Would you favor the issuance of "DUI" plates to drivers convicted 3 times of drunk driving?

[Stinky The Clown]

A Maryland Delegate (state legislature rep) has introduced such a bill. The first three letters of the plate would be "DUI" and the person would be required to have the plates for five years following reinstatement of his license.

Would favor such laws?

[TexasObserver]

1. Make it 2 times, and I'm on board.

But for 3 convictions for DWI? I want them MAKING license plates, not using them.

I'm a real bleeding heart about incarceration, but anyone who gets 3 DWI convictions has driven drunk hundreds of times and is a real danger to society.

[glowing]

2. I say 2 as well. Once is too many times.

[Maru Kitteh]

59. Write me down for 2x also. At 3 times they should forfeit permanently,

And they should be jailed until they stop driving. Driving is NOT a right.

[emilyg]

123. +1

[monmouth]

3. In many states, after three you lose the license for life....n/t

[blueamy66]

35. The DUIs need to be within a specific period.

In AZ, it's every 7 years. So, after 7 years, your slate is wiped clean.

[whyverne]

4. Only if speeders get a similar punishment.

Speeding and "too fast for conditions" still cause the majority of accidents and fatalities but we've become fixated on drinking and driving.

[Maru Kitteh]

62. Are you confused about why people get pissed at assholes who drive drunk?

And for what it's worth, I think speeding at rates of 20 mph over the speed limit should be treated exactly like a DUI, because it entails the same kind of assholishness - total and deliberate disregard for the safety of others for the sake of selfishness, amusement or convenience.

[Hello_Kitty]

103. Same with texting.

I'm so sick of seeing people looking at their Blackberrys instead of the road.

[Turbineguy]

5. Would the letters

be scarlet?

[Goblinmonger]

108. Yes, because Hawthorne's allegory

about the horrible effects of society vs nature written during the Romantic period is spot on to the crime of DUI.

[depakid]

6. And this would accomplish exactly what?

[Stinky The Clown]

8. I'll bet some people mentioned in this story have ideas to share ....

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/legislature/bal-plates0128,0,1030526.story

[TorchTheWitch]

7. no

It would be grossly unfair to innocent others that use the same car.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

34. This is the correct answer. -nt

[SoCalDem]

60. and in states like mine, that transfer tags with the car, it would cause DMV mayhem

:)

[Soylent Brice]

75. DING DING DING

[Jakes Progress]

142. Dung Dung Dung

Lousy excuse.

I think the License Plate is the wrong way to go. I think First Offense is 1000 hours of community service and find commensurate with income. Second Offense is loss of license for a year and fine commensurate with income. Third Offense is loss of license, incarceration, and completion of substance abuse program. Fourth offense is time for serious action.

[LynneSin]

144. So the drunk puts the car & plate under their spouse's name

what does it solve?


Or they register their car in neighboring DC/DE/VA/WV/PA where they don't have these kinds of laws?

I like the concept that they HAVE NO PLATES after 3 convictions.

[old mark]

9. I think anyone with 3 DUI arrests should never be given a license again, no

matter what.
Locally, we had a man who killed another driver while driving drunk. He had 40 previous DUI arrests, had no license or insurance and was driving a car registered to a friend, drunk as a hog. He played golf with a local judge, who thought driving drunk was funny.

The drunk went to prison, long overdue, and I believe the judge should have gone along with him.

I man who did work on our house is currently in state prison for killing a pedestrian while driving drunk. He has previous DUI's as well.
I know and like the man, but another man with a family is dead because of assinine, stupid, self indulgent behavior and I find no excuse for that.


mark

[notesdev]

33. +1

It's the old "tell me three times" theme - that drunk driver is clearly showing he has no intention of altering the behavior, so unless we are willing to tolerate drunks behind the wheel, it should be a permanent ban on driving, or at least 10 years' ban plus some jail time, something severe enough to break the behavior pattern.

I hope the family of the deceased sues the hell out of the drunk and the judge.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

36. Correction: TorchTheWitch's above, plus this, is the correct answer. -nt

[Obamanaut]

43. +1 nt

[Soylent Brice]

78. i agree. my wife and i were hit by a drunk driver when she was pregnant with our first child.

the lady had 6 other previous DUI's. she was driving that night drunk, with no license, and no insurance.

we received our first court ordered restitution check last year, with 5 more to come.

no amount of money could have made up for the potential loss of our child though.

the 3 strikes and you're out rule for felonies seems like a good idea for repeat DUI offenders. either revoke license privileges indefinitely, or until they've successfully completed an alcohol rehab program, and perhaps a minimum X amount of years suspension thereafter, or something along those lines.

