View Full Version : Colored Licenses Plates for DUI - DWI
bocaboca
10-26-2012, 08:42
Does your state have different color license plates for people who have been convicted of either DUI or DWI.
I guess I think I like the idea....I think
stolenphot0
10-26-2012, 08:44
Ohio does. I forget what qualifies you to earn one, but they are an ugly shade of yellow with red lettering.
OctoberRust
10-26-2012, 08:45
never heard of this before. This could get entertaining. :popcorn:
Mm...not sure how I feel about that one. Does the person that made 1 bad choice get the same color plate as the person that's done prison time for mulitiple DUIs? Can we expand this to registered sex offenders, people that have committed felonies, etc? Discuss!
medic2258
10-26-2012, 08:48
I think they should have the persons BAC as the number, and their intials for the letters. ie: .12-jao
Gareth68
10-26-2012, 08:50
Cab we get one for thieves as well, I'd like to spot them in a crowd so I know to keep my stuff secured. And sexual predators....they definitely need plates.
If you are going to hand out scarlet letters, lets hand em out.
OctoberRust
10-26-2012, 08:50
I think they should have the persons BAC as the number, and their intials for the letters. ie: .12-jao
:rofl::rofl::rofl:
What will this realistically accomplish? To often, ideas are proposed that sound like "good, common sense ideas", but after analysis, are not very good, and are often bad.
By comparison, what is the good of making a 36 y/o man register as a sex offender because he was convicted at age 18 for having sex with his 16 y/o girlfriend?
I ask this because I had sex with my 16 y/o girlfriend when I was 18. It was legal in Alabama, but over the border in Florida, it would have been a felony.
Had our first time (in Alabama) taken place two weeks earlier, it would have been a felony. She had just turned 16.
HollowHead
10-26-2012, 09:11
I believe the correct term is, "license plates of color." HH
I believe the correct term is, "license plates of color." HH
:rofl::rofl::rofl:
cowboywannabe
10-26-2012, 09:29
Ohio does. I forget what qualifies you to earn one, but they are an ugly shade of yellow with red lettering.
it has to be the family's only car and way for the "injured spouse" of the offender to get to work....
Ah yes. The party plates.
Mm...not sure how I feel about that one. Does the person that made 1 bad choice get the same color plate as the person that's done prison time for mulitiple DUIs? Can we expand this to registered sex offenders, people that have committed felonies, etc? Discuss!
Yes, great idea. We should all have government implanted microchips, too, so people can know just by walking past you what crimes you've ever committed. Naturally, it'd be great if the government could track everyone, too.
MedicOni
10-26-2012, 10:27
Ohio does. I forget what qualifies you to earn one, but they are an ugly shade of yellow with red lettering.
Lol sounds like my normal NM license plate.
stolenphot0
10-26-2012, 11:03
Basic breakdown of the plates
http://www.jdrlaw.com/ohioduiattorney/ohio-dui-penalties.html
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/pshearer/OH05_dui.jpg
i believe the correct term is, "license plates of color." hhnaaclp?
Mrs.Cicero
10-26-2012, 11:23
Personally, I'd prefer we just permanently revoke their driver's license on the first offense, and shoot them if they are caught at it a second time. But I'll settle for the plate on the first offense and shooting them the second time. Realize my viewpoint is due to the multiple skull fractures, subdural hematomas, etc., that one drunk driver managed to inflict on me.
Minnesota has them. Get them after your second dwi within 10 years. Called 'Whiskey plates'. Every car you drive has to have them. Different color and start with a W.
Idk if it allows cops to pull you over without reason or not...that's the rumor.
Minnesota has them. Get them after your second dwi within 10 years. Called 'Whiskey plates'. Every car you drive has to have them. Different color and start with a W.
Idk if it allows cops to pull you over without reason or not...that's the rumor.
It doesn't.
Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2
HollowHead
10-26-2012, 11:37
Minnesota has them. Get them after your second dwi within 10 years. Called 'Whiskey plates'. Every car you drive has to have them. Different color and start with a W.
.
So, the wife and kids have to have "whiskey plates" on their cars also...or are you forbidden from driving other cars in the household? HH
Closest I've seen here in Utah is people having to blow into a tube before their car will start.
nikerret
10-26-2012, 11:42
I think it sounds stupid. I hate all the different plates. Try running a plate that dispatch hasn't heard of. KS has over 100 different late designtions: schools, military, FF, Breast Cancer, Truck, Perm App, too damn many. If we just use combinatins of letters and numbers without confusing the issue further, my job is a lot easier.
So, the wife and kids have to have "whiskey plates" on their cars also...or are you forbidden from driving other cars in the household? HH
I would assume it's against the law to drive a vehicle without them if you are mandated to have them on yours. I have not done any research though and never had them myself.
Diesel McBadass
10-26-2012, 11:51
The licence plate i have goes back to when i was 6 and riding in my moms minivan, she gave me one of her own cars and i transferred plates to my own car i own now. Plates dont stay with the person. There was a licence plate auto scanner here that was pulling people over for suspended licences and such then the cops were finding the persons spouses or kids driving. Seems like it wouldn't work.
I was thinking an icon of a red solo cup on the license plate would get the point across.
Gunhaver
10-26-2012, 11:54
It doesn't.
Sent from the toe of my jack boot using Tapatalk 2
Seems like it should. I'd call it permanent probable cause issued upon your first DUI and required on every car you drive. I have no problem with cops being able to pull everyone with those plates over and randomly BAC checking them every time they see one and are bored enough to give them the go around.
nikerret
10-26-2012, 11:58
Seems like it should. I'd call it permanent probable cause issued upon your first DUI and required on every car you drive. I have no problem with cops being able to pull everyone with those plates over and randomly BAC checking them every time they see one and are bored enough to give them the go around.
You are the only one who drives your vehicle? You never drive anyone else's vehicle? It's stupid and should not be PC of anything other than the person, or one of the people who the vehicle is registered to has been convicted of DUI.
bocaboca
10-26-2012, 12:23
I think it sounds stupid. I hate all the different plates. Try running a plate that dispatch hasn't heard of. KS has over 100 different late designtions: schools, military, FF, Breast Cancer, Truck, Perm App, too damn many. If we just use combinatins of letters and numbers without confusing the issue further, my job is a lot easier.
Each one of those vanity plates puts xtra $$ into the states coffers....its all about the money
Seems like it should. I'd call it permanent probable cause issued upon your first DUI and required on every car you drive. I have no problem with cops being able to pull everyone with those plates over and randomly BAC checking them every time they see one and are bored enough to give them the go around.
