Easy Solution to DUI charges!

[n2happy]

Yes, the horse is dead. I know that changing the mind of someone as intrenched in there belief as you are MaddMom, is not going to happen. However perhaps someone who has an open mind might benefit from hearing the opinions of those of us who see our laws becoming laws of emotion rather than blind justice.

As for mandatory sentencing..well now, I guess it would save us taxpayers a lot of money if when we are charged with a crime and plead guilty, that we just go on to jail for whatever time the legislature has deemed appropiate for that offense. No lawyers (hooray) no judges just a push-button cut and dried verdict.

Damn! When will we in this country stop tampering with the constitution which guarentees us our day in court? We should look at countries which are not free and see that so many of the laws we want enacted here, are part of their everyday society. I shudder every time I hear some good citizen shout that "the law should do something about this or that".

We are losing so many of the freedoms our forefathers fought so hard to gain for us. One by one well meaning citizens demand that the legislature enact some law that somehow limits someone's freedom. All in the name of patriatism.

For example: The seatbelt law. When congress here in Georgia presented the bill to enact this law, they assurred us that it would be stipulated that a police officer could not stop you and give a ticket just for not wearing your seatbelt. It was an appeasement for those who were opposed to it. The law was passed. Now, guess what. You can and will be stopped if an officer sees you without a belt. And they did it without much fanfare. My right to choose whether wearing a seatbelt was safe for me or not was taken away. Same with the helmet law, and the same for all victimless laws.

When are all the "feel good" people going to realize that one day some right that they cherish is gonna become a target for other "feel good" people with a different opinion?

Majority rules, you might say, but I am more inclined to believe that it is the "squeaky wheel" that rules in too many cases, and that money rules almost always.

So MaddMom, I will say to you; you are a tough cookie and although your heart goes out, as mine does to the families of victims of crime, or carelessness, don't forget that there could be extenuating circumstances for some who break the law and lets let them be heard in court and let a judge or jury decide what punishment should be meted out to them.

Good Luck FNKA on your day in court, too bad you can't defend yourself. I hope you have considered countersueing for false arrest.

 

[FKNA]

Maddmom....looks like we're making progress.

"No, I do not believe the lesser crime should carry the same penalty." That's a point I've been trying to make all along. And the direction that new dwi laws are taking, what's happening is the lesser crime is carrying the same penalty as the more severe crime. In Texas, after September 1st a second dwi offense will carry the SAME penalty as someone that drives while intoxicated and kills someone. That's insane.

Another major problem with dwi's is the BAC which stands for Blood Alcohol Content, NOT Breath Alcohol Content. Law enforcement is in the habit of taking breath tests, NOT blood tests. And anyone that thinks those breathalyzers are remotely accurate are highly misinformed. I'm not going to get into my two personal prior dwi's, how much I actually had to drink, etc. I wouldn't be believed anyway. But after my 2nd I did become very curious about those breathalyzers since the would NOT take a blood test from me even after requested. So I got myself one of those portable breathalyzers, the same that law enforcement use. I ran a serious of tests. Do you realize that a certs breath mint will make you blow over the legal limit? Here's something else to chew on, I could drink enough booze to the point to make me blow over the legal limit, suck on a lime for a minute and the next time I blow it would be well under the legal limit.

Too many people that have a couple of drinks at dinner, or a couple of drinks after work with co-workers are having their lives turned upside down by corrupt law enforcement and/or inaccurate breathalyzers.

Do I advocate drinking and driving? HELL NO! But I am a firm believer in the punishment fitting the crime. You say it should be a mandatory 6 months jail time for second offense. I say that's pretty severe for a simple dwi. You start doing that and you're going to start turning productive members of society into non productive members.

I brought up cell phones and other things as an example NOT to negate what can happen if one drives under the influence. But more so to point, there are many MANY things that contribute to fatalities on our roadways today. Ever see someone drink a Big Gulp and/or one 32oz drinks? When they take a sip they can see NOTHING in front of them. We shouldn't ban the use of cell phones, changing radio stations, having a big gulp etc. But instead, let's actually punish those that kill others as a direct result of drinking and driving.

p.s. did you know that the founder of MADD is against a lot of the dwi related laws that are in effect today? She was even against lowering the limit to .08%

 

[FKNA]

n2happy.....it's a pleasure to find a fellow American that believes in our Constitution. It's a pleasure to come across another that sees what is happening to EVERYONE'S freedom.