[old mark]

107. Murder is murder, no matter what the weapon. You KNOW you can't drink

and drive if you have several DUI's, and if you persist, you show at least disregard for the lives of others, and you put your alcohol consumption ahead of their lives.
Prison, not nametags...
I agree - you don't know who is driving the car.
mark

[Soylent Brice]

115. yup

:thumbsup:

[Haole Girl]

119. I agree, old mark

Especially since I personally knew two people killed by drunk drivers.

[Luciferous]

137. +1

[spoony]

156. Agreed. nt

[DrDan]

10. why not "SPDR" for those with 3 speeding tickets

and since it only identifies the owner of the auto and not necessarily the driver . . .

How about ABUSR for anyone convicted of spousal abuse. . . . or child abuse.

No - I don't support it. We have laws to deal with this.

[MindPilot]

73. This time I agree with you. n/t

:fistbump:

[we can do it]

97. How About DUMB

[DrDan]

122. for registered republicans?

or sara palin supporters?
or pibgoy listeners?

[WVRICK13]

11. NO

they shouldn't have a license plate and should not be allowed to own a car or drive period. When three strikes and you're out makes sense.

[MicaelS]

26. Agree 100%

No car, no plates, no drivers license.

[we can do it]

98. +10000

[Jim__]

12. No. According to the article, the purpose would be to let people know that the driver ...

... may be drunk. I don't think this would be very effective. Usually, if you are near enough to a drunk driver to read these plates, you know they're drunk by the way they're driving. Also, are there any stats to indicate that people injured by drunk drivers would not have been injured if they realized the driver was drunk?

The real purpose is public humiliation. I'm not sure of the effectiveness of public humiliation in altering behavior; and I think it often has a bad effect - alienating the individual and making them feel less empathy, and even hostility, toward society.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

39. This is an EVEN MORE correct answer. -nt

[MH1]

92. Agree, good answer.

[SmileyRose]

13. The scarlet letter.

We don't need to know who the bad drivers are, we just need them off the road.

[Goblinmonger]

109. Fail.

The Scarlet Letter, in the novel, is actually a sign of strength and redemption. Sorry to burst your thematic bubble.

[SmileyRose]

163. Ahem

IMHO The community slapped that thing on her for reasons other than strength and redemption. --- The beauty of art is the many ways it can be interpreted. If you disagree and want to start that discussion fine. But getting all snooty is really not necessary.

[Goblinmonger]

165. Snooty?

Whatever. Sure the Puritans put it on her as a symbol of shame (after deciding to not kill her as they normally would have). But the joke was on them. It was because of that letter that she was able to live a good life. It was the openness of her sin that gave her redemption while the sin of Dimmesdale remained hidden and killed him. I don't think there is any other way to interpret that art.

My point is that everyone just likes to throw out the Scarlet Letter for stuff like this and it doesn't make sense because they ARE referencing the work of art and in that work of art the Scarlet Letter is not a symbol of shame but one of redemption.

I also don't understand how I am snooty for pointing out the thematic realities of a piece of literature but you aren't snooty for pointing out your political opinions about a license plate. Or should I just let people go around misapplying a piece of literature because I will come across as more well read than them?

[SmileyRose]

167. Well read

think about what you just said about the scarlet letter.

Apply it to the license plate

Now you understand my point.

[Goblinmonger]

172. That's seriously your argument?

You are against the license plates because you think they will give redemption to the DUI offenders and let them live a better life? I call bullshit.

[SmileyRose]

173. You can't hear me.

I've tried 3 times now. I give up.

Hope you have a very nice weekend.

[FBaggins]

14. Not unless it's a plate for a bicycle. N/t

[WCGreen]

15. After the 2nd conviction, instal that inhaler device that won't let the

car start if the driver blows over .08....

[blueamy66]

37. .08?

You're joking, right? The cut off for the "inhaler" device is much lower than that.

[WeDidIt]

16. Give them DUI Parking Spots, too

Just as there are handicap parking spots, there should also be DUI parking spots.

The two or three spots furthest from the entry should be reserved for people with those plates. And if you have a DUI plate, failure to park in a DUI parking spot carries a $250 fine.

If they go some place and get drunk, it'll be harder for them to get back to their car.

Oh, and I agree with the two strikes suggestion above. Two strikes and you get the plate for five years. Three strikes and you lose your license for life.

[DrDan]

20. how fair is this for other drivers of that car

there are 1-car families with more than 1 driver.

[we can do it]

99. If They Are Dumb Enough To Let This Idiot Drive Others Should Know

[DrDan]

121. why would you assume the driver of this car is the one with a DUI/DWI conviction?

Further, what would keep the convictee from driving another car?

