There has to be stronger punishment for operating D.W.I. Here in America D.W.I Homicide is a socially acceptable crime of violence.A .24 B.A.C. is too high for an aggravated charge, here in N.Y.S the level is .18.anyway this as usual can be
reduced in a plea bargain.
Each death should be treated as an independent one so that the Justice system can sentence as a single charge.
Put an end to any conditional or hardship license issued .Ignition sensors can be circumvented as in Renting another vehicle as what happened in I believe Suffolk County last week.
Rental agencies should be able to do a license check to see if operators are legal.People call us Prohibitionists which we are not, don’t care if you Drink only becomes our care when people Drive after achieving the state of intoxication.
People get the Anti gunning mind set when someone is killed by a handgun, but
the those same ones forget that the biggest weapon of use in killing is parked in a driveway close to you.
Bill Dikant, Victim Advocate,
Castleton, N.Y. 12033
With or Without a blood test here in N.Y.S. a Police Officer can testify under Common law D.W.I. as to the state of said driver.This is after many weeks of intense schooling. Violating one’s rights, Does this pertain to the Rights of those slaughtered on our Highways. I don’t mean just my families I mean All 15,16,000 who suffer every year.Come on, get your glasses changed I said I’m not against drinking Just don’t drive after achieving that state of intoxication.
Yeah Bill, I’m sure you support legislation like this: …….Jack also wants to make it easier to convict people even if they refuse to take a breath or blood alcohol test. Upon refusal to take a test, a police officer would simply have to testify that the person arrested was impaired “even in the slightest degree.”……..
So now you support jailing people for exercising their 5th amendment rights Bill? It’s a slippery slope where a guy with a badge can now testify “to the slightest degree” in order to convict. Seems we have come a long way Bill from the words “beyond a reasonable doubt” to prove guilt with this type of legislation.
While it’s sad you lost your family, empowering the police to become accuser, judge and jury at the side of the road is frightening.
Please don’t respond just blow if you’re innocent.
Driving is NOT a right. Why do people think it is? When you sign that little card to GET your driver’s license you agree that if you are requested to take a breathalyzer and refuse, you WILL lose your license for a mandatory 1 year in Fla. 5th amendment right doesn’t apply when you sign the card that says YOU agree to the terms under which you got the license. If you sign a mortgage and decide not to pay you’re a deadbeat. If you sign a paper agreeing to the rules of driving and decide not to abide, you’re a hero? GMAB.
I drink. I drink way to much on occasion. I do NOT, however, get behind the wheel when I do. Drunk driving should be attempted vehicular manslaughter. Just because they didn’t hit someone doesn’t mean they won’t. And they will, eventually.
I’m sick and tired of almost every accident in S Fla being caused by a drunk with no license. I know that of the last 8 I’ve heard of on the news that was the cause. Of course fatalities were involved. Our local news crew actually sat in the parking lot of a courthouse. People convicted of DWI, driving with suspended/revoked (multiple convictions on most) came out and DROVE HOME. If they had real jail time over their heads, they would be calling a friend. If they were sitting in a jail cell they wouldn’t be driving. If the friend that loaned the drunk the car stood a chance of losing said car they wouldn’t be so quick to loan it.
Been hit by a drunk, had another one drive through my yard into my tree. Three friends have been hit by drunks with no license. One had a $50K truck totaled and has had 4 surgeries. Of course at HER insurance company expense. Drunks don’t have insurance. One had her car totaled and since it was a 2002, she didn’t get nearly enough to buy another one. One had her kids in the car with her.
Note that all three drunks are BACK ON THE ROADS AND STILL DRUNK. Their names appear every so often on the Sheriff blotter for DWI, DUI, driving on suspended, etc.
Bill, yuor inflated MADD statistics are laughable. The number is more like 13k. But you have to strip away the Single Vehicle Accidents involving death as there is NO INNOCENT VICTIM of a DD in that crash. You also have to strip out the passengers counted as DD as well as the NHTSA imputed numbers included in that 13k.
It never ceases to amaze me how the prohibitionists like to hide behind their victim hood and inflated statistics to pass laws that do nothing to save lives and everything to line their pockets and satisfy their need for VENGEANCE.
Bill, glad to see MADD has kept you angry and bitter over the years. Claiming alcohol related = alcohol caused or better yet, drunk, is another little semantical game MADD and zealots like you like to play.
Do the math Bill. Less than 2,000 truly innocent victims annually.
So let’s look at speeders and inattentives that don’t kill according to you Bill. You know, the majority. Funny how prohibitionists never look at the number in the correct way. The biggest problem on the road based on your stats Bill are the sobers. Funny how zealots only can think about the minority.
You obviously have no clue how these laws eliminate the presumption of innocence and due process as well as the right to confront your accuser – aka Intoxylizer. These laws are now attached to bicycle riders, roller skaters and people mowing their own lawn on private property.
An accusation / charge based on observation makes a cop judge and jury by the roadside. You know cops never lie. So the burden of proof is now on you to prove you were not impaired to the slightest degree. Yeah, good luck with that Dawn.
PS, I don’t support drunk driving or drunk drivers. The issue is not black and white as you see it.
When you get a drivers license, the paper you signed stated that if you are asked to take a breathalyzer you will comply or surrender your license. That’s about as black and white as it can get. Don’t like it don’t drive. If the driver refuses there is no other alternative then to allow the officer to give testimony.
If the driver isn’t intoxicated, what’s the problem?
I’m tired of the criminals rights coming before law abiding citizens. They do NOT have the right to drive drunk. I do, however, have a right to not be killed by a drunk that feels the laws don’t apply to them.
You had to wonder when our resident MADD hater would make a comment. The 11th article of the bill of rights apparently involves the right to drink and drive. Why does every post by this individual claim any anti drunk driving person is owned by MADD? I don’t know about you, but I don’t know anything about MADD or know any of their members. I have known drunk drivers and at least one killed an individual and kept his license for 30 more years. I keep my own statisics Mr. MADD hater.
When I sign my license, I sign with the phrase “under duress”. You see, being forced to agree to something unconstitutional like being able to pursue life, liberty and freedom does not come through the old drivers licensing process.
A well educated person such as yourself obviously knows that.
Please Dawn, don’t make me start giving you a lesson in the Bill of Rights and Constitution.
