Comment 1: Are the laws too strict, too lenient - what changes in the law would you
propose?
"As far as I am concerned they can't be strict enough. If people are continuing to drive under the influence then
they should be penalized. It's a very, very selfish act, and the indifference displayed to the safety and welfare of
other human beings is no better than first degree murder as far as I am concerned. Unless you are mentally
retarded, you are well aware of the dangers involved in driving while under the influence. Therefore injuring or
killing someone while driving under the influence is pre-meditated!"
-----
-----
"They are to strict, its crazy to
think a pissed off soccer mom helped change all these laws."
-----
"i am appalled at the states
negligent regard for those of us who have to use roadways with drunk
drivers, who not only have more than one DWI, i am wittness to a man who
has 4, and is back on the road today. he has had 2DWI'S within the last
2wks. and is a self proclaimed non-stop drinker. i have been
priviledged with this horrific information by the criminal himself.
i am responsible for having him arressted last week. he was on his
way to get his motorcycle back once again, yesterday, when the woman who
was driving the car he was in crashed into another vehicle. she was
drunk. the man she hit was taken out of his car with the jaws of life. i
donot know his condition as of now, he is in the hospital, pray God, and
hopefully will recover. i am going to have the drunken criminal
arressted again today, when he gets on his bike with his girlfriend.
i have 4 sons and would do nothing short of stopping anyone, anywhere to
insure their safety, as well as others who have know ! idea that the
laws in this state for drunk drivers are not protecting us, they are
actually trying to kill us. WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO MAKE NJ A SAFE PLACE TO
LIVE? I WILL NOT STOP UNTIL THEY ARE ALL HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE
DISREGARD OF HUMAN LIFE. THE LAW MAKERS AND THE OFFENDERS. STOP
THIS INSANITY NOW.!!!! PLEASE."
-----
"Too strict because many times
the offender loses his or her job because there is no way to get to
work. There should be a provisional license allowed for going back
and forth to work..."
-----
"Since there are more drivers
on the road without licenses and without insurance due to the lack
of conditional work licenese concurrent with ignition locks,
yes, the laws are too strict and prohibitive of leading a productive
life, i.e., ability to continue working, while having to
perform weekend community service, etc., and get around by
bus, foot, driven by others. The laws are too strict for
people who have only harmed themselves, i.e., didn't get into a car
accident; didn't cause bodily/property harm to anyone."
-----
"NJ DWI laws are way too
strict. A person should be allowed a work license. Also what good is
a jail term when alcholism is considered a disease? Taking away a
man's license and ability to work, outrageously high fines and
sucharges, plus lawyers fees isn't enough. No one wants drunks on
the road. But the punishment is far to severe. Jail should only be
used when a real crime is commited, and not for alcohol or drug
users. "
-----
"When I got my
first DWI I thought the law was to strict. I got a second DWI
about 6 years after my first. Now I think the laws are too
lenient in NJ. The first DWI was too easy to forget because of
the lenientcy. Losing my drivers license for two years, 16 weeks
of IDRC and 180 hours of community service is something I will
never forget. Maybe DWI should be a criminal offense in NJ. More
people might take it seriously then. "
-----
"I was recently charged with
a 3rd offense DWI and I am awaiting trial.
I am 29 years old.Everyone's situation is different.I won't bore you
with mine.Just to say this.While some people consider cancer a
disease, they consider alcoholism behind the wheel an intentional
criminal act? Alcohol impairs judgement correct? So how can you hold
a driver responsible unless they intended to get drunk and then
drive? Which I hope no one has ever done on purpose.The laws in New
Jersey have become draconian and barbaric in terms of penalties.I am
in no way condoning drunk driving, but the room for discretion has
been crushed.It is more about fines and revenue than justice.More
people die in car wrecks from teen drivers,cell
phones,eating,drinking,playing with the radio,putting on make-up,etc.than
all the dwi's in NJ!It is just another way for the state to make
money.New Jersey is the most expensive place to live in the
country.Auto insurance,property tax,health ins.,schools,etc.Micheals
law in 2004 made a Mandatory jail sentence of 6 months for 3rd
offenders!
.Regardless of circumstances?Some drug and assault charges don't even
carry that kind of mandatory punishment.How can the state revoke
your ability to get to work for ten years, then claim to try to help
you by sending you to a drug/alcohol resource center.Hope you
all feel safer.Guys driving home after work are in Jail.Unemployed
drug addict thieves that would Kill for 10 bucks are out on
bail.Politics is killing this state. Does New Jersey have a voice or
not?"