We should just get rid of the fourth amendment, too.
Basic breakdown of the plates
http://www.jdrlaw.com/ohioduiattorney/ohio-dui-penalties.html
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/pshearer/OH05_dui.jpg
i just skimmed that link and saw this which cracks me up...
rd DUI conviction and beyond
DUI penalties continue to increase the more you are convicted of DUI.
With 3 or more prior DUIs within 6 years, any further DUI is a 4th Degree Felony.
With 5 or more prior DUIs within 20 years, any further DUI is a 4th Degree Felony.
Fines increase to range from $850 minimum to $10,500 maximum.
Mandatory treatment, license suspension (including lifetime suspensions), vehicle forfeiture, mandatory DUI plates and Interlock devices.
so if you have to forfeit your license and vehicles why would you need the mandatory dui plates and interlock device? you gonna put em on your bicycle or something? lol
Minnesota has them. Get them after your second dwi within 10 years. Called 'Whiskey plates'. Every car you drive has to have them. Different color and start with a W.
Idk if it allows cops to pull you over without reason or not...that's the rumor.
Honestly, how hard is it for LE to 'find' probable cause to pull you over?
Honestly, how hard is it for LE to 'find' probable cause to pull you over?
I have no idea. I've never been pulled over...knock on wood.
Honestly, how hard is it for LE to 'find' probable cause to pull you over?
Probably pretty easy depending on how bored they are.
Unfortunately I think that the bottom line here is that
some people want someone with a DUI humilated in public.
My question is where do we draw the line with other
convictions that have already been mentioned and a DUI?
HollowHead
10-26-2012, 16:37
Probably pretty easy depending on how bored they are.
Unfortunately I think that the bottom line here is that
some people want someone with a DUI humilated in public.
My question is where do we draw the line with other
convictions that have already been mentioned and a DUI?
Good point. I for one feel that texting while driving is a far more serious offense. HH
Buki192327
10-26-2012, 17:03
Ohio does. I forget what qualifies you to earn one, but they are an ugly shade of yellow with red lettering.
A couple of local LEOs I know, call them party plates.
nikerret
10-26-2012, 17:14
Good point. I for one feel that texting while driving is a far more serious offense. HH
Texting while driving shouldn't be a legal offense, at all. If you are texting and fail to maintain a lane, you have failed to mainain the lane and have broken that law. All other issues that texting can lead to are already covered by the laws named after the specific issues.
Pawcatch@aol.co
10-26-2012, 17:23
Good point. I for one feel that texting while driving is a far more serious offense. HH
I agree.I have one DUI on my record,hadn't drank any alcohol in seven hours with I was arrested for it either.
However,I did my community service and paid all my fines in what my probation officer told me was "record time" for that county.
Still,I get messed with by a buddy who has multiple speeding and reckless driving offenses and claims that my one mistake is still worse.
BTW,it took him a lot longer to pay all his fines than it did mine.
concretefuzzynuts
10-26-2012, 17:29
Hmmm... no. Like others have stated why not child molester plates or burglar plates.
I see more and more intrusion in our lives.
<<< has never had a DUI.
Diesel_Bomber
10-26-2012, 17:34
Personally, I'd prefer we just permanently revoke their driver's license on the first offense, and shoot them if they are caught at it a second time. But I'll settle for the plate on the first offense and shooting them the second time. Realize my viewpoint is due to the multiple skull fractures, subdural hematomas, etc., that one drunk driver managed to inflict on me.
Mrs. C for pres! I like your style!
droidfire
10-26-2012, 17:49
Mrs. C for pres! I like your style!
Got my vote - criminals seem to think that when they get caught they got a good shot at gaming the system to their advantage. Wonder why?
Kinda hard to do looking at the underside of a flower bed.
Else aside, I don't agree with the so-called party plates. You can eventually scrub tar and feathers off...
...and like others have mentioned, how long before we get 'candy plates' for shoplifters and so on down the line.
Probably pretty easy depending on how bored they are.
Unfortunately I think that the bottom line here is that
some people want someone with a DUI humilated in public.
My question is where do we draw the line with other
convictions that have already been mentioned and a DUI?
Various sex offenses are grouped under one umbrella, and a person busted for streaking on a drunken dare when he was in college can be clustered with rapists and pedophiles.
What I don't get is why there is moral indignation about drunk drivers and sex offenders, but we don't hear of similar punishments for murderers, robbers, and thugs who beat people half to death.
Mrs.Cicero
10-26-2012, 18:27
Mrs. C for pres! I like your style!
LOL. :cool: Thank you, but I lack the necessary skills - I don't golf, waste other people's money, or suck up to Hollywood celebrities, and the only entourage I travel with is my kids.:supergrin:
HollowHead
10-26-2012, 18:28
What I don't get is why there is moral indignation about drunk drivers and sex offenders, but we don't hear of similar punishments for murderers, robbers, and thugs who beat people half to death.
Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter makes it perfectly clear. HH
TheExplorer
10-26-2012, 18:31
I guess I'm missing something. If you are a habitual DUI offender, why is your state still allowing you to drive?
HollowHead
10-26-2012, 18:39
I guess I'm missing something. If you are a habitual DUI offender, why is your state still allowing you to drive?
Because juries are made up of people who statistically, have driven under the influence at least once in their lives. "There but for the grace of God go I" reigns deep in alcohol-related prosecutions. HH
vikingsoftpaw
10-26-2012, 18:52
I guess I'm missing something. If you are a habitual DUI offender, why is your state still allowing you to drive?
Because they haven't caught you yet, enough times within the specified time frames.
or because you have someone enabling you.
TheExplorer
10-26-2012, 18:55
Because they haven't caught you yet, enough times within the specified time frames.
That's ridiculous if that's justification for a plate over a suspension.
I guess I'm missing something. If you are a habitual DUI offender, why is your state still allowing you to drive?
Who here is a habitual DUI offender? It helps if you quote the post instead of making a quick reply at the end.
TheExplorer
10-26-2012, 19:04
Who here is a habitual DUI offender? It helps if you quote the post instead of making a quick reply at the end.
What? I'm referring to the OP's topic, DUI plates.