This legislation is fraught with problems. It will never survive any sane scrutiny. Guess that will make it a candidate for passage in the GOP-filled SC legislature.

[Politicub]

17. I'm generally against punishments that evoke the Scarlett Letter

But I'm not surprised about this proposal. It won't make a dimes worth of difference, but will probably pass to make people "feel safer."

[Coyote_Bandit]

18. No, but

I think that courts should be required to make information regarding criminal convictions including misdemeanors easily available to all citizens. I am able to find out if the guy next door is a sex offender. I'd also like to know if he has a history of criminal violence or fraud, deceit, drug dealing or theft.

Same thing with civil actions. I'd like to be ab le to check court records to see if the guy I'm thinking about doing business with has a history of being sued for not paying his bills. Or if the professional I'm thinking of hiring has been sued for professional negligence/malpractice. Or if he is sue happy with a history of bringing numerous suits.

I favor transparency. I don't favor scarlet letters.

[tularetom]

19. With 3 DUI's they shouldn't be allowed anywhere NEAR a car

And the only one they should even be riding in is the one that takes their sorry ass to jail.

Same for cell phone/texting drivers.

[NashVegas]

164. Exactly

[Lochloosa]

21. Hey Bob can I borrow your car? Mine's at the shop and I'll be fired if I don't show up at work.

How many times will you be pulled over before getting to work?

[onenote]

151. if the only person you know that has a car you can borrow is a recidivist drunk driver

you need to get some new friends

[sarge43]

22. No

1. Have a problem with branding people after they've served their sentence.

2. If someone has piled up three DUI convictions, a set of letters on their license plate will stop them from trying for a fourth? Attempting to shame someone out of addictive behavior does not work; in fact, it's often counterproductive.

3. If MD Del wants to do something positive to save lives, introduce a bill making a second DUI conviction a permanent loss of license and if caught driving again and convicted, jail for attempted murder.

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. No

Public humiliation is never a good idea.

[adamuu]

24. no.

I doubt it improves safety (A vehicle runs you down, will you even notice the plate?) Can you propose a scenario where it improves safety?
Meanwhile
It may lead to unfair treatment from authorities
And it amounts to a badge of shame.

[Atman]

25. It's absolutely stupid, feel-good legislation that would acheive nothing

As one other poster pointed out, a guy in his town had 40 duis. A plate doesn't disable the engine or lock out the driver. This is about revenge and humiliation, nothing more.

.

[Stinky The Clown]

27. I'm just curious ......

.... suddenly, after quite a few replies, this post gets an unrec. I'm not complaining, that's your privilege if you're a member of the DU. But why?

Was it the asking of a question without stating my own position on the matter?

Was it the topic?

Was it the proposed law?

Was it me?

I'm just curious. Why did you unrec this thread? The subject matter may be controversial (which is, indeed, why I posted it). But simply asking about it?

[FSogol]

28. Why not just give drunks their own lane?

:shrug:

[TheCowsCameHome]

42. Yep. One lane, with travel permitted in both directions.

[FSogol]

56. The text messagers could use it also. n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

58. Of course - to report accidents..............

[TorchTheWitch]

55. since when do drunks stay in their own lane?

[FSogol]

63. It could be a big wide lane with curvy lines. n/t

[donco6]

29. What would it accomplish?

?

[LeftishBrit]

30. No - I would favour their not getting their license back at all by that stage!

[sendero]

31. You should never get another plate..

... if you've been convicted 3 times. No license either.

[Happyhippychick]

32. I would favor voting out the moran delegate who came up with this.

[PacerLJ35]

38. How about NO plates...

If someone was caught three times with a DUI, chances are they have driven far more times drunk without getting caught. Someone with that little self-control doesn't need to drive. They can take the bus or ride a bike.

[TheCowsCameHome]

41. +1

:thumbsup:

[Coventina]

40. No. They should lose their license. I mean, if the point is that

other drivers need to be aware of them because they are potentially dangerous, then they shouldn't be driving at all.

If it's just about public shame and humiliation, well, I thought we had left that medieval attitude behind.

[spanone]

44. no. take them off the road.

[rucky]

45. 3 times & they shouldn't ever be driving again.

If I fired a weapon into a crowd - even one time - I wouldn't be allowed to carry a gun. I don't see how this is any different.

[Javaman]

46. Odd logic...

one would think that after the second one they wouldn't have a license let alone a car with such a plate.

[rocktivity]

47. Punish the driver, not the car.

Put the DUI stigmata on the license. Cops who are low on their ticket quotas would unfairly target such cars and they may not have the "perp" at the wheel--what if the perp's spouse, child or friend is driving? Besides, getting around it is as easy as buying, renting, or borrowing another car.