-----
"I think they are fine and understand why they are in place."
-----
"i'm in illinois.but our
laws are also screwed up.sorry about my typing skilla,i have none.i,m a
two fingered typer.any way,i got my 2nd dui about 19 months ago.my first
was 19 years ago.i hit a car about 100 feet from my own drivway.it was
parked at night the wrong direction,and completely out in the road in a
fairly dark residential side street.i had only had 3 beers in a two hour
period.being at my driveway i parked and went in the house.my wife heard
the noise.i told her what happened and then i dumbly downed 3 shots a
whisky in shot and a half shot glass.the cops got there in about 15
min.they also got her for dui.of course the judge threw hers out ,but
only after 3000.oo dollars in atty and licence reinstatment fees.i,m
getting screwed,but theres nothing i can do.the states atty wants to
practically execute me.but what i realy want to say here is,what my atty
said to me.he says that rightfully my charges shoult be dropped,because
the state cannot prove BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT,that i was dui at the
time of the accident.but that is not the way our justice system
works.??????he stated that the costitution of the usa is meaningless any
more.the magority of the american people are living in a dream,and do
not see the truth,wich is that communism did not end in russia,it just
became our government.and naziism do not die with hitler,it just came
over here and became our juditial system.i agree."
-----
"I think insurance
companys rip defendants off.Isn't it enough of a penalty to pay the
STATE $3000. bucks?"
-----
"Is a DUI conviction
considered a criminal offense?"
No, a DUI conviction in
New Jersey is classified as a traffic offense.
-----
"too strict"
-----
Way to strict for a motor vehicle
viiolation, crimes of much bigger magnitude can ....ever* it is on your
record 4 life.....3K Surcahrge, r u kidding me, what other States have
that??? NONE what a greedy state New Jersey is! One size fits all"
is just plain wrong, r u listening legislators, we vote too ya know!!
-----
"This state has no mercy I call it
Cash register Justice. Every case is treated the same no matter what.
MADD has gone mad the consitution is thrown out with the law for
DWI you have no rights.What happened to the 5th 6th amendments and
others.What happened to our personal Libertys Freedom of
Locomotion Changes should be done! 1 a right to a trail by jury.
Drivers record should clear after a number of years. State should grant
a person a conditional license. so a person can still keep their jobs.
these present laws destroy familys Reduce people to poverty, I thought
Slavery was over They imposs hefty fines How is someone going to pay if
they can't make a living it's hard enough just keeping the roof over our
head. What Country Do We live In Repeal These oppressive Laws.Too Srict!"
-----
"on a third dwi if the
driver has not injured anyone i think he should be remaned to
rehabiation FOR the duration of the 6 months not jail time unless the
person has hurt someone i think treatment is better for a person
suffering with the problem of acholism
how can we say it is an illness and cover it with health insurance and
turn around and throw someone in jail ?? AGAIN IF THEY INJURED SOMEONE
THEN YES THEY SHOULD BE PUNISH BUT IF NOT I DONT SEE WHY A MANDTORY JAIL
SENTENCE I THINK THATS VERY WRONG. SENDING A MESSIAGE LIKE THAT IS NOT
GOING TO STOP ANY ONE WHO WANTS TO DRINK AND DRIVE. IT COULD MAKE A
PERSON WHO HAS NEVER BEEN IN JAIL KILL THEMSELF FROM THE FEAR OF WHAT
WILL HAPPEN TO THEM IN JAIL"
-----
"I think they are way too
strict in certain instances.
I would change the following:
(if no injuries resulting from being pulled over or an accident with no
other cars)
1st offense - 3 months suspension, but it's up to the courts discretion
to allow a defendant to have a limited license to get back and forth to
work and to go to alcohol or drug dependence counseling REGARDLESS of
B.A.L. (Maybe they can impose miles per month you are allowed to
drive where you "need" to go). We all **** up sometimes
in our lives. Do we need to be crucified for it? What if you
are a documented alcoholic? Should you be crucified for something
you can't control?
2nd offense - Sme as it is now. If you do it again, you havent
learned anything. Mandatory car breathalizer for 1 year.
3rd offense - Longer jail time. Your third offense, tells you you
don't give a ****."
