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