You so freely give up your rights under the guise of safety Dawn. I hope you voted Obama. LOL
Be it known that M.A.D.D. does not nor ever will keep me angered over D.W.I.. After going through my loss of family I saw enough as a Police Officer prior to and after, was working and heard the entire incident on the Radio. D.W.I. has always been a Crime of non violence in some peoples eyes, not mine. I my 25 years in E.M.S. I had enough of it, I have spoken to thousands in my 20 years of Impact panels.My present wife and I have spent 18 years on C.I.S.D trying to help those in Law enforcement, Fire, and E.M.S. cope with their feelings from this needless slaughter and some Idiots out here think they are put at risk for their supposed “Right to Drive INTOXICATED.I’ve seen these offenders get minor punishment for their ignorance.The biggest killer of people here in America is parked in a driveway near you. Mr.Come on, keep hiding behind that screen name, Cowards always do that plus agitate those who try to make a difference in others lives.
After reading some of the comments left from this article I would have to agree when you say that if you are innocent then you should blow. People are going to have fatalities whether they are driving, flying or even walking. I am not condoning driving under the influence by any means. I have lost a loved one from DUI manslaughter, but I also know that if it was not them then it would be another. No matter how tough DUI laws will become, people are going to drink and drive. Sadly enough, if people are stupid enough to get behind the wheel, they do not deserve any reduction from a sentence. But then the question is… if someone was killed from negligence in an accident, are they just as guilty of vehicular homicide…
You do NOT have the God given right to drive. You don’t like the rules? Don’t sign it. Don’t drive. “Under duress” means nothing if you are not FORCED to sign it. You’re not. You can choose to not drive.
How many of those 60% don’t have a drivers license regardless of the reason? If Fla is any indication, I’d say over half.
Again, I feel the penalty for driving without a license should be much higher as well.
Oklahoma has it right, and the other 49 states would do well to follow. No license, no insurance? NO CAR. If you choose to drive it, you are choosing to lose it if you get caught. If someone is stupid enough to loan it to you, well, then their loss as well.
I don’t care if you lost it from DWI, too many tickets, or if you just believed you were so special you didn’t have to have one. It’s all about choices and right now in this country we have no consequences for our choices.
My wife and I do not “Train Officers” We our Group sponsored by the County E.M.S. bureau are called out to De-brief any agency(ies).This is done on a request basis by an Agency who has had a Traumatic incident in their area, and the responders are having a bad time coping.And this includes any incident drunk, sober , Fire, Train crash, air craft whatever the need be.
I do not do the inviting to panels,they are mandated by the court,for those convicted of D.D. Those Invited can and sometimes speak with us after the meeting. Your accusation of “Playing the Victim Card” is quite ignorant to make.
I’m not blaming all the Ills on Drunk Drivers I just try to indicate the anguish we carry for ever.Some of the Victims can not voice their feelings, seen that happen more than once.When other people are the victim of crime they sometime voice their opinions, so why cant we do the same ????, or is it that we cannot hold the D.D.’s liable for their actions. We have the same feelings as do those who have been Raped, Sodomised, Robbed or any of the myriad violent crimes.Tear jerking stories?????,
disgusting remark, Your Sympathies mean squat to me,Professional Victim, if that’s what it takes to make people realize that Driving While Intoxicated is a Violent Crime so be it,I’m guilty of that. Only thing you have shown here is that your the Southbound end of a North bound Horse.
I’m well aware of the Non Violent issue.
If those Road checks save just one life, it’s worth the effort. Now I remember, Schools out and your bored, nothing to occupy your time so mommy lets you play with the computer to spew your nonsense. time for your nappy???, go take it.
When I see people making infantile remarks like yours, it always tells me that deep inside they know they are wrong. You really should get more familiar with the RIDL site. There’s some good info there. http://www.ridl.us. Check it out.
No one has a right to drive intoxicated. But people do have the right to drive. And people do have rights. Many of those rights are enumerated in the constitution.
The problem I have with MADD and others of their ilk, is that they see our rights as nothing more than loopholes that need to be filled.
The right to an attorney is not a loophole. The right to a jury trial is not a loophole. The right not to give evidence against yourself is not a loophole. The right to not have cruel and unusual punishment and excessive fees is not a loophole. Among others.
Those of us who disagree with the current DUI laws, aren’t asking for the right to drive intoxicated. But we do think many of the current laws are abusive, over-reaching, and that they take away the rights that we DO have.
Bill, it’s a well-known fact by psychologists that if a person is still angry six months after a tragedy that they are in serious need of psychological help. It’s not normal to continue to be angry for that long and it means that there is something wrong with you. I don’t say this to be mean or belittling. I’m saying it because I see someone who really needs help. And this is coming from a total stranger who only knows you from your postings on a web board.
I hope you find the the help that you so clearly need because it’s clear that your pain is killing you.
Okay, I’ll bite on this one, show me where in the constitution it says that people have the RIGHT to drive.
Driving is not a right. It is a privilege – one that has responsibilities and rules. Not everyone SHOULD drive. The people that do have the privilege to drive have the RIGHT to expect other people that drive to also take some responsibility.
Why is jail time, high fines, and confiscation of said car cruel and unusual punishment for those that feel they are above the law that they agreed to follow when they decided to drive? Again, taking a car is not cruel and unusual punishment when you actually read the constitution and realize that a car is NOT one of the rights guaranteed in it.
Nobody ever told me I was signing a contract that said that they could dictate whatever they wanted on a public highway that I believe is owned by the people and not the highway dept. Sure, it was there,,just like the fine print in all those mortgages that people signed on to a couple of years ago that are now going into foreclosure over that small hidden truth that said they could jack the interest rates if certain perameters were not followed. Got to love that straightforward open transparency that our ruling bodies afford the citizen. To me, it looks like they are hoping that most will miss it (and they do), then pull their power play basically making off like thieves in the night. Second off, it was a right until some slick legal manuevering back in the early 70’s got some courts to go along with the “driving is a priviledge”thing. It was never defind as a right, I’ll acknowledge that, but one has to realize because it wasn’t, it made it easy for them to claim the priviledge senerio. All one has to do is a little legal research and one will find this to be the case. And third,,roadblocks are flat out illegal per our Constitution. The wording is clear in the fourth amendment. Even the Chief Justice admitted that it was an intrusion of the constitution. But only slight. Regardless of the reasoning, that document was formed to protect individual’s from unwarranted interuption without cause. What do you think the reasoning behind the States that rejected that ruling were? Exactly what I just stated and they affirmed that by rejecting the Federal version and based themselve’s on their respective Constitutions which, ironically, are worded virtually the same. And thinking something “might be going on” is not probable cause. An action observed that threatens the welfare of another in the eyes of law enforcement is. Now where has this led us? To arresting individuals in wheelchairs to walking their bicycles across their own lawn, or mowing their grass on their own property and being charged and penalized as if they were operating a vehicle on a roadway that the people own, not the States or the Federal Gov’t. Does that seem right to you? Because thats whats happening now and is a fact.