-----
"Not allowing a
first time offender to at least drive to work in inappropriate and
non-productive. Such a thing can seriously effect certain carreers."
-----
"Too all the people who said
getting a DUI does not make you an alcoholic, you're right. However, it
still puts your life at risk, not to mention anyone in your proximity.
Maybe it was just a mistake. I don't believe anyone begins their day
thinking they'll drive drunk, but yes, things happen. Still, you make
your own decisions, and if you decide to drink, it is your
responsibility to drink responsibly. Its no excuse if you're having
terrible family problems, going through "a dark time" in your
life, or you just plain messed up. If you steal something and don't get
caught, does that make it right? In the same way, driving drunk and not
causing an accident does not mean the penalty should be less severe. You
just got lucky. Yes, there will always be drunk drivers, but stricter
laws may help some people to plan ahead or think twice."
-----
"too lenient. Drunk drivers
should spend more time in prison. It is a serious offense."
-----
"Yes, The laws are way to
strict. A distinction should be made, based on several factors. Driving
a motor vehicle in NJ is a nesessity of the environment. Factors:
1. Level of intoxication.
2. Was an accident involved?
3. Is alternative transportation available to continue working at
an already established workplace?"
-----
"Too strict. Tough DWI laws will
never stop people from drinking and driving. Let them drive, just make
it maditory for offenders to have interlock devices installed. I truely
believe it's about the money."
-----
"DWI laws suck! How do they expect you to pay those horrendous fines & surcharges (NJ is very Greedy State) without going to work, we NEED a Condintional Driver License to get to our jobs...NJ is so stupid and heartless! Way to stict for 1st timers!!"
-----
"Too lenient. Someone caught for a DWI should be penalized by immediate licensed suspension for a minimun of two years, and a $10,000 fine. There should be no bargaining or plea arrangements. If this overly strict law prevents one person from driving drunk for fear of the legal consequences, well that one person might have killed someone that you or I know or perhaps even a spouse. Now had that happened to me, I would give more than just $10000 to have my loved one back, what is their safety worth to you?"
----
"make driving a right, not a prevlege than people could defend themselfs."
-----
"All Police officers need video
cameras to record arrests and field tests to help ensure fair and just
police reports."
-----
"who is the government to say that driving is a privilege you buy the car,pay for insurance,buy the gas,it all contributes to the economy,you pay taxes to keep the roads repaired,80%of driving is to go to work,food shopping day to day chores, dui ruins the entire family not just the convicted driver,is making a living also a privilege give me a break"
-----
"I understand when you are wrong
your wrong but people make mistakes ,having a low BAC reading just means
you used poor judgment and you shouldn't be treated like a murderer.
Your life should not fall apart due to a DWI , lose jobs, can't get to
work. Work is therapy and it's a way to make ends meet and pay the
horrendous fines. NJ should not ruin a person even more."
-----
"The alcohol level should be raised, because people are not impaired or "drunk" are getting arrested for probable cause."
-----
"It is absolutely unfair. It is a system built with the exclusive goal of rapidly
disposing of cases and collecting as much money as possible in the process.
Pleading "not guilty" and going to trial is the functional equivalent of a Deer
wearing a big red target on its chest during open hunting season."
-----
"Sometimes I think the laws are too lenient...but for the most part I think that if people can't act resposibly reguarding their life, my life or anyone else life they shouldn't be able to drive....too many people die every day because some idiot thought he was ok to drive....I think if you've been convicted of a DWI or DUI then you should have to have that device in your car forever...no matter what the cost is!"
-----
"The fact of the matter is- TOO STRICT! But in all reality, we can't change the law. So the best thing for everyone to do is JUST DON"T DRINK AND DRIVE! Have a designated driver. Have a plan. I had a DUI 4 years ago. I'm no alcoholic. I was dumb and drove home from my company Christmas party. My Husband just got a DUI. He is no alcoholic. He just made a dumb mistake. He got it worse than myself. 20 days in jail, 8 months suspention and all the other monditory first offense penalties.
Stay at home and drink!"
-----
"DUI laws are way too strict! A to and from work license should be issued. If
DUI is a motor vehicle violation, then why should people have to lose everything- like a person
who commits a felony? I don't get it. I hate NJ and I hate MADD. DUI is not a blake and
white issue. Good people make mistakes. Not everyone that gets a DUI is an alcoholic."