Come to think of it, why stop with drunk drivers? How about repeat speeders and moving violaters, too? In fact, why not do it to ALL ex-convicts? Are rapists, child molesters, domestic abusers, and embezzlers worthy of being on the road simply because a car was NOT their weapon of choice?

---------------------------------------------------
rocktivity

[hunter]

71. I punish all my cars, and it makes me happy when other people punish theirs.

Cars are tools of Satan.

:evilgrin:

[MindPilot]

90. I jacked mine up the other day.

It seemed to like it. :silly:

[-wulf-]

48. I agree with others

after the third time a person should lose their privilege to drive. I think on the second conviction that person should lose their license for at least a year.

After a third conviction, I think the idea of some sort of public humiliation is a weak and in effective option. I think by that point, it is safe to say that such an individual doesn't really care if they drive drunk.

I'm not a big fan of these types of "scarlet letter" laws. It is almost always a weak punishment and doesn't serve any purpose.

[MH1]

93. "doesn't really care" - probably not true

many alcoholics want to quit. Ever experienced addiction?

Some of those don't have ready access to alternative transportation. They may loathe the idea of drinking and driving but the compulsion to drink is stronger.

I don't disagree with any of the sane posts on this thread - take away license after x number of convictions, and so forth - but I'm noticing an unfortunate lack of compassion for the addict on this thread. Sure they screw up the lives of others (don't I know it) but it really is not, in most cases, because they want to.

[-wulf-]

174. Compassion isn't an issue here

We can have all of the compassion we want for an alcoholic, while at the same time not allowing them to drive if they've been convicted of a DUI.

If anything, one could argue that taking away the privilege to drive from someone who has been convicted of a DUI because they're an alcoholic is in fact, an act of compassion. It is an effort to prevent them from also becoming a murderer.

[GoneOffShore]

49. No - Not a good idea.

[madinmaryland]

50. No. I thought public shaming/humilation went out after the 1600's and the Puritans.

[pipi_k]

51. Lots of pros and cons going on here...

Some people say that public humiliation never works. That's a little absolutist, I think. How can anyone say it NEVER works? Sometimes it does. But as the article says, the special license plate or sticker gives people behind a "heads up" and allows them to back off. The only thing it won't do is give fair warning to people coming in the other direction.

Taking the offender's license away is another choice. Well, some people drive...and drive drunk...without a license. Really, does anybody actually believe that a drunk is going to remember...or care...that he doesn't have a license before he jumps behind the wheel?

Take his car away...another choice. But what if there are others in the family who need to use the car?


I really don't know what the best solution is besides taking these people off the roads completely, and that would probably mean jail...but we need to make sure they get appropriate counseling for their drinking problem, not just put them in jail for a month or so and then let them out to drive drunk again and again.


PS...regarding anyone who thinks some measures are too harsh...I just wonder if that opinion would still hold if they had a friend or family member who was injured or killed by a drunk driver. I nearly lost both my children, in separate incidents a few years apart, to drunk drivers. I have zero sympathy for the poor injured feelings of anyone out repeatedly driving drunk.

[Democrat_in_Houston]

52. Why would anyone be driving with 3 convictions?

After three convictions, there should be NO restatement of his license!

[-wulf-]

53. Error by the state to do so

Think about it from a liability point of view. If One were in a wreck and was hit by a drunk driver with a DUI tag and significantly injured, could that person not at least take the state to court on the grounds that buy issuing the DUI tag, the state was openly acknowledging that it considered the DUI-branded driver a hazard and risk to public to safety. I think on these grounds, the state could be held accountable for negligence.

[noamnety]

133. Great answer.

If the person is deemed still a risk to others, they shouldn't have a license at all.

Furthermore, the label is likely to lead to third party harassment, and become a danger to the driver themselves (keeping the cycle alive). It's harder to rehabilitate yourself from an addiction when you are in a perpetual state of depression from it and aren't allowed to move forward. I don't see how making it harder for them to recover serves society in any way.

[SallyMander]

54. We already have this in Ohio

They don't say DUI, but they are yellow with red letters i think... they are known colloquially as "party plates" :eyes:

I always think, what if it's the poor person's kid or spouse or whoever driving? Doesn't seem fair unless only one person ever drives the car!


ETA, LOL, i just googled to find an image and i turned this one up :rofl:

[Crabby Appleton]

65. I'm pretty sure she's not on the Ohio DUI plate

Looks more like this

[SallyMander]

74. OMG!!! when i posted that link, it was a bunch of license plates

Some of them were labeled "Muslim," "Democrat," "Jew," etc...

And now it is too late to edit.... :blush: :blush: :blush:

Mods, help!!!

