An Article For You Riders

http://www.pnj.com/article/20130313/NEWS01/130313007/James-McGowan-DUI-death-suspect-to-remain-in-jail-until-trail?nclick_check=1

The motorcyclist run-down last Saturday night was a member of ABATE. It was the perp's 4th DUI in 22 years. Looks like the perp will remain in detention without bond until his trial.

I don't know if this is getting attention because of ABATE or because of it being his 4th conviction. He could have just as easily hit a car or had a single car accident that killed someone in his family.

You cannot legislate morality when dealing with drugs and alcohol. A car simply should not start if a person is impaired. People will continue to die as long as people profit on those deaths. People want to blame the drunk, but the whole system from liquor peddlers, restaurants, the criminal justice system, and all the ancillary tapeworms live off the certainty that drunks will drive. Interlock ignition control would eliminate 95% of the 30k folks a year injured or killed by impaired drivers........but then what would the lawyers, jailers, judges, public defenders, police officers, prosecutors, probation staff, prison guards, and the liquor peddlers do if folks realized that if they drank too much their car would not start.....nope.....there is profit in death.....and each time someone dies......more outrage at the drunk.....more profits for the tapeworms......and more families grieving the loss of loved ones.....Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

There should be a death penalty for hitting and killing a motorcycle rider. I believe California has that as a provision in their state statutes already.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:There should be a death penalty for hitting and killing a motorcycle rider. I believe California has that as a provision in their state statutes already.

No, they don't.

Oh well, there should be...

2seaoat wrote:You cannot legislate morality when dealing with drugs and alcohol. A car simply should not start if a person is impaired. People will continue to die as long as people profit on those deaths. People want to blame the drunk, but the whole system from liquor peddlers, restaurants, the criminal justice system, and all the ancillary tapeworms live off the certainty that drunks will drive. Interlock ignition control would eliminate 95% of the 30k folks a year injured or killed by impaired drivers........but then what would the lawyers, jailers, judges, public defenders, police officers, prosecutors, probation staff, prison guards, and the liquor peddlers do if folks realized that if they drank too much their car would not start.....nope.....there is profit in death.....and each time someone dies......more outrage at the drunk.....more profits for the tapeworms......and more families grieving the loss of loved ones.....Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Why should the penalty for driving under the influence be worse than driving while distracted, texting, on the telephone or whatever? Don't statistics show that those issues cause as many or more crashes and fatalities than does DUI?

I'd like to see your source for your claim that 95% of the 30,000 killed or injured by impaired drives would be prevented with interlock systems.

"Impaired", does that include texting, marijuana, other drugs? If so, how would your system prevent those crashes?

Please don't avoid the issues I posted by claiming I support drunk driving or some such trash. Nothing could be further from the truth. I simply prefer to deal with FACTS. I find problems are much easier to solve with facts rather than feelings.