-----
"too strict"
-----
-----
"I think that the new .08 BAL is a little low. Many people are not "drunk" at this level."
-----
"As a single mother of 4 school aged children, I find the disapointment in their eyes unbearable, I can only rely on friends for "so much" and had to eliminate fun activities (after school sports, birthday parties, summertime at the cominuty pool, CHURCH, just to name a FEW) Every day, the weight of my SIN is getting harder to cope with. The fines, surcharges ALONE are killing me .. not being able to function as a parent for my children has taken its toll. Never have I felt helpless, embarrised,and incompatent as a parent. I have become depressed .. I'm taking medication and have thought of just giving up, ending my pain and guilt ... there doesnt seem to be an end to my "punishment" ... I'm paying in emotional blood, and my tears don't seem to END! God help me ... for I have sinned ... Forgive me and my thoughts of weakness ...
"
-----
"a person found quilty of dwi--faces charges greater those those who stub , attack, rob, steal, shoplift. use false documents to live in this country..etc. plus, drinking is a dease? an addiction? help should be given to this people, reba--fines will do stop a person with an addiction."
-----
"too strict. Nobody should be restricted from getting to and from work.
"
-----
"Too Strick, but if you don"t learn the frist time then, I fell bad for you. It scared the hell out of me. It has been 3 years, i see a cop i fell like a criminal all over again."
-----
"I am the victim of my body's actions. My muscles moved without my minds control. My mouth would drink as my brain would be screaming NO through my whole body. And once in that condition I no longer had control. My body would do anything for more. Including drive for more. I am an ALCOHOLIC!!! I have met many of me in the rooms... I am thankful to the NJSP for stopping me that night, because nothing else could, not me, family, friends, MADD, SADD, or these penalties for DWI. Sure I knew what they were, didn't matter. The law saved my life, the penalties are taking it back. 10 years is not relative to anything,1st=6 mo.,2nd=twice that=1 yr, 3rd=3 times 2nd=3 yrs. Where did 10 years come from, I TOOK CARE OF THE PROBLEM ON THE FIRST DAY I DIDN'T DRINK. My driving never had anything to do with the problem. The problem is that DWI penalties attempt to curse the "drunk" back under the bridge and into the trenchcoat. Where is "parole" in this jail sentence, for the non driving non!
drinker, who doesn't want to hide under the bridge and drive anyway. I like the comment (way above) about alcohol licensing. People would have stopped serving me liquor years ago, if they knew they could legally. The LAWS sent me to a rehab, that told me I had a disease, and that I couldn't control my behavior. Then the PENALTIES punished me for behavior that wasn't mine. Some type of reform is needed for the people who help themselves and stay clean. It's tearing my family apart. My (then)9 year old daughter will not learn to drive with me, and will have her license before me. The STATE took that memory from me. My wife is a full time shuttle service with 3 active children to drive around (girlscouts,soccer, basketball, etc.). My mother picks up the shuttle, when the schedule is impossible to do with one driver. My boss who picks me up 5 days a week, to retain a great employee. THESE are the victims of the penalties. NOT ME. I refuse to drive, then I could be victim once!
again. I am the SURVIVOR. The state's laws no longer punish me. But
"
-----
"When is the punishment for DWI no longer a punishment for the person who committed the offense? The punishment no longer fits the crime. My husband lost his license for 10yrs. He is 5 yrs into it. He's adapted pretty well these days, but I have not. I feel he is no longer the one being punished, but me and my children are. They give murderers parole, why not have some kind of parole deal for this? His time would be better served doing community service or speaking engagements at schools. Is there anything that can be done?
"
-----
"yes, they are too strict. an alcoholic is a person with a serious illness. instead of dumping him in jail send him immediately to a rehab center. if he is not able to work for 6 months, how in the world can he pay for all the fines he has"
-----
"I would like to see a 'provisional' or 'work' liscence in NJ. I believe this could be successfully achieved if the liscence required the use of an interlock device."
-----
DWI laws are UNCONSTITIONAL....Period!
-----
"the laws are too lenient and stricter laws will lead to less DWI crime."
