around that person who has the special license plate."

Look, honey! It's someone with one of those yellow license plates. Slow down and let him pass. :rolleyes:

Are these special DUI license plates a good idea? Will they really be a deterrent?

[kittynh]

well, here they print the names in the paper. Doesn't seem to work. I am surprised how many well to do people are in the paper. Our local neurologist has been arrested twice.

They had a good program on the radio about what really happens with a DUI. It costs a LOT of money! Lawyers, fees, increased insurance rates! The people on the panel said that if they had KNOWN how much money they would be out, they would never have had that extra drink. Many of them were out over $5,000!

[Luke T.]

My best friend got a DUI in Virginia. He needed to keep driving for his job. He was told that in order to do so, he would have to purchase a gizmo that is wired to the vehicle ignition that you have to blow into and have an acceptable BAC in order for the ignition to start. IIRC, it cost about 800 bucks.

A license plate seems cheaper. And if a cop sees a car with one of those plates in a place it shouldn't be, that would be a pretty good deterrent. You wouldn't be stupid enough to park it in a bar parking lot. So you park around the block and get run over by another drunk driver while you stagger around in the street trying to remember where you parked...

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by zakur
Story (http://www.newarkadvocate.com/news/stories/20031231/localnews/141866.html)

A new law that took effect last week in Ohio requires special license plates for people convicted of driving while intoxicated who are allowed some driving privileges (basically just to and from work).

A quote from a MADD representaive said she hopes the special plates will deter drunken driving and "and maybe it will serve as a type of a warning to other motorists on the roadways, so maybe they'll be more careful around that person who has the special license plate."

Look, honey! It's someone with one of those yellow license plates. Slow down and let him pass. :rolleyes:

Are these special DUI license plates a good idea? Will they really be a deterrent?

I'm surprised the get to have any driving privileges at all. Something like DUI should keep a car away from them for at least a year.

[bug_girl]

my happy cycling days ended when i was hit by a drunk driver with no insurance. i got epilepsy, he got a misdemeanor ticket.
i'm not sure how i would react to the plates, but i do know it might be distracting on the road to see it. now i'd have to flip off people in HumVees and people with DUI plates.

[shanek]

Originally posted by Grammatron
I'm surprised the get to have any driving privileges at all. Something like DUI should keep a car away from them for at least a year.

I agree. If they do have driving privileges restored, then they shouldn't have a scarlet letter emblazoned on their car.

[corplinx]

I think its a great idea. In fact, I want the following license plates also:

"talks on cellphone while driving"
"teenager"
"elderly guy with no insurance"
"soccer mom"

and last but not least:
"slows down to look at accidents"

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by corplinx
I think its a great idea. In fact, I want the following license plates also:

"talks on cellphone while driving"
"teenager"
"elderly guy with no insurance"
"soccer mom"

and last but not least:
"slows down to look at accidents"

You missed the most important one:

"Plays way too much "Grand Theft Auto."

[Richard G]

Public humiliation is a very effective deterent.

[pupdog]

A

If I get plates like that, will my kid stop asking to borrow my car?

[wollery]

Raises an interesting question - what if it's a family car used by two or more people? Does the whole family have to forego the ability to drive where and when they want because one of them's an idiot?

[epepke]

Originally posted by Luke T.
A license plate seems cheaper. And if a cop sees a car with one of those plates in a place it shouldn't be, that would be a pretty good deterrent. You wouldn't be stupid enough to park it in a bar parking lot. So you park around the block and get run over by another drunk driver while you stagger around in the street trying to remember where you parked...

Cops have computers in their cars and practically spend half their careers punching license plate numbers into them. So why do they need a special license plate?

[Tmy]

DUI laws are little more than a money making scam. MADD is also out of control. THere a bunch of people with chips on their shoulders, theyll never be satisfied. They keep lowering the dui limit to silly levels. Theyre statistics are rediculous, really what is an "alcohol related" accident?

As for these plates. How would you know if they are going to work or not???