[Crabby Appleton]

85. She's kinda cute

seems like a nice girl

[SallyMander]

105. This is the pic it was supposed to be

I am so embarrassed :blush:

[madinmaryland]

95. Nice post! That made this whole thread worthwhile!!

:woohoo:

[Fla_Democrat]

76. I would almost

almost, I say, DUI for that. :evilgrin:


I wonder if there's a sliding scale... say, what could I be burdened with if I drank an O'Doules and jingled my car keys? :beer:

Maybe she wouldn't be my punishment, maybe I would be hers....
<old punch line>..... "I don't know what he did, but I stepped on a duck."

[Orsino]

57. "The person"?

How many people do you think might drive the same car? Would you want them all so labeled?

[treestar]

61. People with revoked licenses drive all the time

If they get caught, the penalty is very steep, basically because, the law has to be self enforcing.

So this might be a good thing. Rather than revoke the license and wait until something bad happens, at least the other drivers have some warning that a car near them may contain an intoxicated driver.

[ensho]

64. 3 times and you lose your license forever

nt

[closeupready]

66. Not insofar as it is inconsistent with the idea that after someone has paid their debt to society,

that's the end of it; they shouldn't have to be tattooed or scarlet lettered.

Now if I became aware that someone had been convicted of 3 DUI's, I would make sure that people know that, but I believe the government is already too intrusive and this smacks of totalitarianism.

[Statistical]

67. In favor but I would make it on first offense.

And make the plates cost $300 per year.

Other than that a great bill.

[MindPilot]

82. Why should drunk drivers get a discount?

My plates were $459 this year.

[Statistical]

91. Ouch. Ok $300 more than the prevailing 'non-drunk' rate. I think my plates were $180 for 3 years.

[slackmaster]

68. No - Anyone with three DUIs should be permananetly banned from driving

:hi:

[MindPilot]

69. As regulars on this forum know, I have issues with a lot of traffic laws

and their draconian enforcement.

But someone dumb enough to be on their third DUI conviction shouldn't even own a motor vehicle let alone be licensed to operate one.


Edited to add, I question the whole idea of license plates in the first place. It is a public identification method and also an indicator that the appropriate fees have been paid to the licensing agency. It has nothing to do with the operator's competency or the vehicle's roadworthiness. It is really no different than if everyone were required to display their SNN on their clothing or post a sign in front of their house showing their property taxes had been paid.

[Hello_Kitty]

102. I got my driver's license suspended because I got pulled over for expired tags.

Really burned me up because while, admittedly, my car was illegal I was not violating any traffic laws with my driving.

[MindPilot]

114. Similar thing thing -- my registration sticker was partially stolen

It was clear that there used to be a complete and current sticker there before someone tried to lift it. But I came out that morning to one ticket for an improperly displayed registration and another for being parked on a public street with an improperly displayed registration.

[hunter]

70. I think they should burn the car on the side of the road as a warning to other drivers...

... with the drunk driver sitting handcuffed on the curb ahead of the scene covered with fire suppressant foam so he doesn't get burned and wearing a traffic cone as a dunce hat.

[MindPilot]

72. How about the DOT just dispatch a roadside execution unit?

They can just come right to the scene, execute the offending driver using the particular method approved by that state and send the body to the Soylent Green plant.

[hunter]

79. Oh, it's not about the driver so much. Confiscate his license and make him walk home.

For me it's all about reducing the number of cars on the road, especially cars likely to be driven by drunk drivers.

I also think people should be allowed to silence car alarms by any means necessary including (but not limited to) sledge hammers, flame throwers, rocket propelled grenades, thermite, shaped plastic explosive charges, catapults, and giant steam rollers.

[MindPilot]

89. +1 and I would like to add loud audio systems.

A flaming motor vehicle releases a lot of toxins into the atmosphere; it's not exactly the most green disposal method. I suggest the Roadside Execution Unit include a mobile crusher. Much more environmentally friendly while delivering just as much entertainment value as the fire.

Edited to add: Crushed vehicles helps the UAW!

[BoWanZi]

80. Now thats an idea I I like! (nt)

n/t

[jmowreader]

160. So if I wanted to REALLY piss off someone I hated...

I could just go steal his car, drink a pint of rum and drive past the police station going as fast as I possibly could until someone came out to stop me.

[hunter]

162. Well what's the point of doing that?

Get drunk, steal the car, and drive it into his house. Then get out and puke on his feet.

Piss of your ex and let him call the police... It's much simpler that way.

[jmowreader]

168. I think you know the point of doing that

If the punishment for drunk driving is to have your car burned to a crisp in front of you while you're standing there watching it happen, you could really FUCK with that Republican neighbor of yours (assuming you didn't care whether you went to prison for car theft, of course) by getting shitfaced and taking his car. When the cops pull you over, they find out you're drunk and burn your neighbor's car in front of you. You'll get five years but he won't have a car--and the way insurance works, they'll just say your neighbor didn't take steps to protect his property so they refuse to pay.

[mudplanet]

77. In New Mexico, yes. The rate of fatalities due to drunk driving here

is shocking. And half the time when you read about these incidents the drunk has had six, seven, even eleven fines for DUI (no exaggeration)! He or she is now driving without a license and having a license plate that screams "check me out" might be a help.

Frankly, after six in a lifetime I'd prescribe a couple of years in jail. But in New Mexico (and, I suspect, some other states) the drunk is often so well connected locally that they continue to cut them loose.

I don't drive much, but about every 10th time I'm out on the road I witness a drunk, as indicated by 1)running a stop light and crossing three lanes of traffic to make a left turn, or 2) weaving continually in and out of the lane.

You want to be a drunk, knock yourself out. Crawl into a hole someplace and drink yourself to death. But don't get behind the wheel of a vehicle.

I hate control freaks, but I'm pretty sick of picking up the paper to find an entire family murdered by some drunk driving the wrong way on the interstate, and that he has seven prior convictions for DUI. Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me seven times, I deserve what I get.

They remind me of the character Cain in "Year One."
"Oh, no. Look what I've done."
"Oh, no. Look what I've done again."
"Oh, no. Look what I continue to do again and again."

That many DUI's might as well get you confined permanently to a mental institution as a dangerous sociopath.

[w8liftinglady]

81. my only objection is-what if other family members use the car?

are they penalized?Growing up in an alcoholic household-you can't hold a whole family hostage for an individual's behavior.Take his license...he'll just drive a different vehicle...trust me.

[we can do it]

104. Who Do You Think Lends the Person with No License a Car?

we had a serial drunk driver on our block, and family members continually let him borrow cars and he continued to drive drunk - I still say smash the car, it makes lending a car to a drunk unappealing

[Matariki]

83. No. Not fair to anyone else in the family who drives.

Anyway THREE CONVICTIONS?? That should result in a revoked license, not special license plates.

[DearAbby]

84. 3 times???

Screw that....Once, first offense. DUI Plates...that should deter drinking and driving.

[sabrina 1]

86. No, I'm not in favor of scarlet letters.And before

anyone tells me I'd feel different if I was a victim of an irresponsible driver, I have been. And it changed my life when the most important person in it was killed by a driver who should not have been on the road. Still, neither I nor my family ever wanted another life destroyed. It doesn't bring back the person who was killed and revenge and the idea that if we keep punishing people, all will be better, are not solutions.

Giving up morality and principles for not even a guarantee of more safety, is something I thought the 'left' was against. What would be achieved by this? It's like all authoritarian knee-jerk reactions to every problem, and someone probably has a relative who'll profit from it.

But it isn't about making people safer, that's for sure.

[lame54]

87. can we get the same for people who voted for Bush twice?

[Skittles]

88. no

I don't think public humiliation is ever the answer

[Sheepshank]

94. Mulling this over

So the driver is shamed...and maybe avoids driving the car? I'm ok with that.
How is any different than a Sex predator/conviction list the public can access?
Does public humilation work for DUI rehab? Who knows, and maybe not in all cases. But it's clear other rehab options (fines, license revocation, prison time) had not worked in the past...so I don't care they are a little humiliated.

[we can do it]

96. No Smash Their Car After the 3rd Time

[AzDar]

100. Would that serve any legitimate purpose other than harassment?

I can't think of any.

[Beetwasher]

101. How About They Just Never Get To Drive Again?

n/t

[JBoy]

106. Issue them a bus pass stamped DUI

[ddeclue]

110. NO. Grow up. The Constitution protects people against cruel and unusual punishment.

There is NO such thing as absolute safety and I'm NOT interested in living in a nanny state like England.

Doug D.
Orlando, FL

Oh and by the way, I rarely drink, never more than one drink and never DUI so this isn't about me wanting to drink and drive.

[Stinky The Clown]

116. Your reply is framed as if you're responding to me, personally, and not the question.

Why?

Nowhere in my OP do I state my own view. Or even hint at it.

So why did you respond as you did?

[ddeclue]

125. because YOU asked?

:rofl:

[Stinky The Clown]

126. Shame on you. That's snark, not an honest answer

See, here's the thing. I think you fucked up your answer. I think you think I espoused that view. I think you failed to comprehend, jumped to a conclusion, and now are unwilling to admit that.