-----
"I THINK POLICE CHECK POINTS SHOULD BE INCREASED. THIS WOULD
AVOID INNOCENT PEOPLE FROM SUFFERING. IF THEY ARE STOPPED BEFORE THE DAMAGE IS DONE TO THE VICTIM. THE VICTIM WOULD
NOT BE A VITCIM AND THE INSURANCE RATES WOULD NOT BE SO OUTRAGEOUS. THE OFFENDERS FEEL THAT THEY LOOSE
BY PAYING AN ATTORNEY, WELL, GUESS WHAT, I DID NOT CHOOSE TO HAVE MY CARS
TOTALLED, MY PERSONAL PROPERTY DAMAGED, AND MY LIFE TURNED UPSIDE DOWN BECAUSE YOU DECIDED TO BE
IRRESPONSIBLE. NOW THESE LAWS NEED TO BE CHANGED IN FAVOR OF THE VICTIMS. WE DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS AND I WANT TO KNOW
WHY. THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS NICE, BUT SO WHAT, I DID NOT ASK FOR THIS, THIS IS NOT MY FAULT,
THIS WAS NOT AN INNOCENT ACCIDENT. THIS COULD HAVE BE AVOIDED. PEOPLE DIE.
WHEN DO THE VICTIMS HAVE THE FAIR SHAKE. WHEN IS OUR GOVERNMENT EVER GOING TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. SO,WHEN THE CLIENT CRIES I
SPENT $3000.00 TO HAVE MY ATTY GIVE ME FALSE HOPES, WELL, WAKE UP SPANKY, EXPLAIN TO MY 7 YEAR OLD SON, WHAT
HAPPENED TO DADDYS TRUCK, AND HIS SISTERS CAR, AND THE BOY DRIVING THE CAR THAT HIT DADDY'S TRUCK AND HIS SISTERS CAR! IT
ALSO AMAZES ME THAT IF YOU GET CAUGHT WITH SUCH A LARGE WEAPON, YOU GET A SLAP ON THE WRIST, BUT WHAT IS THE
DIFFERENCE, YOU CAN KILL 3,4,5 AT ONCE, A GUN CAN ONLY KILL 1 AT A TIME, DEPENDING ON THE GUN. THERE ARE MANY WAYS THESE
LAWS CAN BE CHANGED, I WOULD BE WILLING TO HELP"
-----
"the laws are very strict, but they do need to be like that.
"
-----
"The monies collected should be forwarded toward a rehab program. Treatment for the disease makes more sense than lining the pockets of cops and politicians."
-----
"yes, i mean, yes we should
have to pay for opur actions, but, i had to go to court, pay the state
$3,000, pay 5,000. in insurance and don't forget the hassle of who can
insure me because even though nothing else is on my license or record,
you are now a high risk, i also had to go to a class , and if the
class doesn't find me fit which is very unfair, then you have to go
through a 16 week program which is not only $25.00 a week, but include
the 150.00 that i originally paid for the IDRC CLASS, which would have
bee sufficient enough, for my first offense as a 25 year old.
definitely not neccessary!!!"
----------------
"I do drink
occasionally and I feel they should make cars standard with the
apparatus you need to blow into in order to start the vehicle. If they
cannot put it in all cars, then it should be mandatory for those who
are convicted of DUI"
-----------------
"Yes I think the nj
dui/dwi laws are a joke, and just show of what the judcial system
really is about(MONEYMONEYMONEY) They should impose a penalty based on
a case by case judgement. It is not fair for someone(or there loved
ones) to suffer for a minor mistake(1st time offenders with a low
b.a.c)"
------------------
"The laws do NOT make sense. If
the breathalizer is not explained to you, then you should not be
penalized for it, even if you signed the papers. I was raped in April,
and am in a step-down position when it comes to dealing with men...I
do what they say and hope to not get hurt, raped, or killed. I was not
given guidance, and am now facing a crimanal charge based on this.
Other evidence is shaky to begin with...the car was off and parked, I
wasn't driving anywhere, etc..."
--------------
"I had a Positive
record for over 40 years, NOT even a parking ticket, I was attempting
to get away from an abusive situation, a simple friend who had too
much to drink. I summoned the police, via my cell which was in the
car. I called home for assistance, when the special PO arrived I put
my key in the ignition, to activate my power windows..I called out to
the PO to advise him that " I was Over here" officer.. I was
charged with DWI..The breathilizer was not admissable in court. I am
appauled, as my life took a serious downward slide, I am the mother of
twins who achieved their Masters in Drug/Alcohol counceling at 23.
They were sick over my DWI charge as , I never would have driven under
the influence.. I had ONE >>1 glass of wine with
dinner.........There are TOO Many Gray areas. Who benefits from my DWI?