[epepke]

Originally posted by Tmy
DUI laws are little more than a money making scam. MADD is also out of control. THere a bunch of people with chips on their shoulders, theyll never be satisfied. They keep lowering the dui limit to silly levels. Theyre statistics are rediculous, really what is an "alcohol related" accident?

Well, essentially to support this view, an accident is called "alcohol-related" if any of the parties (not just the drivers) have had any alcohol at all.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by epepke


Well, essentially to support this view, an accident is called "alcohol-related" if any of the parties (not just the drivers) have had any alcohol at all.

So theyre pretty much a buch of liars. Implying that these accidents were caused by people who were driving drunk when really a passenger couldve had 1 beer and theyd call it alcohol related.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Tmy


So theyre pretty much a buch of liars. Implying that these accidents were caused by people who were driving drunk when really a passenger couldve had 1 beer and theyd call it alcohol related.

I guess it's the same logic the use to scare people into not taking drugs. Did anybody see that commercial where they say, "in a recent study most of the drivers involved in an accident tested positive for marijuana." That's shocking until you ask a simple question: Was marijuana cause of all those accidents? I am willing to bet the answer is no.

That said, I think if you caught DUI you should lose your driving privileges no exceptions.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Grammatron



That said, I think if you caught DUI you should lose your driving privileges no exceptions.

You would rather these people lose their jobs, bankrupt their familes and have them move to the welfare rolls cause they had couple of martinis?

Murders dont catch so much grief.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Tmy


You would rather these people lose their jobs, bankrupt their familes and have them move to the welfare rolls cause they had couple of martinis?

Murders dont catch so much grief.

Have you no concept of punishment?

[Tmy]

Punishment? Im fine with that . But it should fit the crime. Im sure youve gotten a speeding ticket. Do you think you should lose your license permanately????

MADD has done a good job making DUI the worst crime imaginable.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Tmy
Punishment? Im fine with that . But it should fit the crime. Im sure youve gotten a speeding ticket. Do you think you should lose your license permanately????

MADD has done a good job making DUI the worst crime imaginable.

I don't think the two ever compared even with out the benefit of MADD.

[Tmy]

More people are killed because of speeding then are killed by drunk drivers.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by Tmy
More people are killed because of speeding then are killed by drunk drivers.

I'm willing to bet they were killed because they were driving like morons at high speed rather than just speeding.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Tmy
More people are killed because of speeding then are killed by drunk drivers.

Although you may be right about speeding causing more deaths than drunk driving, that's a very bad use of statistics.

What you have to do is compare number of deaths from speeding of the total number of people who were speeding, with the number of people who died from drunk driving of the total number of people who drove drunk.

For example, if 2 people die from speeding, and 100 people speed (2% fatality rate), and only 1 person dies from an accident caused by alcohol, and only 2 people drive drunk (a 50% fatality rate), then obviously alcohol would be considered more dangerious than speeding, even if the total number of deaths were less.

[schplurg]

What about drunks who also speed? Doh!

Originally posted by Tmy

You would rather these people lose their jobs, bankrupt their familes and have them move to the welfare rolls cause they had couple of martinis?
I'd rather they used public transportation to get to work for awhile. I have little sympathy for drunk drivers. It's their problem how they adjust their lives around their conviction. I'd prefer they went straight to jail on their first offense. Then they'd REALLY have a problem working now wouldn't they? As it is now, you can have several convictions and never do any jail time.

My sisters boyfriend was recently convicted for his second DUI (or was it DWI?). Cost him $1000s and weekend work programs, and AA meetings. A month after he was convicted he was caught driving his vehicle. Now he may do 30 days behind bars (jail that is) and he's scared of that. As much as I like the guy, he should do jail time and not be able to drive at all for at least a year. He can get to work without a vehicle (but not to his friends house to drink).

None of these deterrents stopped him from driving. Maybe he should have spent time in jail to begin with on his first offense. It's the only thing he seems worried about

I don't see what good a special license plate would do...some good points have already been made by others. I just assume everyone on the road is a potential danger and drive accordingly.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Segnosaur


that's a very bad use of statistics.



