A few weeks ago, I wrote a blog post called Suspended but undeterred, in which I ranted about the problem of chronic repeat suspended drivers. Well, this one takes the cake.
Earlier this morning, around 3:00 AM, a Lincoln police officer stopped a motorist for a minor traffic infraction. He had no driver's license, and lied about his identity. It didn't work. The officer figured out who he really was pretty quickly.
He tried to deceive the officer about his identity because he is suspended, but here's the kicker: he has previously been convicted of driving on a suspended license 21 times. That's pretty impressive for a 29 year old, and has to be close to a record of some sort.
Friday, April 18, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Chain that sucker to a skateboard!! Can it be made very expensive for the owners of the cars he's borrowing? That might soon dry up his supply. Then he'd probably resort to stealing, but that's a jailable offense. My preferred solution would be to break his legs, but I don't think that's allowed.
The solution is simple. Just make driving on a suspended license a felony and throw these jerks in the slammer. It is obviously the only thing that is going to keep them from climbing behind the wheel. They are suspended because they fail to follow traffic laws, and if we simply let them continue, it is going to result in a tragedy. Anon @8:29 preferred breaking their legs; I'd aim a little higher, like the neck.
Boy doesn't drive very good does he?
Steve--that works for me!
If execution is indicated for DUS, I'd hate to see what you'd come up with as just punishment for MVH. Torn apart by two horses? Hung, drawn, disemboweled, and quartered? I suspect a little habitual message board hyperbole is being exhibited.
No hyperbole, just tired of having to put up with the BS of people who don't believe in following the laws.
Perhaps a more fitting DUS deterrent than execution or physical torture might be legislation allowing the seizure of whatever vehicle the suspended driver is operating - even if that suspended doesn't own it, even if a bank, finance business, or leasing company owns part or all of the vehicle. If cities, counties, and states are willing to fight the legal muscle that banks and leasing companies have on tap, such a law could work.
Anon@1:51
I never suggested torture, though I woulnd't be opposed to capital punishment for someone with this many convictions. Let's not get into that argument here, though.
As for seizing the vehicle, it could have an effect, but it would be extremely unfair as often as not. Say your 20-something child still lives at home and simply takes your car without your permission. Now you're out a car, for his crime? How would you stop them? The only way I can see your idea working is if someone knowingly lets another person without a license borrow their car. That's going to be difficult if not impossible to prove unless they simply admit it. What if they steal someone else's car, do we seize that, too?
No making DUS a prison-time crime is the only feasible way of stopping repeat offenders.
Yes, because jail time has been so successful at deterring crime. Herpaderp. Doughnuts.
Anon @ 11:37
I'm assuming your comment was meant to be sarcastic, but in reality, you nailed it. How many people have you heard of who committed crimes against society while they were incarcerated? Yes, you get few crimes against other inmates while someone is in prison, but that's just part of the price they pay for being criminals in the first place. As for DUS, or any other crime; zero! It is the best deterrent I can think of.
As for your last to sentences (?), maybe I'm too old to get it, but it was lost on me.
The last sentence was a joke about cops. You know... bacon... donuts... pork products of some sort. I bet Tom has heard them all in his career. I am or try to be funny but I truly can have a serious discussion about this without being sarcastic... really. It bothers me when the first reaction to anyone doing anything out of the societal norm is to put someone in jail. Yes, this person has a problem. CLEARLY! We all can agree on this. However, the ultimate goal should be to make a bad person into a good person. Or a bad action into a good one or minimally an intermediate\benign one. How many times have you experienced someone going into jail to only come out as a better person? There may be a few, and I applaud those that do, but the statistics will show you that it is the exact opposite. Our jail\prison system is not a rehabilitation program. Sure, there are efforts to that affect but it's failing. What it is good at, is putting non-violent criminals in a situation that teaches them how to be violent criminals. What it's not good at, is rehabilitating drug addicts, transients, the mentally ill, etc. How about we move forward and figure out a better way. I don't have the answer, but jail is the incorrect solution. We are smarter than this.
Post a Comment