'Booze It & Lose It' Yields 1,137 DWI Arrests in Second Week, 6,469 seat belt violations

releases.usnewswire.com ^

[Constitution Day]

I see Giddy's plan for instant funds is in full effect. Thanks Giddy!!

Revenue enhancement!!

[verity]

Anti law enforcement seems to be a popular theme. Are you a libertarian, republican, or a contrarian?

[Quilla]

If somebody is exhibiting the behaviors associated with drunken driving, I personally have no problem with an officer pulling him over and finding out why.

The law in my neck of the woods parks down the road from nightclubs and gets their quota every Friday and Saturday night. Apparently the designated driver plan hasn't dawned on a lot of folks, yet it would sure save lives and legal fees.

[BluH2o]

Again an excellent example of "Mission creep". First there were lap top seat belts, installed as a practical safety measure, left up to the discreation of the driver as to whether one used it or not. Then came the over shoulder model along with stronger warnings to drivers to use them. Then states started passing laws that required you to wear a seat belt, you could be fined if you were pulled over for some other violation and weren't buckled up. Now it's a stand alone violation allowing police to pull you over if they observe you not wearing a seat belt.
Most states now consider drivers that blow an .08 on the sobriety test legally intoxicated. This threshold has been lowered to the point that if you go out to dinner and have a couple of glasses of wine or beer a driver can be hit with a DUI if stopped on the way home. The "nanny state" mentallity prevails.

[billbears]

I still can't understand how they can pass a law that MANDATES you wear a seatbelt

Now, now, dare not question the wisdom of a Republican. For that's who helped get it through. Giddy Dolt, our fine upstanding big government, power hungry Senator now, back when she worked in the Reagan administration came up with this 'wonderful' idea. As Secretary of Transportation she thought it would be a good idea to tie federal funding for roads to such a law. If a state passed the law, they got money, if not well their roads went to pot. Want to guess how many states passed seat belt legislation? BTW, you can also thank her for pushing to maintain speed limits at 55 nationwide, helping pass legislation for airbags and those third brake lights all cars have to have now

[Unknowing]

Yes, I remember each of these steps.

The most perfect solution is to hire a car, like a limousine, with a professional driver, every time one goes out to dinner. This is how the gentry avoids these problems with police and roadblocks. The state imposes this cost upon us, as an alternative to possible fines and criminal charges, for enjoying wine with dinner.

I expect to see these traps become more common as the unjust use of governmental power becomes increasingly more accepted. I say: Tyranny borders upon well-regulated freedoms, and spreads its seeds therein.

[AppyPappy]

I still can't understand how they can pass a law that MANDATES you wear a seatbelt..

The same way they can pass a law that says you get treated at an ER even if you don't have money. The nanny state can make the rules if the people want the nanny state.

[Helms]

100 Winged Horses

By Geoff Hilton

The ingredients for this creative concoction are paint, fiberglass and wings. Whoa. Definitely not a recipe you’ll find in any cookbooks by Emeril Lagasse, Wolfgang Puck or Martha Stewart. Where will you find these diverse elements coming together? Just be on the lookout next year for various locations throughout these barrier islands that will proudly display one of 100 painted fiberglass “winged horses.” What’s with all this “horse play,” you say? Some kind of “flight” of fancy? Actually, it’s a not-for-profit endeavor designed to send area spirits soaring with pride as the 2003 Centennial Celebration of the “first powered flight in a heavier-than-air machine” draws closer. So, if Regis Philbin ever asks you when the Wright brothers made aviation history on the sand dunes of Kill Devil Hills, tell him: “December 1903, and that’s my final answer.”

Painting and Pegasus: Perfect Together While driving back through Norfolk, Virginia from a recent business trip, Outer Banks Press President Linda Lauby noticed the city’s popular “Mermaids on Parade” exhibit and thought: “Why not come up with our own special event for The Outer Banks to coincide with the 2003 Centennial Celebration?”

Linda, who appropriately happens to be a Kitty Hawk resident, thought that another spirited Outer Banks symbol – the roaming wild horses that survived the islands’ “Graveyard of the Atlantic” shipwreck history – would combine nicely with flight to form a unifying source of area pride. “The ‘equus above us’ theme just seems perfect for The Outer Banks,” says Linda. “Not only does Pegasus – the winged horse of Greek myth – embody the obvious combination of horse and flight, but Pegasus is also a constellation – and purported to be the source of poetic inspiration. Norfolk may have its mermaids, and Chicago and Zurich, Switzerland have had their ‘Cows on Parade’ exhibits, but now we’ve got our own ‘uplifting’ symbol to help get the Centennial Celebration off the ground.” The formal marketing plan will be introduced this summer, and the 100 unpainted white fiberglass horses should be available for purchase in early 2002.