I learned it from watching MADD alright! I learned it from watching MADD! *sob*



Hey Im not sayingthat DUI are a good thing, but I just dont think we should destroy peoples lives for making a mistake. Especially since so many other worse crimes get off with relativly little punishment. You could walk up to a stranger and punch him in the face and get less trouble than if you got pulled over (for say, a broken tailight) and end up blowing a .08.

As for taking public transportaion, that is not a realistic option for most people.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Tmy

I learned it from watching MADD alright! I learned it from watching MADD! *sob*


Maybe you should join D.A.M.M.... Drunks against Mad Mothers.

Originally posted by Tmy

Hey Im not sayingthat DUI are a good thing, but I just dont think we should destroy peoples lives for making a mistake. Especially since so many other worse crimes get off with relativly little punishment.

But your original post didn't mention 'worse crimes'... you mentioned speeding and said it was a greater threat than drunk driving. I was just refuting that particular point.

And of 'worse' crimes get off with little punishment, maybe we should be looking at those other crimes to see if they are punished too lightly.

Originally posted by Tmy

You could walk up to a stranger and punch him in the face and get less trouble than if you got pulled over (for say, a broken tailight) and end up blowing a .08.


Does this actually happen? Seems to me punching a stranger would be assault and would result in jail time.

Blowing a 0.08 may result in a liscense suspension, maybe even a fine, but at least where I'm from (Canada) its unlikely you'd be put in prison.

Originally posted by Tmy

As for taking public transportaion, that is not a realistic option for most people.

Why exactly do you say that? I didn't get my driver's liscence until I was in my 30s; I simply arranged my life to be able to get around without a vehicle. I've had co-workers (ones who still had cars) move so they could be closer to bus lines to get to work. Another co-worker recently lost his ability to drive due to health problems, yet he still manages to come to work.

Public transportation isn't a realistic option because people don't want the inconvenience. But if they are going to risk other people's lives by driving drunk, they should realize that they could get burned because of it.

[Tmy]

DAMM through me out because of my political views!

Public transportation is pretty much limited to people who live in an urban center and work a steady 9-5 job.

How many times are there bar fights were nothing happens. Even if a personis arrested they most likely will get off with less punishment than a DUI perp.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Tmy
Public transportation is pretty much limited to people who live in an urban center and work a steady 9-5 job.


The majority of people do live in urban centers, and most work either a 9-5 job, or work hours where at least some public transportation is available.

If you do live out in the middle of nowhere, that should be even more reason to be extra cautious about your driving habits.

Originally posted by Tmy
How many times are there bar fights were nothing happens. Even if a personis arrested they most likely will get off with less punishment than a DUI perp.

Trouble is, with a bar fight, it may be difficult to determine who 'started it'. (If nobody is clearly 'in the wrong', then pressing charges is difficult.) There are other issues as well: risk (a 'bar fight' usually doesn't involve control of a moving vehicle with enoug size to kill), and the people affected (two drunks fighting probably should share the blame, but if a drunk driver runs over a kid, the kid is likely 100% innocent.)

[Tmy]

We take licenses away to protect the public not to punish (most states you automatically lose your license by refusing or failing a breathalzyer test. You havent been convicted of anything). Chances are if a person is just going to work n back they wont be loaded.


If you run over a kid thats more than DUI. Just like if you punch a guy and he dies, thats more than assualt.

AS for mass transit. You bascially have to live in the inner city to have door to door service. Many people take trains in from the burbs. Even they have to drive to the park n rides.

[evildave]

I think we need other special license plate or car decorations:

For one, stickers for how many points on your license, and/or accidents you have had in the last year or so. You see someone with three bright stars, you know to give them LOTS of room, because they're going to do something right out of a blonde joke.

[pupdog]

Hmmm...Why am I thinking "Death Race 2000"?

[epepke]

Originally posted by Grammatron


I guess it's the same logic the use to scare people into not taking drugs. Did anybody see that commercial where they say, "in a recent study most of the drivers involved in an accident tested positive for marijuana." That's shocking until you ask a simple question: Was marijuana cause of all those accidents? I am willing to bet the answer is no.