Not ALL of our rights are enumerated in the constitution. In fact, the constitution specifically says that. Taking a car from a person IS cruel and unusual punishment. In this day and age, a car isn’t a luxury item reserved for the rich and privileged like it used to be. Today, a car is a necessity. In the old days, you would be justified in killing someone who stole your horse. That was because a horse, which was your mode of transportation, was necessary to life itself. Today, a car is necessary to life itself. We need it to get to work, to take the kids to school, to go to the grocery store to buy food. Without it you are relagated to the life of a beggar. Begging people for rides. THAT is cruel and unusual punishment for a non-violent crime.
I guess you agree with about 33% of the drivers on the road that a license or insurance is just a pesky little piece of paper that is really not worth the hassle?
Sorry, (actually, I’m glad) the laws aren’t on your side. Can’t drive sober, can’t obey the speed limit, can’t keep from hitting other people, you CAN’T DRIVE.
I’m betting you’ve never been hit by someone with no license? No insurance? I’m tired of footing the bill on MY insurance premiums for them. LET THEM WALK.
You want to support them? Fine. You subsidize MY insurance premium then we’ll discuss it.
Personally, I think insurance is a scam. I don’t think ANYONE should drive intoxicated. But if they do and are caught, they should be afforded ALL of their rights. The problem with the current DUI laws, is that a murderer or rapist has more rights afforded to them then a person who had two beers and drove home without hurting a soul. Now really, REALLY think about that. Does that REALLY any sense? Why should you be afforded less rights just because you had a couple of beers?
If you rob a bank, you get mandatory 25 years. Kill your neighbor and you could be out in 7. Sucks. I think the penalty for murder and rape (especially pedophilia) should be execution, but that’s another thread.
But that doesn’t mean I feel sorry for people caught driving drunk or no license that have to pay $15K and lose their car. I don’t want them on the road behind me and my kids.
And, unless your 90 lbs, two beers won’t do it. Unless, of course, you do a beer bong right before you get in the car.
BTW- the Sheriff’s office in Palm Beach County Fla is planning to start taking blood at DUI checkpoints if you refuse the breathalyzer. Refuse that and go to jail for DUI.
No one is asking you to feel sorry for anyone. I’m asking you to use your noggin’ for something other than emotional hyperbole, and think about what makes sense. Does it make sense that someone who had two beers and doesn’t hurt anyone be afforded less rights than a murderer or rapist?
And by the way, yes, you CAN get a DUI for two beers. In fact, I know a lot of people, including myself, who have been charged for DUI when they’ve had NO alcohol or drugs in their system. THAT’S how screwed up the system is. And THAT’S why we think it needs to be re-worked.
Of course it doesn’t make sense. There are no consequences in this society. That’s why so many people aren’t afraid to rob, kill, rape, etc.
BUT, when people are arrested multiple times for no license, DWI, DWI, etc, why should they be allowed to drive home from the courtroom? No car. No drive.
So if the breathalyzer machine is inaccurate and you are charged, you can fight that. I do know that has occurred. I’d rather have them take the blood, personally. I trust blood tests farther then breathalyzers, anyway. Blood will also tell if they are driving under the influence of drugs. If you refuse the breathalyzer and are charged, that’s the consequences of failing to abide by a contract you signed upon receiving a license.
Rights don’t go away Dawn just because you’ve been arrested before. You STILL rights. But even a first time DUI offender has less rights than a murderer, rapist or bank robber. Do you honestly want us to believe that you think a first time DUI offender who hurt no one, should have no right to an attorney, no right to a jury trial, and no right to not give evidence against themself?
And who said anything about an inaccurate breathalyzer (which they are). I’m talking about people getting arrested for no alcohol (breathalyzer reading of 0.00) and no drugs. It DOES happen and you’re naive if you think it doesnt.
And you’re right about the “contract” that you sign with the state. Which is why drivers’ licenses are also a scam. They are nothing more than a way for the state to trick you into thinking that driving is a privilege, when in fact driving is a RIGHT.
We’re never going to agree whether driving is a right or a privilege. I live in S Fla, where 33% of the population agrees with you. And my insurance premiums are proof of that. As is my health insurance. Out of 10 accidents involving people I know (who have licenses and insurance and weren’t at fault) 8 of them involved people who think like you do. 5 of the legal drivers owe thousands of dollars because of them. 3 of them have been permanently injured. And the people you want to defend just drive away, laughing at the damage they’ve done. And it wasn’t a first at-fault accident for ANY of those people you want to keep on the roads.
And if the laws are so hard on DUI offenders, why is it that people have been convicted 15 times and are still out on the roads? Must not be so bad, they’re not afraid of being caught again. and again, and again.
Why, Dawn, is it that everytime I ask you a logical question and ask for a logical response, do you resort to emotional hyperbole. Now I’ve asked you to put your noggin’ to work for something other than emotions.
Would you PLEASE answer my questions instead of avoiding them?
The only experience I have is a friend who was arrested DUI- he refused the breathalyzer, so he automatically lost his license for a year. But he was tried and convicted. (He was drunk- an alcoholic)
Since it was his third- 1st at 15, 2nd at 16, 3rd at 34, they tried to put him away for 10 years. Yes, that was excessive. If he’d killed someone at 15, his record would have been sealed at 18. But can I say that he should have been driving? No.
To use my head would say that the only reason you hadn’t hurt anyone was that you were lucky.
You don’t want answers, you want me to agree that your civil rights were violated because you weren’t allowed to drive home after drinking. The cops had the audicity to stop you and demand that you comply with your agreement that you made when you got your license. I don’t know why you were arrested. I wasn’t there.
the system is screwed up. I don’t dispute that. So because you feel you were treated unfairly do you feel that DUI should be ‘no big deal’? Because that seems to be the answer you want from me and you’re not going to get it.
Well said Bill. I must pose this question. If a DD kills himself in a single vehicle accident, is that “useless slaughter” that needs coping with?
In addition, how do you and your current wife train officers to cope with the “useless slaughter” by sober drivers in multi-vehicle accidents? It seems based on your post the term “useless slaughter” is only being used to identify fatals when any amount of any substance is found in a persons blood. Remember, over 60% of the “useless slaughter”, as you call it, is done by sobers.
And please Bill, on your impact panels, why do you only invite people charged in court? People being forced to participate in order to drive again really wouldn’t be able to question your opinions and tear jerking story because they want their license back.
It’s a little funny how you, even though you’re not part of MADD as you claim, have been able to play your victim card now for how many years?