“We want to generate excitement for this once-in-a-lifetime project among artists, business people, visitors and the general population,” says Linda. “To have these winged horses on display at sites all along the Outer Banks is really going to be a marvelous sight. And, all of the decorated horses will eventually be returned to one location for the culmination of this effort: our December 2003 charitable auction.”

Proceeds Destined for Area Charities When individuals or organizations decide to sponsor a horse, they may then choose their own artist, or Outer Banks Press can suggest an artist from a list of area participants. Sponsors have the option of putting the colorful horses on display at their place of business, or arranging for them to be placed in alternate Outer Banks “stables” to be determined. However, as the curtain closes on 2003, all of the horses will go up for bid at the “100 Winged Horses” charitable auction. During the auction, all of the previous sponsors are certainly encouraged to “permanently” purchase their painted horses if they wish to do so. Leading up to the auction, sponsorship benefits include advertising on many levels and the ability to support a worthwhile cause, plus invitations to receptions, and a tax deduction. Sponsors have the opportunity to display original artwork at their place of business, which will be visited by the many people touring the exhibit. “The spirit of this event is to merge art and commerce in a visual celebration of the 100-year anniversary of man’s first powered flight,” says Linda. Along with organizing the event and generating the publicity surrounding the installation and auction, Outer Banks Press plans to commemorate the event by publishing a full-color book of all 100 horses — mentioning the artists and sponsors — to be sold as a special memento. Visitors will also be able to take a “virtual tour” of the exhibit through the Outer Banks Press web site, www.outerbankspress.com. Steve Alterman, the photographer responsible for the last two covers of The Edge, has agreed to shoot the photos for this keepsake book.

Look for more details about how to purchase one or more of these horses in upcoming press releases and articles/advertisements within Outer Banks Press publications. The web site www.outerbankspress.com, with links to ICARUS International and other aviation-related sites, will also provide news updates – including artist/sponsorship information. “Call, write or send an e-mail,” says Linda. “We’d love to hear from anyone interested in helping us ensure that this exciting project realizes its full potential.”

Perhaps even the spirit of nineteenth-century English poet and essayist Matthew Arnold will be felt in The Outer Banks throughout the coming months. After all, he penned The Forsaken Merman:

Now the great winds shorewards blow; Now the salt tides seawards flow; Now the wild white horses play, Champ and chafe and toss in the spray.

[Helms]

Dare County has a very high level of drunk driving accidents. I saw these horses recently at OBX. Just posted for a lighter note.

Having said that, no wonder why folks are running for cover- this DUI thing is almost a mini-industry. 10 years have past since getting away from a Cary, NC cop on the way home from a bar called the New Bar. Since that time Raleigh's night life isn't what it used to be.

Glad to have lived during a time when things were much lighter and more fun.

Stay away from the beach: the UV, sharks or whatever media scare you chose....NOT

[BluH2o]

The most perfect solution is to hire a car, like a limousine, with a professional driver, every time one goes out to dinner.

A solution yes, however it will put a big dent in spur of the moment dining out. The restaurant business can't be happy about the intrusiveness of law enforcement vis a vis the lowering of the sobriety test to a ridiculous .08.

[FourtySeven]

Well, I wouldn't consider myself a "Libertine" by any stretch of the imagination, but I have to agree with anyone who says this is wrong. It is an anathema to the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". I personally think in another 30 years, we'll start seeing more road blocks for much lesser offenses, all justified by the criminals they do catch.

Bottom line: Does it catch more drunk drivers than simply pulling obvious "weavers" off the road? Probably does. But if that's really what this rationale comes down to, then why don't we have permanant road blocks on every road?

[azhenfud]

"...then why don't we have permanant road blocks on every road?"

And take away the element of "Surprise, surprise, surprise"?

[vin-one]

althought I do not consider my self a Liberdopian
I have been labled such on a recent thread by a Drug warrior.

That being said, I think these road blocks are going over the line

After a nice dinner and a beer with my meal, these stops could find me impaired.
The DWI laws are to strict. the .08 limit is a joke.
anything over .10 is still questionable
Since I am going to the outer banks in a week
I think I will have my kids do all the driving after dinner......

And these stops for seatbelt compliance is another stupid law, it was supposed to be a passive law
It used to be you could not be pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt.
They have gone over the line here

[bc2]

since no one has answered your question regarding drunk driving properly, please allow me.