"party plates"
They clearly discriminate against Alky-Americans. ;)
Grabbrass
10-26-2012, 20:57
Bad idea as far as I'm concerned, as the 'scarlet letter' license plate could compromise the state's case in prosecuting a subsequent DUI offense. Generally speaking, an officer is only supposed to stop a vehicle upon either observing a citable moving violation, or observing circumstances arising to a level of reasonable articulable suspicion of an offense in progress (in this case, DUI). If a defense lawyer gets the officer to admit on cross-examination that the presence of the DUI plate influenced his judgment in deciding to pull the vehicle over, or even if he just convinces the judge or jury that this is true even though the officer denies it, the case could fail as a bad stop.
Gunhaver
10-26-2012, 23:36
You are the only one who drives your vehicle? You never drive anyone else's vehicle? It's stupid and should not be PC of anything other than the person, or one of the people who the vehicle is registered to has been convicted of DUI.
Cry me a river. We put child molesters on lists so we can make their lives more difficult in the name of child safety. How many children do drunk drivers kill every year? Probably way more than weirdos and perverts combined. I don't care about family members of drunk drivers having to deal with more stops than usual any more than I care about family members of sex offenders having a hard time finding a place to live. The consequences of your actions having a negative effect on your friends and family is just another thing to consider when stumbling through the bar parking lot looking for your keys. Besides, a quick explanation that it's your drunk father or brother's car and a registration check and most people would be on their way.
But how much confidence would that plate give you that you can make it home without getting pulled over if you thought maybe you were OK to drive? I'm always the last one wanting to give the police more power but sicking them on actual bad guys that kill people instead of having them hiding behind corners writing chicken **** tickets is never a bad thing.
Does your state have different color license plates for people who have been convicted of either DUI or DWI.
I guess I think I like the idea....I think
Excellent idea. Do the exact same thing with their driver's license.
Louisville Glocker
10-27-2012, 06:02
I like the idea a lot. Of course, it is reminiscent of the Scarlet Letter that Adulterers had to wear on their clothing.
It makes sense because when you're on the road, you're sharing the roadways with others, so your actions on the road can create a danger. Hence, it is essentially a warning sign, a caution sign, just like any other road sign warns drivers of danger.
I think it is a great punishment as well, as it humiliates you in front of your community for your horrible judgment. I think it'd provide a lot more incentive not to drink and drive than say, a night in jail, or a fine, where nobody knows. Imagine showing up to work with your new shiny license plate.
Louisville Glocker
10-27-2012, 06:07
You are the only one who drives your vehicle? You never drive anyone else's vehicle? It's stupid and should not be PC of anything other than the person, or one of the people who the vehicle is registered to has been convicted of DUI.
Oh well, it just adds to the punishment if wifey is mad at you also....
Texting while driving shouldn't be a legal offense, at all. If you are texting and fail to maintain a lane, you have failed to mainain the lane and have broken that law. All other issues that texting can lead to are already covered by the laws named after the specific issues.
Couldnt the same be said of DUI?
What I don't get is why there is moral indignation about drunk drivers and sex offenders, but we don't hear of similar punishments for murderers, robbers, and thugs who beat people half to death.
Because we like murderers, robbers, and thugs better. They are upstanding citizens that only need some rehabilitation.
The 18 year old having consensual sex with his 16 year GF (above) is scum of the earth and can never rehabilitated. :rofl:
Drain You
10-27-2012, 09:20
While potentially causing hilarity and ridicule of moron drinkers, I can imagine a defense lawyer arguing (and worse, winning) in court saying
"Ya honor the po-lease clearly had prejudice when they pulled my client ova afta seein they had a different colored license plate... there is no way you can give him DWI #5 or even send him to prison for the 37 pounds of crack cocaine he had in his britches..."
shotgunred
10-27-2012, 09:23
Personally, I'd prefer we just permanently revoke their driver's license on the first offense, and shoot them if they are caught at it a second time. But I'll settle for the plate on the first offense and shooting them the second time. Realize my viewpoint is due to the multiple skull fractures, subdural hematomas, etc., that one drunk driver managed to inflict on me.
While I have never been hit by a drunk driver I agree with you.
PhotoFeller
10-27-2012, 10:19
Since alcohol abuse is our most costly social problem in terms of accidental deaths, business productivity loss, abuse and neglect of family members, property damage and lots more, handing out scarlet letters for multiple DUI arrests seems perfectly appropriate. People who routinely drink and drive won't like the idea, and folks with DUI records will think its unfair.
I don't see issuance of a special plate as giving more authority to anyone. Yes, it makes the repeat DUI offender stand out in public view; the cops and other drivers are entitled to a cue that 'the operator of this vehicle may be under the influence'. The special plate requirement could be rescinded after 3 or 5 years by the offender avoiding further arrest.
I think it would be an even more powerful concept if all states would adopt the same color plate for DUI offenders. The idea is to introduce a deterrent to commission of the most common and most costly problem in society today. If it takes the stigma associated with a scarlet colored license plate, I'm all for it. By the way, I'm a conservative who likes adult beverages as much as the next guy.
As far as exposing innocent family members to the DUI plate's stigma, look at it this way: what husband or wife wouldn't try to avoid putting family members through such embarrassment? Thus, its an additional incentive to avoid being arrested.
Because we like murderers, robbers, and thugs better. They are upstanding citizens that only need some rehabilitation.
The 18 year old having consensual sex with his 16 year GF (above) is scum of the earth and can never rehabilitated. :rofl:
That would only apply to me if we had done the deed in Florida!
OctoberRust
10-27-2012, 11:05
Cry me a river. We put child molesters on lists so we can make their lives more difficult in the name of child safety. How many children do drunk drivers kill every year? Probably way more than weirdos and perverts combined. I don't care about family members of drunk drivers having to deal with more stops than usual any more than I care about family members of sex offenders having a hard time finding a place to live. The consequences of your actions having a negative effect on your friends and family is just another thing to consider when stumbling through the bar parking lot looking for your keys. Besides, a quick explanation that it's your drunk father or brother's car and a registration check and most people would be on their way.
But how much confidence would that plate give you that you can make it home without getting pulled over if you thought maybe you were OK to drive? I'm always the last one wanting to give the police more power but sicking them on actual bad guys that kill people instead of having them hiding behind corners writing chicken **** tickets is never a bad thing.
Giving the government more power to do something to the individual is never a good thing.
if the individual is not safe to society, and had a trial by jury of his/her peers, he/she should not be free to begin with.