My sympathies for the loss of your family. But people like you blaming all societal ills on alcohol and driving is laughable. There are far more stupids that are just bad drivers and when you put alcohol in them, well, the result is what happened to you family. Again, my sympathies
Sorry pal(sarcasm) I was busy else where.Long time back I learned
He who fights and runs away, lives to fight another day” Never bring a Knife to a Gun fight.
I refuse to be made scorn of, and will not deal with Idiots like you two.
“WHY is driving only a “privilege” and NOT a Right? Then, apply your answer as a test to ANY other of the enumerated Rights, and tell me what makes driving different.”
Hmm. No response. Guess that means nobody is up to the challenge
Yeah, he was “busy” allright. This year’s annual “Boy’s Life” magazine “Swimsuit Edition” got delivered. He’s been icing down his wrists and elbows for a while and couldn’t type. Hey Bill, if you know all about the “Non Violent Issue” then why do you continue to spew the falsehood anyway ?(Another MADDer caught lying)
Please stay at least 100 yards away from any school yard or playground.
“You don’t want answers, you want me to agree that your civil rights were violated because you weren’t allowed to drive home after drinking.”
Oh, but we DO want answers, Dawn. How about answering THIS question? WHY is driving only a “privilege” as opposed to a right?
Any answer you couod come up with could just as easily be applied to ANY of the enumerated Rights in the Constitution, and coul just as well be applied to make THEM only “privileges”, as well. pick a reasonm, any reason. Then apply your answer to ANY of the other Rights that ARE enumerated in the Constitutioon, and tell me why driving is so much different than any other right.
Here, Bill, you try it, too. But I bet your brain is so zombied out from the MADD kool-Aid that you aren’t capable of an original thought, or critical, rational thinking on this topic.
Here’s the question again: WHY is driving only a “privilege” and NOT a Right? Then, apply your answer as a test to ANY other of the enumerated Rights, and tell me what makes driving different.
“What are you going to do about it”???????. Gee, sounds like a kid ‘s threat. O’my, dear me. i’se skared!. I’ll tell your mommie! datz wot!. Been reading those Funny letters @ R.I.D.I., oh poor me those cops arrested me, it’s their fault I was Intoxicated and driving. I’m now a criminal,those overzealous cops caused it. Dawn, Ins.Lady, go to that site when your in a blue funk, you’ll laugh your sides sore from laughing at this grouping of creative writing.Notice NO Times, Dates of Occurrence and NO NAMES.
The Story site is a good place to linger for a great time laugh.
“Anyone want some Kool aide????,Ummmmmmmm, quenches the thirst incurred from laughing uncontrollably.
Cherry tastes great.”
Gee, who’s being childish now? I guess that’s what you do when you have no facts or rational argument.
Wait, you forgot to insult us personally to go for all-out child. Of course, you did that earlier, so I guess that’s in keeping with your mentality. Consistently childish. I soppose that’s something of which you can be quite proud.
Pffft.
Take a hike Bill. I wasn’t intoxicated nor guilty. It came out in the end because I had a spine to stand up for that which was wrong..
Wishing you the best when the experience happens to you (and don’t forget,,you don’t have to have consumed anything,,like many of the “stories” out there)
There’s a laugh a minute on the FACTS being spewed on that site Bill. MADD diminishing rights afforded under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. You know, those pieces of paper MADD mothers wake up and wipe their *** with every day.
RIDL is a VICTIM ADVOCATE site for victims of BAD MADD LEGISLATION pushed by professional victims like Dawn and you.
Every consumer of alcoholdid not kill your loved one Bill. Understand that and you might be able to heal.
Yeah, that fellow Larry Taylor is a DUI attorney. This should be easy for you Bill. Afterall, attorneys love people like you and have no compassion. It means more money. He should be easy for you to pick apart when he states that that he thinks that laws that have been written are unconstitutional. But that doesn’t make sense? Why would an attorney be writing about the laws being wrong? Apparently he isn’t into it for the money. Being an attorney, maybe he really does know something that myself along with a few others in here are not “qualified” to comment on. So lets get a professional opinion. Thats called honest research…
Actually I found the “Arrest Victims Stories” in your upper left column quite revealing. And that is quite a collection of revealing stories in your forum as well. I can’t believe some of these things those MADD people say. Any intelligent individual can see that their actions and words don’t match up. What is up with those people? Pure vengenence??
When it comes to MADDers it’s a mixture of pure vengeance, greed and prohibition. Some of them are in it because they lost some one and poor things, haven’t gotten the help they need to get through the grieving process. Others are paid by MADD and just say the ridiculous things they say because that’s what they’ve been taught in order to help develop the billions of dollars that get sucked into the DUI industry each year. Others are throw backs to the prohibitionist era. They truly believe that alcohol is evil and that all the worlds problems would come to an end if no one drank alcohol. All of them are easily mislead by the MADDness.
You have too much time on your hands. Why don’t you put them to some more productive use than how your utilizing them at present. Your moral standards are slightly lacking. Anybody can be arrested. And that includes you. Maybe its time. Go volunteer yourself then come back to the table when you have something of true substance to speak from.
And remember,,thats only if your truly “not guilty” and it was confirmed by a court of law after you watched $7,000 robbed out of your pocket to get there leaving your kids to have to endure the cash flow shortage during the interm. Unless you can claim that,,then I suggest you tell your mommy to take the computer away.. Go take a nappy nap yourself and try to figure out how you can be part of a solution instead of promoting the dysfunctional thinking…
There has to be stronger punishment for operating D.W.I. Here in America D.W.I Homicide is a socially acceptable crime of violence.A .24 B.A.C. is too high for an aggravated charge, here in N.Y.S the level is .18.anyway this as usual can be
reduced in a plea bargain.
Each death should be treated as an independent one so that the Justice system can sentence as a single charge.
Put an end to any conditional or hardship license issued .Ignition sensors can be circumvented as in Renting another vehicle as what happened in I believe Suffolk County last week.
Rental agencies should be able to do a license check to see if operators are legal.People call us Prohibitionists which we are not, don’t care if you Drink only becomes our care when people Drive after achieving the state of intoxication.
People get the Anti gunning mind set when someone is killed by a handgun, but
the those same ones forget that the biggest weapon of use in killing is parked in a driveway close to you.
Bill Dikant, Victim Advocate,
Castleton, N.Y. 12033
With or Without a blood test here in N.Y.S. a Police Officer can testify under Common law D.W.I. as to the state of said driver.This is after many weeks of intense schooling. Violating one’s rights, Does this pertain to the Rights of those slaughtered on our Highways. I don’t mean just my families I mean All 15,16,000 who suffer every year.Come on, get your glasses changed I said I’m not against drinking Just don’t drive after achieving that state of intoxication.