But that's not what the ad said.

It said that most of the drivers involved in accidents who were tested for drugs tested positive for marijuana. Testing for drugs is not common and practically only happens when there is probable cause, i.e. veiny, glassy eyeballs with blown pupils. So it's not surprising that most tested positive for marijuana. Perhaps the rest were on their way home from a once-yearly appointment with the optometrist.

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by epepke


But that's not what the ad said.

It said that most of the drivers involved in accidents who were tested for drugs tested positive for marijuana. Testing for drugs is not common and practically only happens when there is probable cause, i.e. veiny, glassy eyeballs with blown pupils. So it's not surprising that most tested positive for marijuana. Perhaps the rest were on their way home from a once-yearly appointment with the optometrist.

I'm sorry I misquoted that propaganda BS of a commercial :)

It still makes it sound that people who cause accidents abuse drugs like marijuana and I am certainly "happy" that my tax dollars are paying for these ads.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by Tmy


You would rather these people lose their jobs, bankrupt their familes and have them move to the welfare rolls cause they had couple of martinis?

Murders dont catch so much grief.

Timmy, you ignorant slut.

You're weighing a drunk's family's CONVENIENCE against a legitimate public health hazard. Would you absolve a robber who shot and missed during a hold up?

Accountability. It's not like the drunk bastid couldn't call a friend or a cab. You seem to think driving drunk is okay. What gives?

[Jocko]

Originally posted by Tmy


AS for mass transit. You bascially have to live in the inner city to have door to door service. Many people take trains in from the burbs. Even they have to drive to the park n rides.

So now it has to be door-to-door service. Quite the advocate for the drunks, aren't you? CALL A FREAKIN CAB YOU IDIOT. Otherwise, walk a few blocks from the bus stop. If you can't walk it, what makes you think you can drive it? Sheesh.

[Whoracle]

Well, there does need to be some form of punishment for drunk drivers that works to discourage people from doing while at the same time not ruining their lives. I don't think giving them a "scarlet letter" is going to be a good idea because people are going to adjust their driving around them. People will see the plate and some will slow down, some will speed up to pass, it will just be a mess.

Perhaps we should really just come down hard on them, even the first time. Like a mandatory 1 year jail sentence. I think that would really help because most drunk drivers are just ordinary people, and ordinary people have too much to lose if they go to jail. I think the prospects of a year in jail will help remind you to call a cab or a friend.

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by epepke


Cops have computers in their cars and practically spend half their careers punching license plate numbers into them. So why do they need a special license plate?

Do you really believe this?

Let's pretend it is true that cops spend half their careers punching license plate numbers into the computers in their cars.

1. How long would it take to run one license plate number?

2. How many cars would pass by while this one license plate number was being processed?

3. What are the odds the license plate number would come back with a "Wanted"?

4. If you were a cop, would you waste your time doing this any more after your ran the first few cars through the computer?

If that is all you have by way of objection to a special license plate, it doesn't strike me as a good one.

[Luke T.]

As a former regularly drunk driver and member of D.A.M.M. (I had the T-shirt), I think the DUI laws and punishment are appropriate.

I have been hit by a drunk driver. After he hit me, the drunk tried to talk me into letting him go. I told him I could not in good conscience let him go so that he could go out and ram into somebody else. He was far gone.

And it is a good thing I didn't let him go. As it turned out, he had been arrested for drunk driving exactly one week prior. The cop who responded to the accident happened to be the same cop who had arrested the drunk the week before.

A state trooper once told us he had been hit five times by drunk drivers. And this was while he was on the side of the road with his police lights flashing while writing a speeding ticket.

If somebody is so drunk that they can't see a police car with its lights flashing, well, they should never have gotten behind the wheel.

What punishment do you recommend for someone who has gotten their second DUI? Their third? Their fourth? Their fifth? I know a woman who got five in three years. I don't know why she wasn't put in prison.