For your analogy with child molesters and registry of them, is a moot point. Just because the gov't is doing something, doesn't make it right. If the child molester is prone to doing it again (which they always are, it's the way they're wired) they shouldn't be out of jail to begin with. Same applies to drunk drivers, if one can convince a jury of his/her peers that he/she cannot be trusted on the streets again, then they shouldn't be out, period.
Is this the safest system I advocate? No..... But who said freedom/individual liberties is safe?......:dunno:
OctoberRust
10-27-2012, 11:09
Personally, I'd prefer we just permanently revoke their driver's license on the first offense, and shoot them if they are caught at it a second time. But I'll settle for the plate on the first offense and shooting them the second time. Realize my viewpoint is due to the multiple skull fractures, subdural hematomas, etc., that one drunk driver managed to inflict on me.
Sorry to hear about you getting hit by a drunk driver. However, when you bring this up, you sound like the brady victims that say the government needs to intrude on one's life more.
Yes, I know firearms are specifically covered in the constitution, but so is the 4th and 5th amendment. Which this seems to be a slippery slope to possibly violating. Refer to the above post though before you go crazy on me and say blah blah blood in the streets. Freedom comes at a cost, in certain times.
PhotoFeller
10-27-2012, 11:28
Giving the government more power to do something to the individual is never a good thing.
if the individual is not safe to society, and had a trial by jury of his/her peers, he/she should not be free to begin with.
For your analogy with child molesters and registry of them, is a moot point. Just because the gov't is doing something, doesn't make it right. If the child molester is prone to doing it again (which they always are, it's the way they're wired) they shouldn't be out of jail to begin with. Same applies to drunk drivers, if one can convince a jury of his/her peers that he/she cannot be trusted on the streets again, then they shouldn't be out, period.
Is this the safest system I advocate? No..... But who said freedom/individual liberties is safe?......:dunno:
I don't like unnecessary government either, but I abhor drunks operating vehicles that put my family and everyone else on the road at risk. I'm all for putting repeat DUI offenders in jail for a long time, but that isn't politically popular. So, we have to look for other deterrents.
Punishing drunk drivers with a designated license plate isn't infringing on anyone's freedom or personal liberties. It isn't an unnecessary intrusion by government. Driving while intoxicated is a huge problem, and it calls for creative solutions. Comparing the staggering cost to society of drunk driving to any aspect of firearm issues is ludicrous.
Gunhaver
10-27-2012, 13:26
Giving the government more power to do something to the individual is never a good thing.
if the individual is not safe to society, and had a trial by jury of his/her peers, he/she should not be free to begin with.
Those two statements seem to contradict each other. You think locking someone up indefinitely is not overreaching but putting a special plate on their car is? That's seems a bit bass akwards to me.
For your analogy with child molesters and registry of them, is a moot point. Just because the gov't is doing something, doesn't make it right. If the child molester is prone to doing it again (which they always are, it's the way they're wired) they shouldn't be out of jail to begin with. Same applies to drunk drivers, if one can convince a jury of his/her peers that he/she cannot be trusted on the streets again, then they shouldn't be out, period.
Is this the safest system I advocate? No..... But who said freedom/individual liberties is safe?......:dunno:
More people in prison is not the answer. We already have 2 million people locked up and we're letting seriously dangerous people out to make room for drug addicts. How much better is it going to get when we start locking up first offense DUI folks? What's a bigger burden on the tax payer, supporting someone for life in prison or the cost of stamping out a special plate for them?
OctoberRust
10-27-2012, 13:37
Those two statements seem to contradict each other. You think locking someone up indefinitely is not overreaching but putting a special plate on their car is? That's seems a bit bass akwards to me.
More people in prison is not the answer. We already have 2 million people locked up and we're letting seriously dangerous people out to make room for drug addicts. How much better is it going to get when we start locking up first offense DUI folks? What's a bigger burden on the tax payer, supporting someone for life in prison or the cost of stamping out a special plate for them?
Not a contradiction in the least, if society cannot reasonably trust someone, they shouldn't be out to begin with. Don't start picking and choosing out of the bill of rights though, in the name of being "fair".
I never said life in prison for someone who has a first offense DUI. I injected my personal opinion for the child molester issue, but did not mention what I thought was the appropriate punishment for someone convicted of DUI. It would vary, since few things in the judicial process of crime should be so black and white. Again though, picking and choosing out of the bill of rights, and giving the government unnecessary probable cause is too much, in my opinion.
I don't like unnecessary government either, but I abhor drunks operating vehicles that put my family and everyone else on the road at risk. I'm all for putting repeat DUI offenders in jail for a long time, but that isn't politically popular. So, we have to look for other deterrents.
Punishing drunk drivers with a designated license plate isn't infringing on anyone's freedom or personal liberties. It isn't an unnecessary intrusion by government. Driving while intoxicated is a huge problem, and it calls for creative solutions. Comparing the staggering cost to society of drunk driving to any aspect of firearm issues is ludicrous.
I think most of us have a very negative view on those who operate dangerous machinery that kills thousands, if not millions in this country each year, under the influence of any drug, including alcohol.
You can have "creative" solution all day long, but the bill of rights should NOT be up for sale, vote, or negotiation.
Also, when you said you're all for putting repeat DUI offenders in jail, but it isn't politically popular, my question to you is who gives a $#%@?..... Owning fully automatic weapons such as ak-47s and m-4s should be covered under the second amendment, and it's not "politically popular" either, but I still stand by my principles and values on individual liberties, and with those liberties comes responsibility. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
Gunhaver
10-27-2012, 14:00
Not a contradiction in the least, if society cannot reasonably trust someone, they shouldn't be out to begin with. Don't start picking and choosing out of the bill of rights though, in the name of being "fair".
I never said life in prison for someone who has a first offense DUI. I injected my personal opinion for the child molester issue, but did not mention what I thought was the appropriate punishment for someone convicted of DUI. It would vary, since few things in the judicial process of crime should be so black and white. Again though, picking and choosing out of the bill of rights, and giving the government unnecessary probable cause is too much, in my opinion.
I think most of us have a very negative view on those who operate dangerous machinery that kills thousands, if not millions in this country each year, under the influence of any drug, including alcohol.
You can have "creative" solution all day long, but the bill of rights should NOT be up for sale, vote, or negotiation.
Also, when you said you're all for putting repeat DUI offenders in jail, but it isn't politically popular, my question to you is who gives a $#%@?..... Owning fully automatic weapons such as ak-47s and m-4s should be covered under the second amendment, and it's not "politically popular" either, but I still stand by my principles and values on individual liberties, and with those liberties comes responsibility. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
I'm looking in my copy of the bill of rights and I don't see anything about the right to drive or the right to drive with the same plates as everyone else if you've had criminal convictions.