First of all, you do not have an understanding of libertarian philosophy (I could be mean spirited here, and say you're trolling for flames, etc, however...) Libertarians do not, on principle, initiate force or fraud against a person or their property. This is called the principle of "non-initiation of force".

"Public" roads are owned by all of us, through our tax dollars. Getting a drivers license is a privilege, not a right. So, when you get a drivers license, you, as an adult, agree to a contract to use public roads where society has set forth rules of use of said public roads. These include common sense issues like using turn signals and only driving in one lane at a time. You also agree to abide by the speed limits, and to not drive drunk.

When you drive drunk, you are initiating fraud against the public. That is a "crime", because you have violated the terms of your contract (to not drive drunk on public roads).

Life is about freedom to make choices, and taking responsibility for the consequences. You are free to make a choice (to rob my place of business, for example), but you must be responsible for the consequences (that I will shoot you).

So, DUI and DWI laws are ok. Seat belt laws, on the other hand, are not ok. That is a stupid law, where the actions for your decision to not wear a seat belt do not harm anyone but you (except possibly your family).

Private insurance companies should be free to mandate, as part of your vehicle insurance policy, that you must wear your seatbelt, or you will not be eligible for their payout in the event that you do not. But it should not be a law, and not wearing your seatbelt should not be "probable cause" for the police to pull you over and search your vehicle.

I hope this answers your question.

[stevio]

I actually think the government motto is; "Everybody is a criminal, we just find out how."

[Positive]

"I'll guarantee you one thing though, if they weren't there every other car would have fifteen people in them."

Why can't catch them at the actual borders? Conversely, if these are effective messures why don't we have checkpoints in Denver, Chicago, New York, Houston, Atlanta???

[jmc813]

WOD Ping

[Dr Warmoose]

I think that you proved my point that Libertarian Principles (an oxymoron, I know) are in conflict in regards to "driving drunk" which in itself doesn't hurt anyone, and "failing to wear seatbelts" which in itself doesn't hurt anyone.

You have made your case that complying to seemingly subjective political laws (arbitrary yet inflexible standards for "inebriation", and arbitrary yet under the code-enforcement agent's discrection "speed limit") is a matter of following a contract. You have not made your case that the seat-belt laws are not part of that contract, but are something that benefits the insurance company. By the mere fact that code-enforcement agents and the judges are collecting taxes fines for seatbelt violations should seem to even the layman that seatbelt laws are a part of that driving contract and privledge.

Your claim that driving drunk is "fraud" doesn't meet the legal definition of fraud any more than any legal form of impaired driving is "fraud". So either you need to show how "driving drunk" is indeed fraud, or drop that unsubstantiated claim.

It seems that your primary reason for liking "drunk driving laws" but not liking "seatbelt laws" is that the former is common sense and the latter is just "stupid". This is a fine example of why Libertarianism is just warm-up act for Totalitarianism, for you declare by fiat that one is common sense (even though the declining acceptable levels of intoxication bear little correlation to actual impairment) and the other is "stupid" (just because you may not like buckling up, or that is some aspect of the contract that is too inconvenient and too burdensome).

My primary transportation is a motorcycle so seatbelts are when I cage-up for events where being exposed to the elements is a bad thing. Not only does this Cat 'N Mouse game of life make wearing seatbelts necessary so as not to take penalty points from "The Man", but there hasn't been a single "drunk driving" law that has kept drunk drivers off the road. It is in my interest, my family's interest, my friend's interest, the premium payer of insurance's interest, the emergency crew's interest, my client's interest, and the interests of all of those on welfare that depend on me to work, that I survive a motorvehicle trip across town. That is why I wear seatbelts.

You may call seatbelt laws stupid, and I hate the fact that people are so damned irresponsible, and busy-bodies are so power-mad that the government feels a need to lay down these draconian responses, but as much as you feel that the potential harm that a drunk driver can do merits Gestapo like check-points (where they also check administrative violations like registration, inspection, valid permits, and fish for other violations such as guns, drugs, open containers, contraband, illegal aliens, etc.) I can come up with equally valid reasons to why compulsory seatbelt laws are just as safe and should be part of every driver's legal responsibility.

But you might still just call it "stupid" because seatbelt laws have their roots in the insurance company, whereas head-on collisions caused by drunks must not effect the insurance industry.

[DoughtyOne]

With that I agree. Close the border and forget about the road blocks.

[jmc813]

Since I am going to the outer banks in a week

Where in the Outer Banks are you going?