THE STATE>>>Shame on NJ...Respecfully...Elaine"
----------------
"DWI, drunk driving, DUI,
and a license to drink. madd,
sadd, radd, A.A., and Alanon related.
Copyright 1993-2004 ©
Bruce Alm
The answer to the problem
of drunk driving, etc. could be this; a permit for the purchase and
consumption of alcohol beverages.
This would not only be a
major assault on the problem of drunk driving, but would also have an
effect on virtually all other crimes such as these;
murder, rape, assault,
burglary, robbery, suicide, vandalism, wife beating, child beating,
child molestation, the spread of aids, college binge drinking, animal
cruelty, etc., the list is endless.
If this proposition was
made law, there could be a major reduction in all these areas of
concern, even though the emphasis concerning alcohol abuse seems to be
drunk driving in particular.
There could also be many
other positive results;
families healed, better
work performance, booze money spent on products that would help the
economy (we've all heard of the guy who spends half his check in the
bar on payday,) would spare many health problems, etc.
This new law could go
something like this
Any person found guilty of
any crime where drinking was a factor would lose the right to purchase
and/or consume alcohol beverages.
For a first misdemeanor, a
three year revocation. a second misdemeanor, a ten year revocation. a
third misdemeanor, a lifetime revocation. Any felony crime, an
automatic lifetime revocation.
Anyone caught drinking
alcohol without a permit would receive a possible $1000 fine and/or
jail sentence. those who would supply alcohol to people without a
drinking permit (and possibly make money at it,) would also lose
his/her right to purchase alcohol beverages.
What wife or husband would
buy an alcoholic spouse a bottle?
What friend would give a
problem drinker a drink at the possible cost of a thousand bucks and
the loss of their own privilege? This could be a total discouragement
to these would-be pushers.
This permit doesn't seem as
though it would be a problem to put into effect. It could simply be a
large X, or whatever, on the back of any drivers license in any state,
to show who has been revoked, and cannot purchase alcohol.
Most people of drinking age
have a driver's license, but one area that might be a problem could be
New York City, where many people don't drive.
This problem could be
resolved, however, by a license-type I.D. specifically for the
purchase of alcohol beverages. Most, if not all states have these
already for the purpose of identification.
This could be a small price
to pay for the saved lives of thousands of Americans each and every
year.
After this, it would simply
be a matter of drinking establishments checking I.D.s at the time of
purchase.
In the case of crowded
bars, they could simply check I.D.s at the door, as they do now.
Would this be a violation
of rights?
There can be no argument
here since they already check I.D.s of people who look as though they
may not be old enough to drink.
This could be a good
saying, "If a person who doesn't know how to drive shouldn't have
a license to drive, a person who doesn't know how to drink shouldn't
have a license to drink."
Here are some other pluses
to this idea
A good percentage of people
in correctional institutions are there because of alcohol related
offences . Because of this, court, penal, and law enforcement costs
could drop dramatically.
The need for A.A., ALANON,
MADD, SADD, etc., could be greatly diminished as well.
What the alcoholic fears
most, is the temptation to have that first drink, usually a spur of
the moment type thing. Without the ability to do this, he/she is
fairly safe. To start drinking again would almost have to be planned
in advance. and to maintain steady drinking would be extremely
difficult, in most cases.
Even though A.A. members as
a group don't become involved in political movements, it seems as
individuals, they would all be in favor of a situation like this. Any
person who wants to quit drinking, even if never having been in
trouble with the law, could simply turn in their license for the
non-drinking type.
A woman from MAAD, on the
NBC TODAY show, said "One out of every ten Americans has a
drinking problem, and that 10% consumes 60% of all alcohol beverages
sold in the U.S.."
If this is true, there
could be financial problems for breweries, liquor stores, bars, rehab
centers, etc., as well as lawyers, massive amounts of tax revenue
'down the drain,' and so on.
But it doesn't seem as
though anyone would have a valid argument against a proposal such as
this for financial reasons. To do so would be morally wrong, and could
be likened to a drug-pusher attitude.
Even with the problems this
new law could present, it still could, in one sense, be considered the
simple solution to the number one drug problem in the U.S. and
elsewhere. Alcoholism.
P.S.
What ever happened to the
skid row drunk?"
