Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site unc.unc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!mcnc!unc!fsks
From: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann)
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.auto,net.legal
Subject: Re: DWI Crackdowns and Car Confiscation
Message-ID: <123@unc.unc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 22:48:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: unc.123
Posted: Fri Aug  9 22:48:55 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 07:22:23 EDT
References: <264@SCIRTP.UUCP> <624@ttidcc.UUCP>
Reply-To: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann)
Organization: CS Dept, U. of N. Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lines: 15
Xref: linus net.flame:10614 net.auto:6559 net.legal:1665


Confiscating cars used by drunk drivers only complicates matters.
Just fine the driver $5,000.  If he can't pay, then sell the dept
to a collection agency, or require him to work it off in community
service (ideally including all Friday and Saturday evenings).

If you want to punish someone for lending a car to a driver
who turns out to be so irresponsible as to drive drunk,
then this could warrant a more reasonable fine of about $200.

By the way, drunk driving, with all its dangers, has been around for decades.
Why did everybody wait till the last couple of years to jump on the
anti-drunk-driving bandwagon?  Is this the new fad of the year?

	Frank Silbermann