Yeah Bill, I’m sure you support legislation like this: …….Jack also wants to make it easier to convict people even if they refuse to take a breath or blood alcohol test. Upon refusal to take a test, a police officer would simply have to testify that the person arrested was impaired “even in the slightest degree.”……..
So now you support jailing people for exercising their 5th amendment rights Bill? It’s a slippery slope where a guy with a badge can now testify “to the slightest degree” in order to convict. Seems we have come a long way Bill from the words “beyond a reasonable doubt” to prove guilt with this type of legislation.
While it’s sad you lost your family, empowering the police to become accuser, judge and jury at the side of the road is frightening.
Please don’t respond just blow if you’re innocent.
Blow if you are innocent. What are you hiding from?
Driving is NOT a right. Why do people think it is? When you sign that little card to GET your driver’s license you agree that if you are requested to take a breathalyzer and refuse, you WILL lose your license for a mandatory 1 year in Fla. 5th amendment right doesn’t apply when you sign the card that says YOU agree to the terms under which you got the license. If you sign a mortgage and decide not to pay you’re a deadbeat. If you sign a paper agreeing to the rules of driving and decide not to abide, you’re a hero? GMAB.
I drink. I drink way to much on occasion. I do NOT, however, get behind the wheel when I do. Drunk driving should be attempted vehicular manslaughter. Just because they didn’t hit someone doesn’t mean they won’t. And they will, eventually.
I’m sick and tired of almost every accident in S Fla being caused by a drunk with no license. I know that of the last 8 I’ve heard of on the news that was the cause. Of course fatalities were involved. Our local news crew actually sat in the parking lot of a courthouse. People convicted of DWI, driving with suspended/revoked (multiple convictions on most) came out and DROVE HOME. If they had real jail time over their heads, they would be calling a friend. If they were sitting in a jail cell they wouldn’t be driving. If the friend that loaned the drunk the car stood a chance of losing said car they wouldn’t be so quick to loan it.
Been hit by a drunk, had another one drive through my yard into my tree. Three friends have been hit by drunks with no license. One had a $50K truck totaled and has had 4 surgeries. Of course at HER insurance company expense. Drunks don’t have insurance. One had her car totaled and since it was a 2002, she didn’t get nearly enough to buy another one. One had her kids in the car with her.
Note that all three drunks are BACK ON THE ROADS AND STILL DRUNK. Their names appear every so often on the Sheriff blotter for DWI, DUI, driving on suspended, etc.
So tell me again, why do you defend these people?
Bill, yuor inflated MADD statistics are laughable. The number is more like 13k. But you have to strip away the Single Vehicle Accidents involving death as there is NO INNOCENT VICTIM of a DD in that crash. You also have to strip out the passengers counted as DD as well as the NHTSA imputed numbers included in that 13k.
It never ceases to amaze me how the prohibitionists like to hide behind their victim hood and inflated statistics to pass laws that do nothing to save lives and everything to line their pockets and satisfy their need for VENGEANCE.
Bill, glad to see MADD has kept you angry and bitter over the years. Claiming alcohol related = alcohol caused or better yet, drunk, is another little semantical game MADD and zealots like you like to play.
Do the math Bill. Less than 2,000 truly innocent victims annually.
So let’s look at speeders and inattentives that don’t kill according to you Bill. You know, the majority. Funny how prohibitionists never look at the number in the correct way. The biggest problem on the road based on your stats Bill are the sobers. Funny how zealots only can think about the minority.
You obviously have no clue how these laws eliminate the presumption of innocence and due process as well as the right to confront your accuser – aka Intoxylizer. These laws are now attached to bicycle riders, roller skaters and people mowing their own lawn on private property.
An accusation / charge based on observation makes a cop judge and jury by the roadside. You know cops never lie. So the burden of proof is now on you to prove you were not impaired to the slightest degree. Yeah, good luck with that Dawn.
PS, I don’t support drunk driving or drunk drivers. The issue is not black and white as you see it.
When you get a drivers license, the paper you signed stated that if you are asked to take a breathalyzer you will comply or surrender your license. That’s about as black and white as it can get. Don’t like it don’t drive. If the driver refuses there is no other alternative then to allow the officer to give testimony.
If the driver isn’t intoxicated, what’s the problem?
I’m tired of the criminals rights coming before law abiding citizens. They do NOT have the right to drive drunk. I do, however, have a right to not be killed by a drunk that feels the laws don’t apply to them.
You had to wonder when our resident MADD hater would make a comment. The 11th article of the bill of rights apparently involves the right to drink and drive. Why does every post by this individual claim any anti drunk driving person is owned by MADD? I don’t know about you, but I don’t know anything about MADD or know any of their members. I have known drunk drivers and at least one killed an individual and kept his license for 30 more years. I keep my own statisics Mr. MADD hater.
Maybe they’re afraid with stricter penalties they’ll lose their license?
I’m not affiliated with MADD. To be honest, they are, in general, a bit rabid against drinking for my taste. At least my experience with them.
I just want drunks out from behind the wheel.
When I sign my license, I sign with the phrase “under duress”. You see, being forced to agree to something unconstitutional like being able to pursue life, liberty and freedom does not come through the old drivers licensing process.
A well educated person such as yourself obviously knows that.
Please Dawn, don’t make me start giving you a lesson in the Bill of Rights and Constitution.
You so freely give up your rights under the guise of safety Dawn. I hope you voted Obama. LOL
No NI, I need you to educate me. Please explain to all of us how “guilty until proven innocent” is now part of the Bill of Rights and Constitution.
Be it known that M.A.D.D. does not nor ever will keep me angered over D.W.I.. After going through my loss of family I saw enough as a Police Officer prior to and after, was working and heard the entire incident on the Radio. D.W.I. has always been a Crime of non violence in some peoples eyes, not mine. I my 25 years in E.M.S. I had enough of it, I have spoken to thousands in my 20 years of Impact panels.My present wife and I have spent 18 years on C.I.S.D trying to help those in Law enforcement, Fire, and E.M.S. cope with their feelings from this needless slaughter and some Idiots out here think they are put at risk for their supposed “Right to Drive INTOXICATED.I’ve seen these offenders get minor punishment for their ignorance.The biggest killer of people here in America is parked in a driveway near you. Mr.Come on, keep hiding behind that screen name, Cowards always do that plus agitate those who try to make a difference in others lives.
Dawn, you are an absolute……..fill in the blank. I’ve read every post between you and RIDL and you make 0…ZERO…..sense.
Amazing how Bill Dikant has decided to leave the discussion when questioned.
It must be the same approach he uses at his VIP’s. Tough questions? End the discussion.
Great job prohibitionists. Apparently Responsibility in DUI Laws (www.ridl.us) has a counter to your bad agendas Dawn.