After one DUI you have showed yourself to be a danger to yourself and others. No question about it, we all know how dangerous drunk driving is so we don't have to debate how many DUIs it should take before action is taken against someone. The only question now is what to do with that person to keep them from killing someone.
What's your solution? Can't lock them up, can't put tags on their car to alert police to check them out more frequently. Then what? Do we all just keep getting killed by drunks every day and chalk it up to "freedom ain't free"?
This has nothing to do with the bill of rights.
I don't get the plates. Many people drive different cars. So your wife has to drive around with the Dwi plates if you got a Dwi? And your kids?
Maybe they should make Dwi folks put one of those magnetic signs on top of their car like the pizza delivery people have that says Dwi.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Texting while driving shouldn't be a legal offense, at all. If you are texting and fail to maintain a lane, you have failed to mainain the lane and have broken that law. All other issues that texting can lead to are already covered by the laws named after the specific issues.
The same logic can be applied to driving intoxicated.
airmotive
10-27-2012, 14:33
Texting while driving shouldn't be a legal offense, at all. If you are texting and fail to maintain a lane, you have failed to mainain the lane and have broken that law. All other issues that texting can lead to are already covered by the laws named after the specific issues.
If you replace the word "texting" with "drunk", does this change anything? IMHO, impared is impared...be it drunk, texting, 48 hours without sleep or getting a BJ while driving (ar any combination of the above). The results are the same: a two ton machine that is your responsibility, but not under your control.
PhotoFeller
10-27-2012, 15:19
So your wife has to drive around with the Dwi plates if you got a Dwi? And your kids?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Damn straight! If you don't want the wife and kids to be embarrassed, don't drive drunk.
If family members want to avoid embarrassment, they can apply pressure or other tactics to keep a drunken father or mother off of the streets.
The amount of alcohol related misery inflicted upon families and the public is tragic beyond measurement. To me, its as bad as anything our society has to deal with. Wimpy assed whining about infringement upon personal freedom and constitutional protections is symptomatic of much that is wrong with the USA.
Almost any step that forces individual accountability for alcohol abuse will be a step in the right direction.
If you drive recklessly while impaired with booze, drugs, meds or whatever, you're infringing on my implied right to safe passage to anywhere I choose to go. Under the law, I have an enforceable obligation to abide by the law, and I have the right to expect others on the road to do the same. Thus, if you crash into my vehicle when you are intoxicated, you will be punished. So much for the argument that imposing a special license plate on DUI violators is somehow infringing on their constitutional rights.
Personally, I'd prefer we just permanently revoke their driver's license on the first offense, and shoot them if they are caught at it a second time. But I'll settle for the plate on the first offense and shooting them the second time. Realize my viewpoint is due to the multiple skull fractures, subdural hematomas, etc., that one drunk driver managed to inflict on me.
Hear, hear. :thumbsup:
Driving while drunk, and I understand the polite term is 'under the influence,' is never a mistake. It is an intentional act of deliberate, callous indifference.
I suggest that we stop coddling these galoots and make the first time they drive drunk the last time they draw a breath outside of a prison.
Harsh, you say? Perhaps, but the drunk driver is playing Russian roulette with the muzzle pointed at us.
Shinytop
10-27-2012, 17:21
The colored license plates serves absolutely no purpose, none at all. Nothing keeps the offender from driving another car, rental or another car that belongs to the family.
It would also not help other drivers, if you are looking for that license plate you are not watching the road as you should be. Do you really want law enforcement to watch them extra or do you want law enforcement watching for bad driving in all drivers?
Bad concept, no way it helps anything. Period. I am not against shaming them but find a way that would help. Unique license plates would not.
What we should do is demand laws that take them off the road with severe financial penalties for offenses to include loss of property. I hesitate to ask for jail time because we already have too many people in jails. Maybe more weekend litter details or serving as cleaning people in hospitals and public buildings.
LOL. :cool: Thank you, but I lack the necessary skills - I don't golf, waste other people's money, or suck up to Hollywood celebrities, and the only entourage I travel with is my kids.:supergrin:
Hmm,sounds qualified. I'll vote for Mrs C.
D
PhotoFeller
10-27-2012, 18:02
The colored license plates serves absolutely no purpose, none at all. Nothing keeps the offender from driving another car, rental or another car that belongs to the family.
It would also not help other drivers, if you are looking for that license plate you are not watching the road as you should be. Do you really want law enforcement to watch them extra or do you want law enforcement watching for bad driving in all drivers?
Bad concept, no way it helps anything. Period. I am not against shaming them but find a way that would help. Unique license plates would not.
What we should do is demand laws that take them off the road with severe financial penalties for offenses to include loss of property. I hesitate to ask for jail time because we already have too many people in jails. Maybe more weekend litter details or serving as cleaning people in hospitals and public buildings.
Like most things subject to interpretation and personal opinion, different folks will have a different reaction to the license plate idea.
I agree with your point about strict law enforcement and stiff financial penalties for DUI. For habitual offenders, jail has to be the ultimate threat.
The possibility of public embarrassment can be a strong deterrent to certain behaviors. Think about the doctor, lawyer, executive, politician, cop, teacher, community leader or other prominent person who would want to avoid the scarlet plate for obvious reasons. Consider any serious member of a church or synagogue who doesn't want to be spotted with the telltale plate. Anyone with an ounce of personal pride would want to avoid the stigma of a 'drunk plate', in my opinion.
Some people just don't care about public scorn. Serious drunks wouldn't think much about a different plate. I've known a few clowns that would see the plate as a cool sign of their 'wildness'. Nothing short of incarceration will have an impact on these individuals.
Speaking personally, the prospect or driving around my community with a DUI offender license plate would certainly influence my behavior. Maybe I'm an outlier here, but risking the reputation I've spent a lifetime building just isn't in the cards.
I politely disagree . He , whom-ever as payed his dues and earned his or her right of privacy. No need to go through life being met with even more scrutiny! Live and let live.......!
OctoberRust
10-28-2012, 15:15
I'm looking in my copy of the bill of rights and I don't see anything about the right to drive or the right to drive with the same plates as everyone else if you've had criminal convictions.
