DUI laws could face overhaul

IT IS ABOUT TIME.

Maybe if drunk driving offenders started receiving more severe punishments, it would deter them from doing it again and prevent others from doing it at all.

First time offenses should result in those yellow license plates. I keep my distance from those!

I committed one dui and spent 7k to remain out of jail.

You need a means of transportation

Laws are Draconian(strict)

Even if my son got killed by a drunk driver i would understand--there is such a thing of addiction from genes. f the laws; lets race!

I advocate driving under influences like cocaine,it actually helps motor responses.

Kyle,
What kind of idiot are you? If you don't have anything intelligent to say maybe you should just shut your mouth! Maybe you should start your own thread instead of imposing your idiotic responses on those with serious issues that people actually care about. You could title your thread, "if you want to exchange posts with a complete asshole, click here!"

kyle you are a child playing in an adult world and your immaturity is quite obvious.

hell its only about the loot anyways...
besides it culls the herd

godless by choice wrote:

hell its only about the loot anyways...
besides it culls the herd

What the hell does that mean?

"lois"
What the hell does that mean?

duh....the courts really only want the money involved in dui's.and since we have people living longer,wars and accidents keep the population in check.

No the courts purpose is to enforce the law and maintain safety and order in society. Playing the money card because you don't think people should take responsibility for their actions is ridiculous. Using your logic...get drunk....get in an accident...wipe out a car full of people...and the drunk does everyone a huge favor by helping to keep the population in check. godless by choice, you are not lightly burnt, you are fried.

but you would have thought so. Now have the idiotic plates and am allowed to be profiled by every cop in Akron. why no plates yet for the pedophiles? they ruin more lives than drunk drivers who were railroaded like myself

One does not supercede the other. Two seperate issues. Wrong is Wrong. Yellow plates tell me, keep your distance. Shed light elsewhere to take the attention ofF yourself is lame.... you're an endangerment to society. WEAK. VERY WEAK.

I think the yellow plates are a little silly... really what is the purpose of them? But I also don't think there is any point for a drunk driving to try to play the victim card. Drunk drivers- your not the victim. My 8 year old nephew who is in his early grave because of a drunk driver is a victim. So maybe you didn't kill anyone, but the point is that YOU COULD HAVE. You just got lucky... that time.

Not long ago I got a DUI. The experience has dramatically changed how I view this issue....

I never had wanted to drink and drive; it was just part of the 'going out' scene. I generally tried to make sure I was 'okay' to drive after being at the bar.....but I never really realized what I was risking every time I drank and drove, and how easily everything could have slipped away. I can definitely say I will never drink and drive again.....not even one beer.

That being said, I think the current penalties for 1st time offenses might be too harsh. Six months of suspension for someone like me, who at age 29 has never been in ANY trouble(never even had a speeding ticket) is just plain excessive.

However, the penalties for repeat offenders are definitely FAR too lenient. I can't imagine ever going through the experience of getting a DUI again.

My suggestion: Shorten the suspension period for 1st-timers to 90 days, and increase the fines and suspension periods for repeat offenders.

Freda wrote:

First time offenses should result in those yellow license plates. I keep my distance from those!

I think that the state should take this idea one step further. The proposed child molester plates should be the same as the "party plates". Who would risk a DUI if you would be mistaken for a child molester all the time?

Freda wrote:

Playing the money card because you don't think people should take responsibility for their actions is ridiculous.

I totally agree. People who think this is for money need to wake up. DUI laws are to protect the masses. And from "godless by choice"s little quote (“lightly burnt,but still smokin”) I would guess that godless is one of those smoking morons who complains about the smoking ban because they can't do what makes THEM happy anymore, even though by doing what makes THEM happy they are hurting others.

One DUI, jail time, fine.

Second DUI, more jail time, bigger fine.

Third DUI, even more jail time, huge fine and confiscation of automobile no matter who it belongs to.

Notice I said nothing about loss of driver's license. It never makes any difference. These perps will just continue driving without a valid license. But when they lose thier car for good, they will start to take notice.

Roger wrote:

One DUI, jail time, fine.
Second DUI, more jail time, bigger fine.
Third DUI, even more jail time, huge fine and confiscation of automobile no matter who it belongs to.
Notice I said nothing about loss of driver's license. It never makes any difference. These perps will just continue driving without a valid license. But when they lose thier car for good, they will start to take notice.

DUI 1: 6 months jail time
DUI 2: 2 years jail time
DUI 3: life

The problem is the ever-decreasing BAC limits. The vast, vast majority of fatality accidents resulting from DUI are way higher than a marginal case - we're talking .15 and above.

It all comes down to a one size fits all law pushed by an extremely powerful lobby (led by MADD) interested mostly in re-instituting Prohibition - because anyone who does something They disapprove of is by definition a degenerate who should be locked up.

If they raised the limit back to a reasonable level and allowed some wiggle room for people who can obviously handle their drinks better at the marginal region, I'd be big time in favor of massive penalties to de-incentivize driving drunk (and that means obviously impaired). However, the current scheme is too much of a revenue generator for municipalities and the Highway Patrol and MADD is too powerful for anything to change in a common sense direction.