As far as my day in court, at first all I wanted was a complete dismissal of the charges. But now, even though I would like the dismissal so I can put this behind me, I also do want my day in court. I want to get Officer Jurk up on that witness stand so we can tear his police report to shreds. I want to prove in court his "malicious intent". Believe me, after all is said and done I will be back in court, this time civil court.

 

[bob279]

If a guy was going down the road 90 miles an hour on a 40 mile an hour posted speed limit and a cop gets him on radar, what happens? It's a summary offense and he gets a ticket and some points taken off his license. The next week that same guy goes down the same road 90 miles an hour, a cop again gets him on radar. What happens? He gets another ticket and a few more points off his license.
The next day another guy goes down the road 90 miles an hour in a 40 miles an hour posted zone. A car pulls out and he hits the car killing someone. What happens? He goes to jail.
What's the difference between that and driving after drinking? The first guy could very well have killed someone going that fast in a 40 mile an hour zone. But HE DID'NT. He put everyone around him at risk of injury or worse. But he only gets a ticket, why- because no one was injured or worse.
The punishment does not fit the simple dui case. There is no difference in driving 90 miles an hour in a 40 mile zone and driving after drinking. Law enforcement needs to take each case individually. There are alot of factors that need to be considerd before you screw someone's life up for going two feet over the yellow line. And the way things are today heaven help the person that may be out after 11pm on a weekend night with alcohol on their breath. Police become predators they will follow you until you give them probable cause, your tire touching the white or yellow line, anything that fits they will stop you because they figure the odds are in their favor that at that hour on a weekend night that person has probably been drinking. Do the same thing at 11 am and no one pays attention.
This type of enforcement reminds me of the small towns that used to set up speed traps to supply their income.

 

[n2happy]

FKNA, Thank you, but I am not the only one who sees what is happening to the constitution. Unfortunately MaddMom said it well when she stated that if we didn't like the laws, we should write our congressmen who would not see our position for supporting drunk drivers.

Unfortunately when liberals pass "feel good" laws it is hard to get others to see the point of the other side. I remember when burning the flag by someone got a lot of patrotic people up in arms to make it illegal. The people who were advocating this were good Americans who viewed the burners as unAmerican.

When I stood up for the right to peaceful protest (which burning of the flag is), I was jumped on severely. I am a good debater and at least neutralized them. If Americans would just study some history of our country, they would see that protesting the things that our government does that we feel are wrong, is our right and I feel strongly is our duty.

Stopping murder by threat of a death sentence is statistically unsuccessful. I believe that most people never consider the consequences of getting caught and at the time of their anger, could care less what happens as long as they make the SOB pay for what he did.

I wear a seatbelt most of the time to keep from getting a ticket. The only reason. I do however buckle up my 5yr old son to protect him. He isn't old enough to decide for himself or strong enough to handle slamming on of the breaks.

I wish that the people who see how our lawmakers are taking away our rights one by one, would stand up and protest. But it is very hard to fight people who think that they are saving lives or saving people from harm.

One of the main reason we have a homeless problem today is that the librals passed a feel good law that stated that patients could not be kept in mental hospitals for life, if they did not pose a threat to society. I agree that some were kept who could probably function outside, but the majority were turned loose when they didn't have enough skills to contribute to society.

Some people are so entrenched in their ideals that they will not listen to reason.

If any like thinkers read these pages, please respond so our voices can be heard, at least here.

 

[FKNA]

Bob....that was an EXCELLENT analogy.

n2happy....I know you're not the only one out there. But unfortunately these days far too many people are turning a blind eye to the Constitution.

The reason I started wearing a seat belt was because of a promise I made to my wife. Prior to that, when the seat belt was first put into law in Texas I fought it tooth and nail. I went to jail 1/2 a dozen times over not wearing a seat belt. These days, I'm like you....my wife didn't want the hassle and nor did I anymore.