Its okay to be wrong. It is even more okay to be man enough to admit it.

[ddeclue]

127. SO go ahead and admit you are wrong.. I stand by MY answer.

[Stinky The Clown]

128. You didn't give an answer. You gave a one line snark that is disingenuous on its face.

Typical. But that's the fact. So you go ahead and stand by your non-answer and I'll stand by my assertion that you suffer at a fundamental level from the fear to admit personal errors.

[ddeclue]

139. I have no error to admit. Get over yourself already.

[Stinky The Clown]

149. You misread the OP and now your stuck with your answer

Get in touch with yourself.

Good grades for you, though, in the bravado department,

"hahaha"

[ddeclue]

155. No I CORRECTLY read the OP and posted accordingly. YOU just don't like getting slapped down and are

a whiner about it.

[Stinky The Clown]

157. Louder isn't righter.

But nice try.

[LeftishBrit]

129. Just to let you know...

we don't do this in England either!

[sabrina 1]

132. Thank you, some of the responses in this thread are scary

considering we supposedly live in a democracy. How quickly people are willing to give up rights for what they perceive will give them a little safety, and in this case it would not do that anyhow.

Ben Franklin was right to worry that the democracy they envisioned when they wrote the Constitution, probably wouldn't survive very long.

To live in a society where everyone is labeled, as in the sex offender laws where even people who were very young themselves are marked for life, is simply frightening.

Should we hang a label around the neck of everyone who was ever charged with a crime? I wonder if any of those cheering for this ever got a speeding ticket, speeding being pretty deadly after all, or talked on a cell phone while driving? Because once you open this evil door, that's what will be next. YOUR bad habits will be announced so that stones can be thrown at you also.

Really frightening living in this authoritarian country these days.

[Stinky The Clown]

135. So you applaud that reply ........

..... implying that in asking the question I was espousing a position is appropriate?

For the record, I think it is one of the dumbest things to be introduced into my state's legislature in years. But the person you're taking thinks it was prefectly cool - even funny - to imply that it *my* position.

Is that what you're saying?

[Goblinmonger]

143. Calm down, Francis.

I get it and all, but you lash out at this guy and at me when it is (somewhat in my case) clear we were NOT saying it about YOU but about others (in my case) and about the law (in this case). I understand you want to make it clear that you don't favor the law, but your tone is a little over the top.

[sabrina 1]

147. Sorry, I didn't get that from the post. I was replying only to the

commenter and agreeing with him. Sorry to have missed any implication that you agreed with the proposal. I'm glad to hear you do not. I'm afraid we may be in the minority in today's punishment oriented society and we're still not safe with all of laws and punishment. Probably among the least safe people in the civilized world.

[cherokeeprogressive]

111. To what end?

:shrug:

[Goblinmonger]

112. Stop with the Scarlet Letter comparisons.

It's just silly and makes it seem like you either haven't read the book and are just making an allusion to sound cool or you completely misunderstood it.

Hawthorne uses his book to completely flip the symbols of society. The letter and the scaffold, thought by Puritans (the representation of bad society that the Romantics fought against) to be symbols of shame, actually become a symbol in the book of redemption, strength, openness, and humanity. Certainly you are not arguing that the use of these plates are bad because the openness of the sin (and not the repression of society) would help make those with DUIs better people?

Gets off his English teacher soap box.

[Stinky The Clown]

118. You're a VERY shitty reader for an English teacher. You get an F for comprehension

Where in the OP do I say the idea is mine or that I endorse it?

In case you think I misread *you*, I quote you here: "It's just silly and makes it seem like you either haven't read the book and are just making an allusion to sound cool or you completely misunderstood it."

Would that not be better directed at the person who sponsored the bill? Do you call for reporters to go to jail when they report on murder stories?

English teacher?

[Goblinmonger]

141. I didn't want to spam your thread

and reply to each and every one (though I did to a couple and then stopped), so I made a general comment to the OP so it was at the first thread level so that those that came after me would see it.

Sorry for the misinterpretation. "You" can be singular or plural. Perhaps I should have used the British "one" in the sentence you quoted.

Edited to add: And, yes, English teacher. If I were going to lie about a profession to make myself seem more important and well liked, would I pick English teacher? :evilgrin:

Re-edited to add: And notice that I didn't fly off the handle for your attack on me. Just learning to go with the flow isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[Stinky The Clown]

148. Fair enough

I won't disparage English teachers. You can. I won't. :hi:

[Goblinmonger]

152. Cool

I completely see how there was a lack of clarity in what I wrote.

And there's a lot of crazy in the English teacher realm. Trust me.

