Originally Posted by
turbo1889
I once knew a retired state trooper who used to argue that DUI should carry the death penalty on the first offense. Cases like this make me think back to the arguments I had with him that such a policy was going a little too far for even my taste and was too draconian. Maybe he had a good point.
I was an EMT and heavy rescue volunteer for about 7yrs, worked as a guard on a military post and was also a bouncer. When you see up close the toll for people being drunk it will change you.
Prior to being an EMT, I never wore seatbelts and I did my share of driving when I shouldn't have. Seeing what happens definitely changed my habits and viewpoint on many things.
I think our system in general is way too geared towards revenue generation with the fines and penalties, vs truly protecting the public and punishing those who commit crimes against the innocent. Our system is also structured to affect the poor in many cases. A DUI is something the wealthy can easily afford, as are cellphone tickets, but those who struggle can wind up severely impacted by the $10k cost of a first DUI in NJ. The system needs to be balanced to affect all, equally.
A few things that would help.
Enforce penalties for things that actually endanger people. Traffic violations like crossing into an oncoming lane, driving too slowly, failure to signal, texting, on the phone etc. All of those represent a real danger to others yet the political motivation isn't there to truly enforce them. Instead we do speeding, which is pure revenue stream, much easier to collect.
With regard to the actual penalties, when they are financial they should be a percentage of assets or annual earnings, whichever is greater. This way people are being assessed an equal burden for their actions.
Locally I listen to the police radio frequently and hear the operators of $60k+ vehicles with 40+ cellphone tickets in their history. Clearly the fine doesn't matter to them, but for the avg Joe, the $250 for the ticket, could really hurt them. That gap needs to be closed and you will have much more even public attention to the issues.
I am not of the camp where being under the influence somehow forgives the consequences of the action. Nor do I believe an "accident" where someone is mowed down should go unpunished. There are "accidents" but very very few are truly unavoidable, more blame should be investigated and applied than exists now. An example, a provable mechanical failure of a car that causes it to go haywire and results in a death...accident. A driver who is well beyond the age of operating safely or simply too inattentive or incompetent, or uncoordinated to operate safely that mows someone down...not an accident.