Enough of that, let's get back to the alcohol laws. Some say "BRAVO" to the new alcohol laws that go into effect in Texas starting September 1st. How's this for an INSANE alcohol law? One can be arrested for boating while intoxicated, have their license taken away....all for drinking while floating on a inner tube. If you think that's bad, it gets worse. The SECOND time one is busted while drinking on an inner tube, they can be charged with a FELONY. I kid you not, that's the new law that goes into effect September 1st.

 

[Sercher]

Response to all maddmoms

Before I state my opinion, which is all it is-MY opinion, I'd like to make it clear that I have never had a DUI, an accident or a traffic citation. I do occasionally drink-two drinks are usually my limit. I do drive, I do not feel that it impairs my reflexes and I could probably pass a breathilizer test. I do have children. Or rather, I did have children. My eldest son was killed in an alcohol related accident 11 years ago. Now I could have focused on the evils of alcohol and called anyone who drinks a murder or a potential murderer, but this wouldn't have brought my son back. What about the vehicle he was driving? It didn't withstand the impact very well. The car overturned and the roof crushed. The airbags didn't deploy and he was cut from his seatbelt. Perhaps some of this venom should be directed toward the automobile manufacturers. But of course they are much too powerful, so this anger is directed toward people who don't have these large companies resources.
I find this whole situation appaling. If no one can drink and drive, then it should be illegal for restaurants and bars to even serve it. I have been watching what has been happening and it sickens me. People are losing their jobs and their ability to support their families. There is no one who has not broken some law or has done something innocently that could have resulted in injury or worse to another. The vast majority of offenders, in my area, are not the problem drinkers. DUI's don't stop these people, they have a problem, a disease. They drink anyway and they drive with or without a license. Perhaps the huge sums of money generated by these fines-and perhaps a portion of the fees from the attorneys- should be directed to the real problem. When you you place yourself in the position of judge and jury, you will be judged.
Anything you read in any magazine or newspaper, or view on television is colored by the person who wrote the words. It isn't necessarily the truth, only the truth as they see it.
No need to respond to this. It was hastily typed and I was just surfing the web.

 

[MADD'sHypocrite]

MaddMom never drank and drove?

I call shenanigans. If this is 100% truth, I nominate MaddMom for the next available sainthood.

As for your ability to make your sound judgement not to drive, let's hear what a former MADD President has to say about it:

“Once you’ve consumed your first drink, you’ve lost that ability to make a sound judgment.”
—Penny Wagner, MADD Chapter President

And Yes, MaddMomma, The FOUNDER of MADD, Candy Lightner has joined THE LIQUOR LOBBY after being fired by MADD because:

1. She was unhappy with the way MADD was becoming more about incorporation rather than her original intent.

2. In 2004, Ms. Lightner received a DUI after taking an illegal U-turn after some drinks at dinner. Do a Google search - you will find it if you seek the truth.

Alcoholism is a disease and uneducated facists (while the initial movement was a GREAT idea, MADD has become a slave to its' fundraisers) like MADD seem to think anyone who has two drinks and drives is a hardcore drunk or Public Enemy #1.

This country is so ****ed up in its' phobias. We shield our children from sex, but every other movie and video game has gratutitous VIOLENCE. Having solved gangs, hunger, hate crimes, and gun control, (note sarcasm) we should definitely exercise every legal effort to slam the doors on someone who uses poor judgement by driving after having a couple of drinks.

Yes, that makes sense. Marijuana is not legal. Alcohol is. People do not get into bar fights or shoot their spouses under the influence of marijuana, but it is illegal. Alcohol can REMOVE anything in a family's lives if abused.

Marijuana makes people hungry and lethargic, but generally euphoric and remaining in control of actions and emotions.

My theory is this. Militarily speaking, the US would rather have angry alcoholic soldiers ready to shoot anything that gets in the way rather than laid back marijuana users.