After reading some of the comments left from this article I would have to agree when you say that if you are innocent then you should blow. People are going to have fatalities whether they are driving, flying or even walking. I am not condoning driving under the influence by any means. I have lost a loved one from DUI manslaughter, but I also know that if it was not them then it would be another. No matter how tough DUI laws will become, people are going to drink and drive. Sadly enough, if people are stupid enough to get behind the wheel, they do not deserve any reduction from a sentence. But then the question is… if someone was killed from negligence in an accident, are they just as guilty of vehicular homicide…
Again, you’re confusing a PRIVILIGE with a RIGHT.
You do NOT have the God given right to drive. You don’t like the rules? Don’t sign it. Don’t drive. “Under duress” means nothing if you are not FORCED to sign it. You’re not. You can choose to not drive.
I choose to abide by the rules.
How many of those 60% don’t have a drivers license regardless of the reason? If Fla is any indication, I’d say over half.
Again, I feel the penalty for driving without a license should be much higher as well.
Oklahoma has it right, and the other 49 states would do well to follow. No license, no insurance? NO CAR. If you choose to drive it, you are choosing to lose it if you get caught. If someone is stupid enough to loan it to you, well, then their loss as well.
I don’t care if you lost it from DWI, too many tickets, or if you just believed you were so special you didn’t have to have one. It’s all about choices and right now in this country we have no consequences for our choices.
you said it perfectly Dawn!
Question- You’re trapped in an elevator with Osami Bin Laden,Charles Manson, and a MADDer. You have a pistol with two bullets left. What do you do ?
Answer- Shoot the Madder twice…
My wife and I do not “Train Officers” We our Group sponsored by the County E.M.S. bureau are called out to De-brief any agency(ies).This is done on a request basis by an Agency who has had a Traumatic incident in their area, and the responders are having a bad time coping.And this includes any incident drunk, sober , Fire, Train crash, air craft whatever the need be.
I do not do the inviting to panels,they are mandated by the court,for those convicted of D.D. Those Invited can and sometimes speak with us after the meeting. Your accusation of “Playing the Victim Card” is quite ignorant to make.
I’m not blaming all the Ills on Drunk Drivers I just try to indicate the anguish we carry for ever.Some of the Victims can not voice their feelings, seen that happen more than once.When other people are the victim of crime they sometime voice their opinions, so why cant we do the same ????, or is it that we cannot hold the D.D.’s liable for their actions. We have the same feelings as do those who have been Raped, Sodomised, Robbed or any of the myriad violent crimes.Tear jerking stories?????,
disgusting remark, Your Sympathies mean squat to me,Professional Victim, if that’s what it takes to make people realize that Driving While Intoxicated is a Violent Crime so be it,I’m guilty of that. Only thing you have shown here is that your the Southbound end of a North bound Horse.
Bill, The same Supreme Court that ruled it’s OK to have Nazi-style roadblocks also said that DUI is NOT a crime of violence. Please try and keep up…
I’m well aware of the Non Violent issue.
If those Road checks save just one life, it’s worth the effort. Now I remember, Schools out and your bored, nothing to occupy your time so mommy lets you play with the computer to spew your nonsense. time for your nappy???, go take it.
Hey Bill,
When I see people making infantile remarks like yours, it always tells me that deep inside they know they are wrong. You really should get more familiar with the RIDL site. There’s some good info there. http://www.ridl.us. Check it out.
No one has a right to drive intoxicated. But people do have the right to drive. And people do have rights. Many of those rights are enumerated in the constitution.
The problem I have with MADD and others of their ilk, is that they see our rights as nothing more than loopholes that need to be filled.
The right to an attorney is not a loophole. The right to a jury trial is not a loophole. The right not to give evidence against yourself is not a loophole. The right to not have cruel and unusual punishment and excessive fees is not a loophole. Among others.
Those of us who disagree with the current DUI laws, aren’t asking for the right to drive intoxicated. But we do think many of the current laws are abusive, over-reaching, and that they take away the rights that we DO have.
Bill, it’s a well-known fact by psychologists that if a person is still angry six months after a tragedy that they are in serious need of psychological help. It’s not normal to continue to be angry for that long and it means that there is something wrong with you. I don’t say this to be mean or belittling. I’m saying it because I see someone who really needs help. And this is coming from a total stranger who only knows you from your postings on a web board.
I hope you find the the help that you so clearly need because it’s clear that your pain is killing you.
Okay, I’ll bite on this one, show me where in the constitution it says that people have the RIGHT to drive.
Driving is not a right. It is a privilege – one that has responsibilities and rules. Not everyone SHOULD drive. The people that do have the privilege to drive have the RIGHT to expect other people that drive to also take some responsibility.
Why is jail time, high fines, and confiscation of said car cruel and unusual punishment for those that feel they are above the law that they agreed to follow when they decided to drive? Again, taking a car is not cruel and unusual punishment when you actually read the constitution and realize that a car is NOT one of the rights guaranteed in it.
Hey Dawn,
Nobody ever told me I was signing a contract that said that they could dictate whatever they wanted on a public highway that I believe is owned by the people and not the highway dept. Sure, it was there,,just like the fine print in all those mortgages that people signed on to a couple of years ago that are now going into foreclosure over that small hidden truth that said they could jack the interest rates if certain perameters were not followed. Got to love that straightforward open transparency that our ruling bodies afford the citizen. To me, it looks like they are hoping that most will miss it (and they do), then pull their power play basically making off like thieves in the night. Second off, it was a right until some slick legal manuevering back in the early 70’s got some courts to go along with the “driving is a priviledge”thing. It was never defind as a right, I’ll acknowledge that, but one has to realize because it wasn’t, it made it easy for them to claim the priviledge senerio. All one has to do is a little legal research and one will find this to be the case. And third,,roadblocks are flat out illegal per our Constitution. The wording is clear in the fourth amendment. Even the Chief Justice admitted that it was an intrusion of the constitution. But only slight. Regardless of the reasoning, that document was formed to protect individual’s from unwarranted interuption without cause. What do you think the reasoning behind the States that rejected that ruling were? Exactly what I just stated and they affirmed that by rejecting the Federal version and based themselve’s on their respective Constitutions which, ironically, are worded virtually the same. And thinking something “might be going on” is not probable cause. An action observed that threatens the welfare of another in the eyes of law enforcement is. Now where has this led us? To arresting individuals in wheelchairs to walking their bicycles across their own lawn, or mowing their grass on their own property and being charged and penalized as if they were operating a vehicle on a roadway that the people own, not the States or the Federal Gov’t. Does that seem right to you? Because thats whats happening now and is a fact.