---------------------------
"The laws are fair
except the part about taking away your license for 3 to 6 months if
you are a first offender. what if you are a single source income
person with no one to help you??? how do to continue to work or pay
the court fines for that matter?
You will without a doubt
lose your job because u can not show up for work if you must drive. If
you have family how are you suppose to support?
I am not saying that dwi
drivers should get a lap on the wrist(especially second offenders). No
one is perfect and sometimes good people make bad decision that does
not mean that they must lose their entire career.
I would propose DWI
offenders be giving restricted license to go to work so that they can
atlease have a source of income to live and pay those court
fines."
--------------------------------
"there
not too strict except that i think you should be able to get a permit
to get to and from work on a first offense. im really stuck now."
---------------------------------
"when you
go to idrc lie i have not done drugs in 20 years. i drink mybe 6 beers
aweek got a dui they told me to go to more meetings at 35 dollars a
pop. this was my 1st dui"
---------------------
"Yes they
are to harsh i understand that people crash and stuff like that but it
should all depend on how they are acting when pulled over...like
falling over slurring...or if they act fine fail maybe one test...its
just to harsh 6 months...should be like 1 month 1 month is hell its so
hard"
---------------------
"YES EACH
CASE IS DIFF.MANEY PEOPLE HAVE A HOUSE N FAMELEY THEY R
SURPPOTING.fAMELYS ARE BEING TOURN APORT BY THE DUI LAWS IT SEEMS NJ
IS A VERY GREETY STATE WITHOUT COMPASON .THE SURCHANGE IS AN ILLEAGLE
TAX WE NEED TO REPAL THIS NOW.IT IS A FAILD SYSTEM THERE R 200,000
PEOPLE WHO CANNOT DRIVE R PAY THIS ILLEAGLE TAX THIS ILLLEAGLE TAX
ALSO DISCRIMANTS AGENT LOWER INCOME PEOPLE. ITS HURTING WORKING
FAMLEYS"
------------------------
"The laws
and punishments are fine. The prejustice police officers have against
people driving when the bars close is unfair. Police are human beings
who exagerate to make the state's case better. Of course you write up
a report saying "smelled STRONG alcohol" on the defendant's
breath after he blew over .10 to create probable cause after the fact.
How can you argue that he didn't smell it when it blew > .10? What
a joke. There should be video tape of the driver driving all over the
road before a stop can be made. The troopers only use the video tape
in their vehicles to help prove the case for the state. The trooper
should be required to start the tape rolling as soon as he sees
swerving so the whole world can see it not just his go be his
interpretation of a "swerve". It's there job to lie. Lying
creates revenue for the state and job security for the whole
oppressive crew."
-----------------------
"YES TO
STICT .REPEAL THE SURCHANGE"
-----------------------
"I do not think that the Breathalizer is a accurate methord of
checking a person alcohol content,there is the size of the person,did they injest food recently,and many other close
perameters that have to be taken into concideration,plus the, plus and minus factor of accuracy,to many people lives have been
ruined on the inaccrucy of this archaic methord. And if there is reasonable dought in this methord,people who have been
convicted should and have the right to restitution for a doughtful methord of conviction,this methord should be banned."
-----------------------
"NJ DWI laws are very fair. I would propose that anyone
charged with a DWI not be allowed to get away with it. I do know that the
more money that you or your parents have, the more likely you will get away with just a slap on the wrist."
-------------------------
"I THINK THE 6 MONTH SUSPENSION OF A DRIVERS LICENSE IS HARSH AND ALL THE SURCHARGES THAT GO ALONG WITH IT.
"
---------------------------
"That the real culprit of the crime be attackes. The liquor
importers, distributors and all the advertising on our public networks. Alcohol more damaging than cigarettes."
-----------------------------
"CONDITIONAL LICENSE FOR WORKING PEOPLE NOT
EVERYONE
ARRESTED ON DWI IS AN ALCOHOLIC. Sometimes people make mistakes."
------------------------------
"Too strict for first time offenders. I have been driving for 31 years
with a perfect record, always kept my license, registration, insurance fees up-to-date but all that means
nothing I find I have to prove myself innocent instead of being found guily. NJ will force
me to commit a crime by driving without a license so I can continue to work. I ask
myself why was I a law abiding citizen all these years? The State doesn't care it just wants your money.
-----------------------------
"DWI laws need to be strict. However, in NJ they are not fair. A
person who gets stopped for a reading of .2 or greater (first charge) gets the same penalty as someone at .1. More interpretation
needs to be allowed to the presiding Judge as someone with .1 is less liable to cause a problem as someone with .2 or greater.