Do I think Marijuana should be legal? Yes. Should you be able to use it and drive or go to work under the influence? Absolutely not! It should be held in at minimum, the same regard as any other legal drug. It is natural. It needs no further processing in order to be used in its' final form. Those of you Bible thumpers should agree. God created it - how can you say it is wrong? Who are you to say you know better than your Supreme Being?
Alcohol is legal BECAUSE it is a money making proposition down the line from the producers to the courts to MADD itself. All three have lost their way.

If you are curious - No, I do not use anything mind-altering by choice. I have in the past. I don't think ANYONE has the right to judge another's actions WHEN they do not place others in jeopardy. Alcoholism has been present in my family's history and I have seen its' effects on the individual and his/her family on the whole.

George W. Bush - your beloved President - drank like a fish, used coke, lied to the ENTIRE world to begin a war after stealing an election, yet is praised by many (sadly) as a true man of faith.

I apologize for the disconnected approach I have used; I do not apologize for the content.

You may all go back to being sheep.

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

I call shenanigans. If this is 100% truth, I nominate MaddMom for the next available sainthood.

As for your ability to make your sound judgement not to drive, let's hear what a former MADD President has to say about it:

“Once you’ve consumed your first drink, you’ve lost that ability to make a sound judgment.”
—Penny Wagner, MADD Chapter President

And Yes, MaddMomma, The FOUNDER of MADD, Candy Lightner has joined THE LIQUOR LOBBY after being fired by MADD because:

1. She was unhappy with the way MADD was becoming more about incorporation rather than her original intent.

2. In 2004, Ms. Lightner received a DUI after taking an illegal U-turn after some drinks at dinner. Do a Google search - you will find it if you seek the truth. Great, A *MADD MOMMY* receiving a DUI. WOW! This does great for your cause.


Alcoholism is a disease and uneducated facists (while the initial movement was a GREAT idea, MADD has become a slave to its' fundraisers) like MADD seem to think anyone who has two drinks and drives is a hardcore drunk or Public Enemy #1.

This country is so ****ed up in its' phobias. We shield our children from sex, but every other movie and video game has gratutitous VIOLENCE. Having solved gangs, hunger, hate crimes, and gun control, (note sarcasm) we should definitely exercise every legal effort to slam the doors on someone who uses poor judgement by driving after having a couple of drinks.

Yes, that makes sense. Marijuana is not legal. Alcohol is. People do not get into bar fights or shoot their spouses under the influence of marijuana,You are Nut's, there are probably more related shooting deaths due to being high than drunk.

but it is illegal. Alcohol can REMOVE anything in a family's lives if abused. I think we all know that, but you are still bringing up a 6 year old thread lady.That is insane.




Marijuana makes people hungry and lethargic, but generally euphoric and remaining in control of actions and emotions. You must be high at the moment, and I will leave others to respond to that comment.


My theory is this. Militarily speaking, the US would rather have angry alcoholic soldiers ready to shoot anything that gets in the way rather than laid back marijuana users.OH GAWD! I don't think I can read anymore of your crap. You are actually bringing the military into this diatribe?

Do I think Marijuana should be legal? Yes. Should you be able to use it and drive or go to work under the influence? Absolutely not! It should be held in at minimum, the same regard as any other legal drug. YooHoo, but it is not legal for the most part.


It is natural. It needs no further processing in order to be used in its' final form. Those of you Bible thumpers should agree. God created it - how can you say it is wrong? Who are you to say you know better than your Supreme Being?
Alcohol is legal BECAUSE it is a money making proposition down the line from the producers to the courts to MADD itself. All three have lost their way.

If you are curious - No, I do not use anything mind-altering by choice. I have in the past. I don't think ANYONE has the right to judge another's actions WHEN they do not place others in jeopardy. Alcoholism has been present in my family's history and I have seen its' effects on the individual and his/her family on the whole.

George W. Bush - your beloved President - drank like a fish, used coke, lied to the ENTIRE world to begin a war after stealing an election, yet is praised by many (sadly) as a true man of faith.

I apologize for the disconnected approach I have used; I do not apologize for the content.

You may all go back to being sheep.


WOW! I have never seen anything so insane posted by someone.

YAG? Bay? You out there?

 

[cbg]

Am I the only one who noticed that this post is from 2001?