Posted on 04/01/2011 2:22:59 PM PDT by chessplayer
There are victims of drunken driving. And, according to one Montana legislator, there are victims of drunken driving laws.
While speaking out against a proposed bill that would make DUI laws more strict for repeat offenders, state Rep. Alan Hale, R–Basin, said drunken driving regulations hurt local businesses and are "destroying a way of life."
(Excerpt) Read more at aolnews.com ...
They could always revert to horses. That’s why there were few collisions in the 19th century, regardless of how much the riders drank.
Well - any behavior - no matter how despicable can be labeled a “way of life”. So?
And here I was thinking dui laws were too lax watching some screwhead get 3 DUI within a year’s time. Not like oops I guess I had 3 beers instead of just 2 drunk, but like drink a 5th in 30 minutes chased by those three beers.
My personal thought is that obviously drunk, knows it, and has absolutely no business driving should be charged with attempted manslaughter.
He sounded tipsy in that video clip. What a mar-oooon.
I agree. I don’t drink, but .08 is too low for the legal limit.
My nominee for headline of the week!
I read that there are no speed limits in Montana - is that true?
This guy is a complete idiot.
I don’t recall the source (and am too lazy to look for it at the moment), but I remember reading something a while back that said most alcohol-related auto accidents involve a driver with at least 0.15% BAC.
“I read that there are no speed limits in Montana - is that true?”
It was at one time, but I don’t think that’s the case any longer.
Of course I live in CA, so any Montanans who can give the correct answer are free to jump in. :)
The vast majority of drunk drivers are repeat offenders with BAC more than twice the legal limit. When was the last time you heard someone arrested for being at .009%? They also didn't come from having dinner at the local restaurant or pub.
“Yeah, who cares if a lush wipes out a carload of people or kills some kids. It`s just some good `ol boys having some good `ol fun. “
In the ‘50’s and ‘60’s an acceceptable excuse for killing someone with your car was, “Well, I was drunk.” I actually witnessed this. It was accept5able to speaker and apparently to the listeners that this was the same as an act of God and should be treated the same way. As far as I’m concerned, anybody driving drunk should be punished until they either stop doing it or they are off the road because they’re in jail. It should be treated the same as firing your gun into an occupied building.
Well, like gun control laws, DUI laws are not keeping people who desire to drive while intoxicated from doing so.
While speaking out against a proposed bill that would make DUI laws more strict for repeat offenders, state Rep. Alan Hale, R–Basin, said drunken driving regulations hurt local businesses and are “destroying a way of life.”
______________________________________________
“Repeat Offenders”. This moron has a problem with harsher laws and/or penalties for repeat offenders?
What an idiot.
The laws are already disproportionate.
We take the biggest law book and cross we can find and club those with a DWI/DUI with them. It’s out of control.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.