Booze laws not working. Shame drivers and crush cars, say police

**Genestho** · 16th February 2009, 12:32

DomPost

"hint at an expected crackdown on motorists who continue to drive drunk."

"A discussion document is expected to go to the public this year."

I say bring it on

**Patrick** · 16th February 2009, 12:50

Long over due...

Shouldn't matter whose car it is either.

Bring it on.

**Mully** · 16th February 2009, 12:52

+1. Repeat drink-drivers, or people who are 3 or 4 times the limit.

Crushy, crushy.

**firefighter** · 16th February 2009, 12:58

I'm all for it, I think for repeat offenders is best though.....some people actually do buck up their ideas after being caught.....plus i'd hate to see a stolen car crushed by accident....

**ManDownUnder** · 16th February 2009, 13:03

Crushing cars I am in two minds about. On the face of it - brilliant. Revenge is sweet etc... but there's potential $$$ going away that could be given to victim's families (in cash, counselling or damages...)

Tough one - but getting tougher on drunk drivers? HELL YES!

... bring it on...!

**Mully** · 16th February 2009, 13:16

Yes, I was in two minds about crushing boy racers' cars..... Although, if they sold them, they'd only be sold to more boy racers.

I like the idea of seizing repeat drink drive offenders' vehicles and selling them.

**Boob Johnson** · 16th February 2009, 13:18

Damn straight!

What pisses me off is when you read "so n so is up on his 8th DIC conviction"....wtf!!! And the sentence handed down to him is not much different to the 7 before it

**jrandom** · 16th February 2009, 13:18

Originally Posted by ManDownUnder

Crushing cars I am in two minds about. On the face of it - brilliant. Revenge is sweet etc... but there's potential $$$ going away that could be given to victim's families (in cash, counselling or damages...)

Good point, but then again, the administrative hassle of, f'rinstance, confiscating and selling the vehicles, could be a bit of a nightmare. What about liability when they're (as they often are) unsafely modified, etc?

I'm all for the crushing idea.

(Just so long as it stays restricted to drunk drivers. I can see the potential for 'scope creep', with all sorts of traffic regulations ending up linked to vehicle-crushing offenses. Seen doing a burnout? Crush. Caught driving while suspended? Crush. Carrying passengers on a restricted licence? Crush. You catch my drift.)

**ManDownUnder** · 16th February 2009, 13:24

Originally Posted by jrandom

Good point, but then again, the administrative hassle of, f'rinstance, confiscating and selling the vehicles, could be a bit of a nightmare. What about liability when they're (as they often are) unsafely modified, etc?

I'm all for the crushing idea.

ok - compromise, chop the cars and sell them for parts?

I'm (genuinely) a fan of bringing back the stocks in a main square, and tomatoes being sold reeeeeaaaaallll cheap nearby. Humiliate the hell out of them - as part of the punishment.

**R6_kid:Me** · 16th February 2009, 13:32

Originally Posted by ManDownUnder

I'm (genuinely) a fan of bringing back the stocks in a main square, and tomatoes being sold reeeeeaaaaallll cheap nearby. Humiliate the hell out of them - as part of the punishment.

Haha, that could help boost tourism numbers too!

**Skunk** · 16th February 2009, 13:33

Car goes $1 reserve on TradeMe. Money goes to any victims. After the 3 convictions - chop their hands off.

**Hitcher** · 16th February 2009, 13:44

What if the car is owned by somebody else? Such as a finance company, a neighbour, an employer or your grandmother? Unless the vehicle being destroyed has been acquired by the offender in hard-earned tax-paid dollars, destroying that vehicle is completely and utterly pointless. Indeed the ensuing litigation would be most entertaining indeed.

**EatOrBeEaten** · 16th February 2009, 13:53

As a dirty foreigner I'm genuinely shocked by the general attitude towards drink-driving here. In the UK there was a massive, sustained campaign to change attitudes that actually worked. When I was a kid people still had that "she'll be right" attitude, now people take your keys if they think you're over the limit and it's seen as a really stupid, dangerous, anti-social thing to do, especially among young people.

The laws should be toughened up, but there needs to be a shift in attitude among everybody. This is not designed as an "it's better in the old country blah blah why don't I fuck off back there" rant, just genuine surprise that it's not seen as such an issue here!

**Patrick** · 16th February 2009, 13:53

Originally Posted by Hitcher

What if the car is owned by somebody else? Such as a finance company, a neighbour, an employer or your grandmother? Unless the vehicle being destroyed has been acquired by the offender in hard-earned tax-paid dollars, destroying that vehicle is completely and utterly pointless. Indeed the ensuing litigation would be most entertaining indeed.

Tough.

Finance Company can still recover their loss.

Car owners/family/employer whatever should be more responsible as to who is using their car. The owner can also sue the piss heads for losses for the crushed car.

My bet is that once this happens, no one will be "borrowing" anyone elses car except in an emergency. Getting pissed isn't an emergency.