Eye on Whatcom

Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Vanity License Plates - or - My Plate Glows in the Dark Options
Flat Tire
Posted: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 6:39:08 PM

Rank: New Member
Groups: Member , Moderator

Joined: 12/13/2007
Posts: 108
Location: Bellingham
I'm in a bit of a rush, so I can't go into depth here, but I'd like to get some feedback on the Neon Yellow plates for DUI offenders. I know the bill is already dead, but the chatter on it is still lingering.

Brat
Posted: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 10:01:42 PM

Rank: New Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 2/1/2008
Posts: 36
Location: Bellingham
I never heard the whole background on this topic so I ask...

What is the purpose? Is it to shame offenders? To somehow keep others safe by knowing the person driving near you had a DUI?

Regardless, I don't get it and am glad it's dead! What a waste of time and taxpayer money!
DJGray
Posted: Thursday, February 14, 2008 6:56:14 PM

Rank: Administration
Groups: Administrator , Member

Joined: 1/11/2008
Posts: 277
Location: Bellingham, WA
Brat wrote:
I never heard the whole background on this topic so I ask...

What is the purpose? Is it to shame offenders? To somehow keep others safe by knowing the person driving near you had a DUI?

Regardless, I don't get it and am glad it's dead! What a waste of time and taxpayer money!


Well, I'll weigh in on this. I was listening to "The Commentators" (John Carlson & Ken Schram) talk about this last week and strangely enough, I found myself agreeing with Schram (the liberal) and not with Carlson (the conservative).

As Brat has asserted, the purpose might be (and is) to shame the offenders. Those who get a DUI must sport a neon yellow license plate for one year so that everyone who sees the plate will know that they are a convicted drunk driver.

Now, here is where Ken Schram and I are on the same page:


1. This is just window dressing and feel-goodism. It gives the appearance of doing something about a serious problem, but in truth is accomplishes nothing at all.

2. It punishes the innocent along with the guilty. Consider the one-car family. If I'm caught driving drunk, and my wife then drives the car, it appears that she is the one who has been convicted. Or what if my son borrows the car to go on a date, or out with some friends. This is just not good.

Now, Carlson (whom I generally like) argued that alcoholism is a family problem, and needs to be addressed by the family. So, when the wife and son (or other family members) to be shamed by the same punishment, they will exert pressure on "me" for getting the family into this mess. That is, to me, a very calloused viewpoint. Do we take the same approach with other family issues? Do we tell the family with an abuser in it to just work it out? Do we tell the child who is repeatedly raped that the family needs to work this out, and we're going to hang a scarlet "A" on the front of the home until the rapes stop?

No. That's not the solution. We live in a state where a drunk driver must be caught and convicted FOUR TIMES in ten years before it is even considered a felony. The problem is not going to be solved until we begin to take the crime seriously the first time a driver is caught.



Mark Twain wrote:

A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting its shoes on.

  • Mark Twain


  • Baron Miller wrote:

    Grace ruins the idea that you are fully in charge.

  • Baron Miller



  • Users browsing this topic
    Guest


    Forum Jump
    You cannot post new topics in this forum.
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
    You cannot create polls in this forum.
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

    Main Forum RSS : RSS

    YAFPro Theme Created by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
    Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.8 (NET v2.0) - 3/28/2008
    Copyright © 2003-2008 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.