[truebrit71]

113. Just the same way I would be in favour of Yellow Stars for Jewish drivers...

...:sarcasm:

This is a very BAD idea on many levels, not least of which is the civil rights aspect..

Great way to get hassled by the fuzz for absolutely no good reason, and makes one a target for vengeance-filled folks out there..

[yowzayowzayowza]

117. No, second DUI should draw a label on their license...

thus guaranteeing 'em a pipe to blow on at every future traffic stop. The third should revoke said license entirely.

[proteus_lives]

120. How about this.

If you're convicted DUI more then once, you lose your license for the rest of your life.

[RedCappedBandit]

124. No.. What's the point?

Why not spend this time improving the breathalyzer devices. The plate would be useless.

[earth mom]

130. Anyone with 2 DUI's shouldn't be allowed a license in the first place. nt

[Spider Jerusalem]

131. I'd favour a lifetime driving ban for people thrice-convicted, personally.

Here in the UK a drink-driving offence is punishable by a driving ban of (usually) 12 months for the first conviction (and the points and offence remain on your licence for 10 years after reinstatement) along with a six-month prison sentence (usually suspended on the first offence) and a fine of £5000; a third offence would receive a ban of three years and a six-month sentence (unlikely to be suspended) along with the fine.

[Cleita]

134. Anybody who has gotten one DUI if for no other reason than stupidity,

who gets a second one, is more than stupid. He really is dangerous because he has not learned his lesson and should have his driver's license limited if not revoked altogether. I don't know if license plates would help. What if other family members who don't drink and drive have to use the same car?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

136. Why is someone with three DUIs driving in the first place?

Three DUIs means you have a serious problem. I'd rather have these people getting appropriate (and mandatory) treatment than special license plates.

[rd_kent]

138. No, I favor those convicted of DUI for a SECOND time lose driving privileges, forever!

[SaveOurDemocracy]

140. 3 DUI's should = lifetime forfeiture of driving privileges

[leftstreet]

145. Most chronic offenders don't have current valid licensing

drivers and/or auto

[bigwillq]

146. No (nt)

[Randall Flagg]

150. And "Fatty" plates, Druggie plates, Divorced plates, Liberal plates,

Had sex with a 17 year old when 18 plates, Shoplifted when 14 plates, poor credit risk plates, Smoker plates, Never graduated High School plates, masturbater plates, gay plates, non-christian plates....

I'm sure I left a few out.

[Goblinmonger]

166. What do those have to do with driving

and the safety of those around them?

I don't like the idea of the plates. I'm firmly on the side of taking away a license after the second time (you get one to be a dumbass but your second means you haven't and won't learn). But your analogy is a little flawed.

[whistler162]

153. Nope....

I would however be infavor of issuing a bus pass good for 10% off a monthly bus pass and a ankle bracelet that sent a message to the local police IF the drunk got tried to drive again.

[Zomby Woof]

154. No

I'd rather they be making other people's regular license plates in prison.

[SimonPhoenix]

158. I have a BETTER idea-lose your license after two DWIs

Is that too harsh? I don't think so. First DWI should result in a license suspension of a year's time. The second DWI should result in the revocation of the license for life. No need for jail time- the drunk driving idiots would respond better to my plan.

THEN, if the person is EVER caught driving after the second time, they'd be driving with a revoked license, and should then be sentenced to LIFE IN PRISON with no early PAROLE.

This plan would seriously cut down on drunk driving. And then we could let all the non-violent drug addicts out of prison to make room for all the drunk drivers who just couldn't learn.

And don't give me that alcoholism is a disease bullshit because I'll laugh in your face. No one is saying that alcoholism isn't tough to overcome. But there's no fucking excuse for getting behind the wheel of a car when you are drunk.

[SimonPhoenix]

159. Driving drunk is the favorite pasttime for Americans

I just wanted to add this: drunk driving is Americans' favorite pasttime. It's too often laughed about or dismissed as something minor: "oh Johnny's had a little bit too much to drunk, drive safe Johnny". Hahahahaha.

Not really so funny though.

[TxRider]

161. They could tattoo it on the forehead as far as I care

[Donald Ian Rankin]

169. Absolutely not, for many reasons:

1: People with three DUI convictions arguably shouldn't be allowed to drive anyhow.
2: As pointed out upthread, it's unfair on others who use the same car.
3: It would lead to drivers concentrating on watching number plates rather than the road.
4: It would lead to an increase in road rage.
5: It would serve no useful purpose.
6: I am generally sceptical about this kind of "inventive" punishment - I think it's the start of a slippery slope.
7: What happens when such a person drives someone else's car?
etc, etc, etc.

[B Calm]

170. HELL NO!!!!!!!

[undeterred]

171. I'd expect no plates at all, no car.