Quote:
Originally Posted by flameswin
I'm not saying people who get dui's should be given any sympathy, or cut any slack, but having that blower thing for the rest of your life seemed a little harsh to me. It would just seem like quite the punishment to be 50 years old, driving your grandkids to soccer practise, and having to explain to them that the reason your embarassingly blowing into a device shaped like a d*ck to start your car, is because you screwed up once when you were 17, over three decades ago. I mean there's lots of things you can do to screw up when your younger, but not too many I can think of, leave you with a permanent social stigma to make you look pathetic for the rest of your life.
|
It does seem harsh, but I'm in favour of the judicial system having the discretion to award stiff penalties in all things, whether it's violent crime, DUI, or something less dangerous; but I'd want to see the harshest penalties used in only the most extreme cases. If a judge sees a lack of remorse and a lifestyle that makes repitition likely, they should have the ability to assign very stiff penalties. On the other hand, it just doesn't make sense to give a blow tester to someone who got drunk at their Christmas party but is sober the other 364 days a year.
I'm not sure if the current machines have this technology, but they should track failed and passed tests, and operate on a parole system. If you haven't tried to start your car while over the limit in 10 years, you should be able to apply to have the tester removed.