Not ALL of our rights are enumerated in the constitution. In fact, the constitution specifically says that. Taking a car from a person IS cruel and unusual punishment. In this day and age, a car isn’t a luxury item reserved for the rich and privileged like it used to be. Today, a car is a necessity. In the old days, you would be justified in killing someone who stole your horse. That was because a horse, which was your mode of transportation, was necessary to life itself. Today, a car is necessary to life itself. We need it to get to work, to take the kids to school, to go to the grocery store to buy food. Without it you are relagated to the life of a beggar. Begging people for rides. THAT is cruel and unusual punishment for a non-violent crime.
I guess you agree with about 33% of the drivers on the road that a license or insurance is just a pesky little piece of paper that is really not worth the hassle?
Sorry, (actually, I’m glad) the laws aren’t on your side. Can’t drive sober, can’t obey the speed limit, can’t keep from hitting other people, you CAN’T DRIVE.
I’m betting you’ve never been hit by someone with no license? No insurance? I’m tired of footing the bill on MY insurance premiums for them. LET THEM WALK.
You want to support them? Fine. You subsidize MY insurance premium then we’ll discuss it.
Personally, I think insurance is a scam. I don’t think ANYONE should drive intoxicated. But if they do and are caught, they should be afforded ALL of their rights. The problem with the current DUI laws, is that a murderer or rapist has more rights afforded to them then a person who had two beers and drove home without hurting a soul. Now really, REALLY think about that. Does that REALLY any sense? Why should you be afforded less rights just because you had a couple of beers?
If you rob a bank, you get mandatory 25 years. Kill your neighbor and you could be out in 7. Sucks. I think the penalty for murder and rape (especially pedophilia) should be execution, but that’s another thread.
But that doesn’t mean I feel sorry for people caught driving drunk or no license that have to pay $15K and lose their car. I don’t want them on the road behind me and my kids.
And, unless your 90 lbs, two beers won’t do it. Unless, of course, you do a beer bong right before you get in the car.
BTW- the Sheriff’s office in Palm Beach County Fla is planning to start taking blood at DUI checkpoints if you refuse the breathalyzer. Refuse that and go to jail for DUI.
Dawn, Dawn, Dawn,
No one is asking you to feel sorry for anyone. I’m asking you to use your noggin’ for something other than emotional hyperbole, and think about what makes sense. Does it make sense that someone who had two beers and doesn’t hurt anyone be afforded less rights than a murderer or rapist?
And by the way, yes, you CAN get a DUI for two beers. In fact, I know a lot of people, including myself, who have been charged for DUI when they’ve had NO alcohol or drugs in their system. THAT’S how screwed up the system is. And THAT’S why we think it needs to be re-worked.
Of course it doesn’t make sense. There are no consequences in this society. That’s why so many people aren’t afraid to rob, kill, rape, etc.
BUT, when people are arrested multiple times for no license, DWI, DWI, etc, why should they be allowed to drive home from the courtroom? No car. No drive.
So if the breathalyzer machine is inaccurate and you are charged, you can fight that. I do know that has occurred. I’d rather have them take the blood, personally. I trust blood tests farther then breathalyzers, anyway. Blood will also tell if they are driving under the influence of drugs. If you refuse the breathalyzer and are charged, that’s the consequences of failing to abide by a contract you signed upon receiving a license.
Rights don’t go away Dawn just because you’ve been arrested before. You STILL rights. But even a first time DUI offender has less rights than a murderer, rapist or bank robber. Do you honestly want us to believe that you think a first time DUI offender who hurt no one, should have no right to an attorney, no right to a jury trial, and no right to not give evidence against themself?
And who said anything about an inaccurate breathalyzer (which they are). I’m talking about people getting arrested for no alcohol (breathalyzer reading of 0.00) and no drugs. It DOES happen and you’re naive if you think it doesnt.
And you’re right about the “contract” that you sign with the state. Which is why drivers’ licenses are also a scam. They are nothing more than a way for the state to trick you into thinking that driving is a privilege, when in fact driving is a RIGHT.
We’re never going to agree whether driving is a right or a privilege. I live in S Fla, where 33% of the population agrees with you. And my insurance premiums are proof of that. As is my health insurance. Out of 10 accidents involving people I know (who have licenses and insurance and weren’t at fault) 8 of them involved people who think like you do. 5 of the legal drivers owe thousands of dollars because of them. 3 of them have been permanently injured. And the people you want to defend just drive away, laughing at the damage they’ve done. And it wasn’t a first at-fault accident for ANY of those people you want to keep on the roads.
And if the laws are so hard on DUI offenders, why is it that people have been convicted 15 times and are still out on the roads? Must not be so bad, they’re not afraid of being caught again. and again, and again.
Why, Dawn, is it that everytime I ask you a logical question and ask for a logical response, do you resort to emotional hyperbole. Now I’ve asked you to put your noggin’ to work for something other than emotions.
Would you PLEASE answer my questions instead of avoiding them?
The only experience I have is a friend who was arrested DUI- he refused the breathalyzer, so he automatically lost his license for a year. But he was tried and convicted. (He was drunk- an alcoholic)
Since it was his third- 1st at 15, 2nd at 16, 3rd at 34, they tried to put him away for 10 years. Yes, that was excessive. If he’d killed someone at 15, his record would have been sealed at 18. But can I say that he should have been driving? No.
To use my head would say that the only reason you hadn’t hurt anyone was that you were lucky.
You don’t want answers, you want me to agree that your civil rights were violated because you weren’t allowed to drive home after drinking. The cops had the audicity to stop you and demand that you comply with your agreement that you made when you got your license. I don’t know why you were arrested. I wasn’t there.
the system is screwed up. I don’t dispute that. So because you feel you were treated unfairly do you feel that DUI should be ‘no big deal’? Because that seems to be the answer you want from me and you’re not going to get it.
“You don’t want answers, you want me to agree that your civil rights were violated because you weren’t allowed to drive home after drinking.”
Funny you would say that after I told you I was arrested with no alcohol and no drugs in my system. Hmmm…
We’re talking about rights Dawn. Here’s the question one more time, since you can’t seem to get it straight.
Does it make sense that a murder, rapist or bank robber should have more rights than a person arrest for DUI for the first time?
Well said Bill. I must pose this question. If a DD kills himself in a single vehicle accident, is that “useless slaughter” that needs coping with?
In addition, how do you and your current wife train officers to cope with the “useless slaughter” by sober drivers in multi-vehicle accidents? It seems based on your post the term “useless slaughter” is only being used to identify fatals when any amount of any substance is found in a persons blood. Remember, over 60% of the “useless slaughter”, as you call it, is done by sobers.
