House Bill 1214 is up for consideration in Colorado. This bill aims to mandate a felony charge for the third DUI/DWAI offense, regardless of the circumstances. This Bill will further remove discretion from our court system and should not be passed. It has been defeated in the past due to the costs of enforcement and lack of space in the jails. However, it seems there are now empty beds in  the jails, which should be a good thing, unfortunately it has been used as a signal to the legislators that new laws to increase incarceration are needed to fill them. The representative that introduced the Bill states that Colorado is one of five states that do not have a felony penalty for repeat offenders. This is much like saying, we should do this because everyone else is. We are also one of two states that has legalized marijuana, did we do that because everyone else is? I hope that citizens stand up and make their voices heard on this issue because we shouldn't pass new laws because everyone else has them.

The real problem with this mentality is that everyone that has been convicted of a DWAI or DUI was driving or actually causing a safety risk to the community. This is often not the case in Colorado. Another problem is that a DWAI is a .05 - .07 BAC level, which for me is one drink. These laws need to be equal for all drivers, not discriminating against people that drink. If a driver is observed driving poorly and creating a safety hazard, they should be ticketed and removed from the road - equal treatment for all drivers. Most fatal accidents are caused by people that have a .000 BAC level.

Colorado residents write your representatives to make your voice heard and ask for equality among drivers. No on House Bill 1214.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_22648886/colorado-needs-felony-dui-law
 
If you live in Kentucky, Michigan or Wisconsin beware of pending legislation to implement hasher punishment for drunk drivers. Kentucky representative Dennis Keene has introduced a bill to mandate interlock installation for DUI offenders. In October 2012, the feds in their infinite wisdom enacted legislation for states to mandate interlocks or risk losing a portion of their funding (blackmail). This will help the bill pass, this time -
http://www.kypost.com/dpps/news/region_northern_kentucky/wilder/lawmaker-files-bill-to-toughen-ky-dui-laws_8240064

Michigan stands to lose $50 million in federal funding unless they vote to keep the BAC limit at .08. The original
legislation that lowered the limit to .08 will run out soon and raise the legal limit to .10 BAC. MADD and police officers that get paid overtime and receive awards for their DUI arrests are against letting the limit revert to .10. They claim that the data supports their position, but as we all know - their data is seriously flawed and holds no meaning. http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/Drunk-Driving-Laws-Could-Change--191118541.html

Wisconsin has introduced legislation that will make a third drunk driving offense a felony. The representative said that their laws were out of line with other states and needed to be stronger. They want to enforce mandatory minimum sentences and criminalize first offenders over .15 BAC which is not currently the law. You can read about it here
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/bills-would-toughen-wisconsins-drunkendriving-laws-qm8nt5o-190705021.html

The only way to stop the madness is to make your voices heard. Please write, call or visit your representatives if you live in any of these states and tell them this has gone too far.

 
The UK has repealed DUI laws in rural areas siting that they cause a rise in depression and suicide in the county. They also said that there are not enough DUI accidents in rural areas on these roads to justify the punishment. The residents can apply for a special permit to drink and drive because there is no other means of reasonable transportation home from a pub. Many are outraged at this decision, but we think it's a step in the right direction!
Opponents claim that depression causes suicide not the lack of being able to go to the pub. I think the opponents are non-social people and do not understand that most of us do not want to drink at home by ourselves for fear of being arrested. Living in fear is never a good thing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/22/irish-council-rural-drink-driving    

This is reminiscent of the Montana argument wouldn't you say...maybe Alan's not so far out there after all.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4796451