After one DUI you have showed yourself to be a danger to yourself and others. No question about it, we all know how dangerous drunk driving is so we don't have to debate how many DUIs it should take before action is taken against someone. The only question now is what to do with that person to keep them from killing someone.
What's your solution? Can't lock them up, can't put tags on their car to alert police to check them out more frequently. Then what? Do we all just keep getting killed by drunks every day and chalk it up to "freedom ain't free"?
This has nothing to do with the bill of rights.
Check your copy of the bill of rights again. Go back to the 4th and 5th amendment. Read those, then ponder on who they apply to. In my book/bill of rights, they apply to every free man and woman. If you're not in jail, you shouldn't be stripped of those rights, giving police probable cause.
My solution would be let each state decide the penalties on DUI. I can chalk it up to "that's the price of freedom" since if you want safety over freedom, we can also chip away even more at the 5th amendment, giving everyone an annual dose of truth serum, and interrogating each citizen/inhabitant of the US into any crimes they have committed. This right here alone, along with getting rid of the 1st amendment, could have prevented 9/11. The point isn't that I'm advocating getting rid of these amendments, but pointing out to you, liberty and freedom is not the safest system there is. It is a system I advocate, many others can only stand freedom to an extent that feels comfortable to them. Again, the 4th and 5th amendment is not up for debate/vote/sale. Along with the others in the BOR.
PhotoFeller
10-28-2012, 16:13
Drunks that drive put more men, women and kids at risk of death or serious injury than any other category of deviants in our society. Fines don't stop them. We don't have the jail capacity to house them. They write a check to their lawyer and go have a drink.
If the DUI offender plate served as a deterrent to some of these fools, it would be worth a shot.
Your statement that we prefer safety more than freedom is incredibly simplistic. We are a complex society of 300+million people with the best system of freedoms and protections in the world. Protecting the safety and freedom of the millions of people on our roads who obey the law by publicly exposing repeat DUI offenders is a step I believe the courts would uphold.
nikerret
10-28-2012, 19:48
Couldnt the same be said of DUI?
The same logic can be applied to driving intoxicated.
If you replace the word "texting" with "drunk", does this change anything? IMHO, impared is impared...be it drunk, texting, 48 hours without sleep or getting a BJ while driving (ar any combination of the above). The results are the same: a two ton machine that is your responsibility, but not under your control.
Not the exact same. I don't need an actual violation to stop someone for reasonable suspicion of drunk driving. If you are stopped, without having committed any travffic violation, and you are DUI, good arrest. Safely texting is not the same as driving DUI and not quite crossing the line.
Punishing drunk drivers with a designated license plate isn't infringing on anyone's freedom or personal liberties. It isn't an unnecessary intrusion by government.
It is if people are being stopped only because of that?
I politely disagree . He , whom-ever as payed his dues and earned his or her right of privacy. No need to go through life being met with even more scrutiny! Live and let live.......!
So by that logic then a person who sexually assaulted a child who has done their time shouldn't be subject to the sex offender laws then right?
snewsoG22
10-28-2012, 20:12
Probably should give teens and seniors their own color of plates too.
HollowHead
10-28-2012, 20:19
Probably should give teens and seniors their own color of plates too.
Agreed, although I think the seniors' tag is unnecessary. Just steer clear of Buicks. HH
I've had so many DUIs my plate would look like a rainbow!
Actually I've had nary a one. Below pretty much sums it up.
Can we get one for thieves as well, I'd like to spot them in a crowd so I know to keep my stuff secured. And sexual predators....they definitely need plates. If you are going to hand out scarlet letters, lets hand em out.
JimIsland
10-28-2012, 20:54
I think it's bull****.....maybe we should outlaw alcohol since it is the root of the problem, get rid of guns because they kill, abolish the porn industry because it creates sex crazed pedophiles? Pftt....whatever
snewsoG22
10-28-2012, 20:56
don't forget to ban cars all together too.
Colored Licenses Plates for DUI - DWI
GTDS
:rofl:
HollowHead
10-28-2012, 21:04
I think it's bull****.....maybe we should outlaw alcohol since it is the root of the problem, get rid of guns because they kill, abolish the porn industry because it creates sex crazed pedophiles? Pftt....whatever
While we're at it, let's ban the internet as it causes obesity. Seriously, making an object like a car a visual pariah because of what it's driver did is one of the stupidest ideas ever. HH
GTDS
:rofl:
Now that's what I'm talkin' about. :supergrin:
PhotoFeller
10-28-2012, 22:31
I think it's bull****.....maybe we should outlaw alcohol since it is the root of the problem, get rid of guns because they kill, abolish the porn industry because it creates sex crazed pedophiles? Pftt....whatever
Settle down, dude. Until now this has been a discussion, not a brawl.
I understand that you don't agree with tagging repeat DUI offenders, but you don't explain why it isn't right or won't work. Saying the idea is BS doesn't explain your logic.
Noone has suggested banning alcohol or anything else. Its individual driver behavior that takes lives. Alcohol doesnt kill, just like guns don't kill.
Is drunk driving a serious problem? If it is, what might be done to reduce the number of people killed and maimed each year in alcohol related accidents? Wouldn't it be better to try something new than to just accept the failure of current laws?
F14Scott
10-28-2012, 22:39
How about banning "A" to prevent "A"? As in, "We want to prevent alcohol-related driving incidents, so we are removing driving privileges from those with an alcohol-related incident."
Instead, we seem to like to ban "B" to prevent "A". As in, let's give a DUI criminal a red license plate, or a three-DUIs-and-you're-out rule, or ban liquor sales after midnight, or any number of things that are only tangentially related to driving drunk.
PhotoFeller
10-28-2012, 22:55
How about banning "A" to prevent "A"? As in, "We want to prevent alcohol-related driving incidents, so we are removing driving privileges from those with an alcohol-related incident."
I'll vote for 'A to prevent A' as Scott suggests. Forget the goofy red license plates. Implement and enforce a law that says 'If you're arrested for drunk driving, your license is revoked.' I like that a lot.
If you're convicted for DUI, don't whine about having to drive to work, needing to drive the kids to school, or anything else that losing your license interferes with; there will be no exceptions.
I suspect anyone who objects to DUI plates would find this proposal quite acceptable. Right guys? Its not unconstitutional, it doesn't impose a 'scarlet letter' punishment. I think Scott has the answer.
