Friday, November 01, 2013

A few modest proposals concerning DUI/Hit and Run.

Much of our society today is based on society's failure to do the unpleasant things required to move these issues to "resolved."

Drugs. Illegal aliens. Domestic violence. Corruption in office. Murder. You name it..

For example: we tell people "not to drink and drive," but then we don't make it illegal if they do, unless they achieve some arbitrary number of BAC which the typically drunk driver rarely can nail down while they’re drinking. Solution?

Make 0.0 the only acceptable BAC for driving.

But we CAN'T do THAT... the restaurant industry would scream! So, implementing this, which would, I admit, likely put most taverns out of business; would result in an economic hit... but it would save lives.

And what's their revenues compared to blood in the streets?

For example: let's make license suspensions lifetime for the first offense.

It's not like people don't KNOW they're not supposed to drink and drive... right? So why, outside the social acceptance of this crime, do we treat it any differently?

The woman in this article is on her FOURTH DUI conviction as it is. FOURTH? Are you fricking KIDDING me? She should never have seen the light of day again after her SECOND.

For example: Let's confiscate the car.

Those opposed would scream like cut cats. Families would suffer... those financing cars would suffer. But to my mind, that's like the police NOT confiscating a MAC-10 used in a drive-by. After all, what is the goal?

Well, for one thing, banks would be hard-pressed to finance a car with someone that has a DUI. And isn't THAT too bad?

Right now, we're just nibbling around the edges... and then we wonder how to "make sense" of all this.

DUI? Suspended for life and lose your car.

Hit and run? Same as DUI and 5 years for non-injury, 10 years for injury, and life for fatality.

Sounds harsh?

Likely not to the victims. And in time, this would practically disappear as a problem if enforced.

To that end, we either quit screwing around and address this stuff, or we keep trying to confuse the public, substituting motion... with action.

One example of this implementation is Singapore: gun crime in Singapore is practically unknown. And that's largely because if you commit a crime and are even carrying a gun... even if you don't use it... that's an automatic 20 year pop.

If you pull a gun during a crime, even if you don't fire it?

They execute you.

What a concept. As a country, we suffer horrific gin crime and the effort, then, is to punish those who don't commit the crimes as result of the actions of those who do.

And how's all that worked out for us?

No comments: