Saw this the other day at koco.com:
"OKLAHOMA CITY -- Anyone convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol in Oklahoma would have to install an ignition interlock device on their vehicle for two years under a bill passed by the state Senate and sent to the House.
The Erin Elizabeth Swezey Act passed on a 45-0 vote Tuesday. It's named after a 20-year-old Edmond woman killed by a drunken driver. A second DUI conviction would require the ignition lock for five years and a third would lead to the device being installed for eight years.
The lock includes a device that detects alcohol and the driver must blow into it. If any alcohol is detected - it will not allow the vehicle to start.
Those convicted of DUI would also have the words 'interlock required' printed on the driver's license."
Hmm. I guess I really don't have anything against this kind of legislation although I think the "interlock required" flag on a driver's license is a little mean spirited. Basically if you want to drive for the first six months after getting a DUI you have to have one anyways.
So what does everyone think? Should the consequences of a DUI be more severe? Speaking from experience from my DUI two years ago next month, I spent a lovely night in the Oklahoma County jail, spent thousands on fees, fines, and probation costs, not to mention lawyer fees and I'm still on probation to boot.
I appreciate the Senate wanting to do more to curb people from driving intoxicated but I thought we were in a crunch to finish the legislative session. How much time and effort was spent on this "feel good" bill? When is the very conservative legislature going to tackle the budget shortfall, economic growth and job creation? Just wondering. Oh well, at least our children will be able to learn intellegent design in the next school year...
No comments:
Post a Comment