I propose that we pass a law that it is illegal to break the law. That will solve everything.
skeeter7
10-29-2012, 01:19
This is the first I have ever heard of special license plates for individuals with DUI convictions. I know they don't have them here in RI. I really don't agree with the idea of issuing someone a different colored plate. I think all states should instead adopt a stricter set of sentencing guidelines when it comes to DUI charges. I feel there should definitely be a 3 strikes and you're out rule as well as far as license revocation. A plate just shames a person even after they have paid the price for their mistake. A stronger punishment will make most people think twice before they do it again. I was in court one day and I heard one attorney say to another, "I told my client to move to RI after we finish up with her 2nd DUI trial in MA because she will lose her license in MA if she gets caught again." Hopefully, he hits that attorney next time he drives drunk. Maybe it will change what he says to his clients. I just shook my head...
Lone_Wolfe
10-29-2012, 01:31
Hmmm... no. Like others have stated why not child molester plates or burglar plates.
I see more and more intrusion in our lives.
<<< has never had a DUI.
I see the DUI plats as a warning to other drivers that the driver of that car has a higher than average chance of being drunk behind the wheel. I'd try to stay away from those cars in traffic.
SGT HATRED
10-29-2012, 02:16
A whole lot if stupid in this thread...
If it wasn't about generating revenue and more about public safety I might agree.
<--- got a dui and wasn't driving a vehicle or in a vehicle...
PhotoFeller
10-29-2012, 09:51
This is the first I have ever heard of special license plates for individuals with DUI convictions. I know they don't have them here in RI. I really don't agree with the idea of issuing someone a different colored plate. I think all states should instead adopt a stricter set of sentencing guidelines when it comes to DUI charges. I feel there should definitely be a 3 strikes and you're out rule as well as far as license revocation. A plate just shames a person even after they have paid the price for their mistake. A stronger punishment will make most people think twice before they do it again. I was in court one day and I heard one attorney say to another, "I told my client to move to RI after we finish up with her 2nd DUI trial in MA because she will lose her license in MA if she gets caught again." Hopefully, he hits that attorney next time he drives drunk. Maybe it will change what he says to his clients. I just shook my head...
Skeeter-
I agree with much of what you say about tougher laws for DUI. Where I disagree is your point about shaming a person after they pay the price for their mistake.
As I see it, the DUI plate would become part of a well established, well communicated punishment/offender exposure program for repeat DUI convictions within, let's say, 3 years. Stated another way, two DUIs within 3 years and your vehicles would have to wear DUI plates. The community would know, starting with driver education classes, that public identification for repeat DUI arrests is part of the price for violating the law.
Enforcing stronger laws to punish offenders is the best solution. However, lawmakers are reluctant to get tougher because (1) there are so many drivers that drink that it isn't politically popular to tighten the screws, (2) people who get caught always fight like hell to keep their driving privleges because of work and other transportation needs; this clogs the local courts with DUI cases and (3) alcohol is so deeply ingrained in our society that bad booze-related behavior gets a pass because people feel like "damn, that could have been me!"; this diffuses public sentiment that would otherwise fuel organized efforts to toughen DUI laws and law enforcement. Other than MADD, I'm not aware of any large scale effort to reduce drunk driving.
For me, this discussion is a good topic because alcohol-related traffic accidents are a huge problem. DUI plates may be a goofy idea, but the discourse is healthy.
In Ohio, these plates are not mandated for anyone. However, if you wish to exercise driving privileges after your conviction and as a part of your sentence, you must display these plates a a condition of your driving privileges. If you do not want to display the plates, then you cannot drive a vehicle during the duration of your sentence. If you are caught operating a vehicle without these tags during your sentence, you are charged with driving under suspension. It's really rather simple, before you go out and break the law, understand the consequences. If you then decide to go ahead and do it anyway, or are too lazy to understand the consequences, why is that anyone's fault but your own?
F14Scott
10-29-2012, 18:11
Enforcing stronger laws to punish offenders is the best solution. However, lawmakers are reluctant to get tougher because (1) there are so many drivers that drink that it isn't politically popular to tighten the screws, (2) people who get caught always fight like hell to keep their driving privleges because of work and other transportation needs; this clogs the local courts with DUI cases and (3) alcohol is so deeply ingrained in our society that bad booze-related behavior gets a pass because people feel like "damn, that could have been me!"; this diffuses public sentiment that would otherwise fuel organized efforts to toughen DUI laws and law enforcement. Other than MADD, I'm not aware of any large scale effort to reduce drunk driving.
Spot on, this.
PhotoFeller
10-29-2012, 18:20
In Ohio, these plates are not mandated for anyone. However, if you wish to exercise driving privileges after your conviction and as a part of your sentence, you must display these plates a a condition of your driving privileges. If you do not want to display the plates, then you cannot drive a vehicle during the duration of your sentence. If you are caught operating a vehicle without these tags during your sentence, you are charged with driving under suspension. It's really rather simple, before you go out and break the law, understand the consequences. If you then decide to go ahead and do it anyway, or are too lazy to understand the consequences, why is that anyone's fault but your own?
Seems reasonable to me. The Ohio approach puts accountability and personal responsibility squarely where it belongs...on the offender's shoulders.
Not the exact same. I don't need an actual violation to stop someone for reasonable suspicion of drunk driving. If you are stopped, without having committed any travffic violation, and you are DUI, good arrest. Safely texting is not the same as driving DUI and not quite crossing the line.
It is if people are being stopped only because of that?
For curiosity's sake, aside from having firsthand knowledge that someone has been drinking, how do you suspect someone is drinking and driving if there isn't "an actual violation" to pull them over for? Not saying you can't, I just don't know how.
Second, "safely texting and driving" makes as much sense as "safely drinking and driving" even if your state doesn't have a specific law related to texting and driving.
DreamWeaver88
10-29-2012, 20:28
I think it sounds stupid. I hate all the different plates. Try running a plate that dispatch hasn't heard of. KS has over 100 different late designtions: schools, military, FF, Breast Cancer, Truck, Perm App, too damn many. If we just use combinatins of letters and numbers without confusing the issue further, my job is a lot easier.
Why does it matter what kind of plate it is that has to be run? Doesn't it just go by the state and the license plate number?
DW
PhotoFeller
10-29-2012, 21:01
For curiosity's sake, aside from having firsthand knowledge that someone has been drinking, how do you suspect someone is drinking and driving if there isn't "an actual violation" to pull them over for? Not saying you can't, I just don't know how.
Second, "safely texting and driving" makes as much sense as "safely drinking and driving" even if your state doesn't have a specific law related to texting and driving.
