If State promotes drk drv should we...

[candor]

Take the law into our own hands? Police already have assistants using radar, at fatigue stops etc.

The State lately made it easier for cops to meet the fishing quota by reducing the maximum disqualification (best evidence one too) from 2 years to one. Equals more drink drivers recycled faster.

It also promoted the idea of impaired driving being a fair bet, by reducing the max penalty for drug impaired driving causing death from 5 to 3 yrs last year. It decriminalised driving with no licence ever - 2 infringement

It also funds assessment and treatment for under 5% of convicted offenders.
It also pays out the full red carpet deal on ACC for drink drivers - not the deal elsewhere.

And neglects to act within the law, which requires confiscation of cars on 2nd offences unless there is hardship, by usually only trying this out on the 10th offence.
And leaves a loophole, not applicable to boy racers, that you can sell before making a plea. If the car isn't confiscated the 1 year ban on registering a car doesn't apply.

Further to this it protects drunk drivers from adverse publicity by concealing the sum total of crimes - it lately adjusted Justice Dept statistics to conceal victim numbers (those injured and killed). And was about to suppress offenders names till BADD spoke up.

Would it be reasonable then to have a website recording repeat drink drivers who have not had their cars divorced from them, and promote a strategy of community empowerment by clamping? Kind of like citizens arrests since they only keep driving drunk while disqualified because Judges refuse to obey the law by confiscation. Thoughts? So far more males like it than women... :argue: Clamp Judges cars too?

[R6_kid]

Clamp Judges cars too?

My neighbour is a Judge - please make sure you get the right house! :msn-wink:

[SMOKEU]

Then the hardcore drunk drivers will keep on buying $500 cars with no WOF or rego, and when that gets impounded they will do the same thing again.

[StoneY]

I actually agree with the lesser maximum disqualification period of 12 months on the grounds that skills deteriorate more with lack of use
Also believe ya should have to re-sit the tests (not re-sit all graduate levels just the final full tests)

BUT I also believe that a 3rd offense should mean NEVER holding a license again for LIFE
3rds strike policy....they have it in 12 states in the US and have the lowest DUI stats of all in 8 of them 12 states (cant recall where I read this tho)
3rd DUI, lifetime ban on road use

AND to prove I am no 'hypocrite' my 3rd ones due...yes I have been done for it twice (shamefully and no excuses given) have been guilty of it twice in the last 25 years as a road user
I would say I deserve a life ban if I get done again, and rightly so

Once thats in place, Jail for driving on a life time ban, or a 4th DUI offense, and I mean JAIL, years not months

That would be an interesting angle of enforcement :yes:

[candor]

Your post says we need deterrence by use of real deterrents one way or another - its missing.

Boy racer done thrice for a skid where there is public access or could be, on a beach even with noone else on the beach, gets car confiscated. Nb boy racer offences are associated with under 2% of road toll.

3rd offence of drunk drive (1/4 of toll) is just a 28 day impound.
Judges do have discretion to confiscate car of drunk driver on 2nd offence but don't, as they don't take it seriously one little bit. But then Oz penalties don't get hefty either till you go double our current limit (few).

The countries with half our drunk toll all confiscate repeat drunk cars regularly. We confiscate about 1% of convicted drunk drivers cars if that despite bulk recidivising. Any half pie trained law student can save the drunks weapon from confiscation on the hardship basis - use of word like family car and noone says "yes family crushing car" or mentions that kids aren't killed by speeders near schoold but by prior convicte ma and pa drunk/drug driver, truth be told.

"Transport Minister Steven Joyce said the Enforcement Powers Act (crusher act which nets 10 cars a year from people who should have long past been disqualified under a proper framework) sends the message that the type of dangerous, disruptive and antisocial behaviour associated with illegal street racing will not be tolerated."

It is clear judges / MPs here value property and car access as a value more than people. Max for car theft 7 years, for killing while driving drugged 3, while drunk 5.

Chapter 1
Taranaki Daily News 2009 - could he be a dad, hope not as the car will keep!

John Laurie, 28, was sentenced to one month in jail for his fifth driving while disqualified charge. The judge said Laurie had now gone to jail for his last two disqualified driving charges.
"See if you get tired of it before I do," the judge said.
Laurie was taken off the road for one year and one day and an order was made to confiscate his car.

Chapter 2 is Once a twisted lawyer catches wind of the draconian confiscation

Repeat drink-driver wins bid to get confiscated car back July 25, 2008, 11:02 am

A leading neuro clinical psychologist whose car was confiscated following a third drink driving offence has had the confiscation quashed in the High Court.

Garry Huingahau McFarlane-Nathan, who holds a number of contracts with the ACC, was disqualified from driving for 12 months and ordered to do 250 hours community work after pleading guilty to excess breath alcohol in the Whangarei District Court in January.

His car was later ordered to be confiscated.

McFarlane-Nathan, who had previous drink-driving convictions in 1996 and 2005, was seen driving erratically, crossing onto the wrong side of the road on State Highway 1 at Ruakaka in January. A breath test showed he had a reading of 525 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. The legal limit is 400.

McFarlane-Nathan appealed the confiscation of his vehicle which he said would cause undue hardship.

Justice Christopher Allan in the High Court at Whangarei agreed, saying that it would also cause undue hardship to his family, and more particularly to the many people he employed.

The judge said that McFarlane-Nathan's financial affairs were "somewhat complicated".

He was a neuro clinical psychologist specialising in people with brain and spinal injuries. He was the only Maori psychologist working in the Upper North Island, and his company held multiple contracts with the ACC, stretching from Northland down to Thames.

Justice Allan said that McFarlane-Nathan employed an operations manager, two full-time office assistants, a part-time occupational therapist, a clinical psychologist as well as a number of home care workers and other support staff.

The judge disagreed with the District Court assessment that he was a "man of assets". On the contrary, Justice Allan said he was in a "parlous" financial position.

His liabilities exceeded his assets and his properties were all highly geared.
In addition, the car was leased.

Habitually, McFarlane-Nathan would roll over outstanding debt on a vehicle when he replaced it with a new one.

The effect was that if the car were now confiscated, the lease would terminate and he would have to pay the lessor around $70,000.

McFarlane-Nathan told the judge that if the car were seized, he would be put into bankruptcy.

Insolvency would mean he would lose his ACC work.

In quashing the confiscation order, Justice Allan said that McFarlane-Nathan was a highly-qualified man offering the community a specialised and important service. He employed a driver to take him to appointments.

"The complete loss of that contract would plainly have devastating financial and professional consequences for him," the judge said.

It would cause undue hardship to him, his family and workers.

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/4...confiscated-car