And please Bill, on your impact panels, why do you only invite people charged in court? People being forced to participate in order to drive again really wouldn’t be able to question your opinions and tear jerking story because they want their license back.
It’s a little funny how you, even though you’re not part of MADD as you claim, have been able to play your victim card now for how many years?
My sympathies for the loss of your family. But people like you blaming all societal ills on alcohol and driving is laughable. There are far more stupids that are just bad drivers and when you put alcohol in them, well, the result is what happened to you family. Again, my sympathies
Sorry pal(sarcasm) I was busy else where.Long time back I learned
He who fights and runs away, lives to fight another day” Never bring a Knife to a Gun fight.
I refuse to be made scorn of, and will not deal with Idiots like you two.
“WHY is driving only a “privilege” and NOT a Right? Then, apply your answer as a test to ANY other of the enumerated Rights, and tell me what makes driving different.”
Hmm. No response. Guess that means nobody is up to the challenge
Yeah, he was “busy” allright. This year’s annual “Boy’s Life” magazine “Swimsuit Edition” got delivered. He’s been icing down his wrists and elbows for a while and couldn’t type. Hey Bill, if you know all about the “Non Violent Issue” then why do you continue to spew the falsehood anyway ?(Another MADDer caught lying)
Please stay at least 100 yards away from any school yard or playground.
“” Does it make sense that a murder, rapist or bank robber should have more rights than a person arrest for DUI for the first time? “”
Or maybe pass a law that poor people are not allowed within 1000 ft of a bank. Just in case they might try to rob it??
I hereby make scorn of Bill! There. Now what are you going to do about it?
“You don’t want answers, you want me to agree that your civil rights were violated because you weren’t allowed to drive home after drinking.”
Oh, but we DO want answers, Dawn. How about answering THIS question? WHY is driving only a “privilege” as opposed to a right?
Any answer you couod come up with could just as easily be applied to ANY of the enumerated Rights in the Constitution, and coul just as well be applied to make THEM only “privileges”, as well. pick a reasonm, any reason. Then apply your answer to ANY of the other Rights that ARE enumerated in the Constitutioon, and tell me why driving is so much different than any other right.
Here, Bill, you try it, too. But I bet your brain is so zombied out from the MADD kool-Aid that you aren’t capable of an original thought, or critical, rational thinking on this topic.
Here’s the question again: WHY is driving only a “privilege” and NOT a Right? Then, apply your answer as a test to ANY other of the enumerated Rights, and tell me what makes driving different.
” Never bring a Knife to a Gun fight.”
It could also be said; “Never bring conjecture to a factual debate”. So why did you?
“What are you going to do about it”???????. Gee, sounds like a kid ‘s threat. O’my, dear me. i’se skared!. I’ll tell your mommie! datz wot!. Been reading those Funny letters @ R.I.D.I., oh poor me those cops arrested me, it’s their fault I was Intoxicated and driving. I’m now a criminal,those overzealous cops caused it. Dawn, Ins.Lady, go to that site when your in a blue funk, you’ll laugh your sides sore from laughing at this grouping of creative writing.Notice NO Times, Dates of Occurrence and NO NAMES.
The Story site is a good place to linger for a great time laugh.
Anyone want some Kool aide????,Ummmmmmmm, quenches the thirst incurred from laughing uncontrollably.
Cherry tastes great.
Bill DIKant said:
“Anyone want some Kool aide????,Ummmmmmmm, quenches the thirst incurred from laughing uncontrollably.
Cherry tastes great.”
Gee, who’s being childish now? I guess that’s what you do when you have no facts or rational argument.
Wait, you forgot to insult us personally to go for all-out child. Of course, you did that earlier, so I guess that’s in keeping with your mentality. Consistently childish. I soppose that’s something of which you can be quite proud.
Pffft.
Take a hike Bill. I wasn’t intoxicated nor guilty. It came out in the end because I had a spine to stand up for that which was wrong..
Wishing you the best when the experience happens to you (and don’t forget,,you don’t have to have consumed anything,,like many of the “stories” out there)
Excuse me,,standup against that which was wrong.
Hey Bill, you want dates and names? Take a look at our discussion forum where we’ve documented all sorts of stories that were in the news.
http://www.ridl.us/phpBB2/index.php
Go ahead. Keep on laughing. We’ll laugh back when it happens to you.
Why not read through this site too
http://www.duiblog.com
There’s a laugh a minute on the FACTS being spewed on that site Bill. MADD diminishing rights afforded under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. You know, those pieces of paper MADD mothers wake up and wipe their *** with every day.
RIDL is a VICTIM ADVOCATE site for victims of BAD MADD LEGISLATION pushed by professional victims like Dawn and you.
Every consumer of alcoholdid not kill your loved one Bill. Understand that and you might be able to heal.
Yeah, that fellow Larry Taylor is a DUI attorney. This should be easy for you Bill. Afterall, attorneys love people like you and have no compassion. It means more money. He should be easy for you to pick apart when he states that that he thinks that laws that have been written are unconstitutional. But that doesn’t make sense? Why would an attorney be writing about the laws being wrong? Apparently he isn’t into it for the money. Being an attorney, maybe he really does know something that myself along with a few others in here are not “qualified” to comment on. So lets get a professional opinion. Thats called honest research…
Hey RIDL_Prez,
Actually I found the “Arrest Victims Stories” in your upper left column quite revealing. And that is quite a collection of revealing stories in your forum as well. I can’t believe some of these things those MADD people say. Any intelligent individual can see that their actions and words don’t match up. What is up with those people? Pure vengenence??
When it comes to MADDers it’s a mixture of pure vengeance, greed and prohibition. Some of them are in it because they lost some one and poor things, haven’t gotten the help they need to get through the grieving process. Others are paid by MADD and just say the ridiculous things they say because that’s what they’ve been taught in order to help develop the billions of dollars that get sucked into the DUI industry each year. Others are throw backs to the prohibitionist era. They truly believe that alcohol is evil and that all the worlds problems would come to an end if no one drank alcohol. All of them are easily mislead by the MADDness.
Bill,
You have too much time on your hands. Why don’t you put them to some more productive use than how your utilizing them at present. Your moral standards are slightly lacking. Anybody can be arrested. And that includes you. Maybe its time. Go volunteer yourself then come back to the table when you have something of true substance to speak from.
And remember,,thats only if your truly “not guilty” and it was confirmed by a court of law after you watched $7,000 robbed out of your pocket to get there leaving your kids to have to endure the cash flow shortage during the interm. Unless you can claim that,,then I suggest you tell your mommy to take the computer away.. Go take a nappy nap yourself and try to figure out how you can be part of a solution instead of promoting the dysfunctional thinking…