Woofie-
I suspect the police look for subtle signs of intoxication like driving too slowly, straying accross the center line, difficulty keeping a straight line. These cues would warrant further observation, but wouldn't constitute a violation.
I agree with you that safe driving while texting just doesn't compute. I'm calling that an oxymoron, or so it seems to me.
Glockworks
10-30-2012, 03:25
Does your state have different color license plates for people who have been convicted of either DUI or DWI.
I guess I think I like the idea....I think
Stupid idea. Me and my wife own 5 cars. Our driving age children drive any of them sometimes. Get it, or do I have to spell this out?
Mrs.Cicero
10-30-2012, 05:42
Around here I suspect everyone pulling out of the biker bar down the road after midnight and weaving and wobbling on their motorcycles within their own lane while driving 20 miles under the speed limit is probably somewhat inebriated...
I like that bar, (the bartenders are quite creative), but only in the winter. It gets a little rougher than I want to deal with in good riding weather.
bocaboca
10-30-2012, 07:09
Stupid idea. Me and my wife own 5 cars. Our driving age children drive any of them sometimes. Get it, or do I have to spell this out?
I don't get it. I would appreciate it if....You would spell it out.
thank you in advance for "spelling it out".
PhotoFeller
10-30-2012, 09:24
Stupid idea. Me and my wife own 5 cars. Our driving age children drive any of them sometimes. Get it, or do I have to spell this out?
Look at it this way: If no one in your family has a DUI problem, no one has to be embarassed by your 5 cars wearing DUI plates. Whats complicated? What has to be spelled out? If everyone exercises reasonable judgement, and obeys the law, this isn't a big deal.
Here is another way to think about this: If you've got family members who drink and drive, you've got a lot more to worry about than embarrassing license plates. Like killing a car load of innocent people.
nikerret
10-30-2012, 10:54
Why does it matter what kind of plate it is that has to be run? Doesn't it just go by the state and the license plate number?
DW
No. In KS, each designation has to be ran with that designation and the numbers/letters. Mosst plates have duplicates and the make/model has to be known to make sure you have the right one.
For example, ABC123 can be on a Cavalier and a F-150, both current and valid. One would be a passenger car and the other a truck. The tag intself is not shown as different and not every tag has a dupicate.
Mrs.Cicero
10-30-2012, 11:44
No. In KS, each designation has to be ran with that designation and the numbers/letters. Mosst plates have duplicates and the make/model has to be known to make sure you have the right one.
For example, ABC123 can be on a Cavalier and a F-150, both current and valid. One would be a passenger car and the other a truck. The tag intself is not shown as different and not every tag has a dupicate.
What moron designed that system?
.264 magnum
10-30-2012, 11:48
Stupid idea. Me and my wife own 5 cars. Our driving age children drive any of them sometimes. Get it, or do I have to spell this out?
We have five cars as well. Other than my wife's car which is more or less off limits to the kids, everyone picks whichever car they'd like to drive that day.
PhotoFeller
10-30-2012, 11:51
No. In KS, each designation has to be ran with that designation and the numbers/letters. Mosst plates have duplicates and the make/model has to be known to make sure you have the right one.
For example, ABC123 can be on a Cavalier and a F-150, both current and valid. One would be a passenger car and the other a truck. The tag intself is not shown as different and not every tag has a dupicate.
The DUI plate could be real simple. The special color plates could be issued in numerical order starting with 1 and numbering as high as necessary:
FLORIDA
47956
So, what is the purpose of these plates? If they don't give LEO probable cause for a pull over, then what exactly do the plates accomplish for anyone? What is the state's official reasoning behind these?
I am fine with the ideal on the 2nd conviction of DUI.
Glockworks
10-30-2012, 19:27
Look at it this way: If no one in your family has a DUI problem, no one has to be embarassed by your 5 cars wearing DUI plates. Whats complicated? What has to be spelled out? If everyone exercises reasonable judgement, and obeys the law, this isn't a big deal.
Here is another way to think about this: If you've got family members who drink and drive, you've got a lot more to worry about than embarrassing license plates. Like killing a car load of innocent people.
Okay I will spell this out slowly for some. No one in my family drinks at all. I meant to imply others in other families who might have more than one car in their name might have a problem here. Does every car in their name get the special tag? Do others in the family through often ZERO fault of their own have to drive with this badge of dishonor (colored license plate)? This was my main direction of my post, those who were not DUI/DWI driving should not have to have this brand of dishonor on the car they drive. I was thinking of others, apparently a concept lost on some.
PhotoFeller
10-30-2012, 21:05
Okay I will spell this out slowly for some. No one in my family drinks at all. I meant to imply others in other families who might have more than one car in their name might have a problem here. Does every car in their name get the special tag? Do others in the family through often ZERO fault of their own have to drive with this badge of dishonor (colored license plate)? This was my main direction of my post, those who were not DUI/DWI driving should not have to have this brand of dishonor on the car they drive. I was thinking of others, apparently a concept lost on some.
I think the way Ohio's plan works, a DUI plate has to be on whichever vehicle(s) the offender drives. I guess if he/she operates 3 out of 5 family vehicles, those 3 have to wear them. I'm not an Ohioan, so that's my interpretation of 9L82's earlier post.
HollowHead
10-30-2012, 21:09
I think the way Ohio's plan works, a DUI plate has to be on whichever vehicle(s) the offender drives. I guess if he/she operates 3 out of 5 family vehicles, those 3 have to wear them. I'm not an Ohioan, so that's my interpretation of 9L82's earlier post.
If that's the case, I hope these plates are supplied free of charge. HH
PhotoFeller
10-30-2012, 21:20
If that's the case, I hope these plates are supplied free of charge. HH
I suspect the DUI fine covers the plate cost. Maybe the court issues one 'special use' plate that can be moved from one vehicle to another.
Woofie-
I suspect the police look for subtle signs of intoxication like driving too slowlyviolation, straying accross the center lineviolation, difficulty keeping a straight lineevery driver on the road. These cues would warrant further observation, but wouldn't constitute a violation.
I agree with you that safe driving while texting just doesn't compute. I'm calling that an oxymoron, or so it seems to me.
What I said in red.
If that's the case, I hope these plates are supplied free of charge. HH
they are not free the offender has to but the plates and then when he is able to get regular plates agian he has to buy the new regular plates.
I worked with aguy that this happened to(he deserved it) then the dumbass goes and get caught again and hes to get the plates and a devise he has blow into before the car woould start.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.