Unfortunately, trial by jury is not allowed in NJ and the verdict is tied to judges who are politically appointed. These judges have a
tie to the local township and the police in the respective township. Quotas by the police are also at issue. Since the judge is
appointed, whom do you think they will believe? Finally, the breathalyzer used in NJ is a joke. It was designed in the 1950's
and does not have an independent readout. What this means is that the arresting officer has full control over the outcome of
the reading without an un-biased input or output. With the politically
appointed judges supporting these officers, the whole DUI process in NJ raises
serious ethical concerns."
------------------------------
"Raise the BAC to.15 Excuse me but some of us are experienced
drinkers and can operate a motor vehicle safely at this level. The field test is a total joke. I have failed it three times when I wasn't
even drinking. The cop smelled alcohol in the car from my passenger. A breathalyzer proved I was sober but then the
bastards started to accuse me of taking drugs. I had to give them a urine
sample and got a DUI ticket which cost me almost $ 8000.00 dollars to defend. The urine came back clean. I should have
pissed in the bastards mouth. This gets even more ridiculous because the state postponed it twice,
had a change of venue because the judge in the municipality was some kind of sexual deviate ( an
employee of his was suing him for improper sexual advances and my attorny's firm happened to representing the plaintiff in that
matter). When we finally got to court nine months later the prosecution was still not ready and wanted to postpone it again. I
had expert witnesses and my attorney in court. Going back again was going to cost me an additional $ 1,500.00. So I pleaded guilty
to reckless driving, received 5 points and a 2 month suspension. You can't make this kind of stuff up. The whole DWI issue is
an emotional political football that no politician wants to be accused
of not being behind 100%. It is a travesty that results in tremendous hardship and inconvenience for anyone even accused
of it. It's time to stop the insanity. Are alcohol related traffic accidents and fatalities really down."
-----------------------------
"Yes, they are too strict and I think that the Judge should be able
to impose whatever sentence he feels. He should not be required to impose a jail penalty."
------------------------------
"The laws are too strict. One should be given privileges to drive
back and forth to work. There should be more room for the courts interpretation of each case. A first offense with no prior
driving record should not be treated the same as an Alcoholic behind the
wheel of a weapon. "
-------------------------------
"The laws do not appear to be written with sufficient thought to
adequately handle the variety of complex issues which may surround any given case. I do not advocate or excuse
DWI/DUI. However, there is no differentiation between the penalties based
on circumstance or source of impairment. An individual can be unexpectedly impaired, for instance, by taking a new
prescription medication. This, in my view, is a far different crime than an
individual who plans to get drunk (high, toasted, etc.) because that's his/her idea of a good time. Likewise, I read one posting
wherein a person, after starting to drive home, realized the alcohol he had drank was affecting him more than he'd expected. He
found a safe place to park, put the keys in the rear of the car and took a nap, waiting for the effects to wear off. In that
circumstance, I think the guy acted about as responsibly as he could once he'd realized the effect of the alcohol. Yet he was
charged anyhow. Changes: trial by jury ! should be allowed. In my view, if the penalty involves risk of jailtime or significant penalties,
provisions for a jury trial should be automatic. Further, the financial penalties should be tied to the income of the person. I
have a relative in NJ who, unfortunately, has had a number of DWI's. He is very depressed and has no medical insurance. He
knows he was wrong to drown his sorrows in alcohol and to drive in that condition. Since he has multiple offenses (which appear
to carry a minimum prison sentence but no maximum sentence), he does not know if he will ever be released from prison. He
is fairly certain he will never be able to see our 80-year old mother again,
and by the time he gets to see his three daughters, they will all be adults. He has two more sentences to be delivered to him
(presuming that he will be convicted in two forthcoming trials), as well as a contempt of court ruling (for failure to appear in court for
a hearing - which he couldn't do beca! use he was in jail and they refused to let him attend the hearing), a"
---------------------------
"One can
understand severity in these matters, if a conviction is reached.
However, loss of job and subsequent damage or loss of relationships
(marriages, possibly involving children), jobs, etc. may be more
detrimental than those who enacted the legislation may have
forseen. Was their intent to ruin somone's life, or to inflict a
"reaonable penalty"? Reform on these points should be
seriously considered within the NJ legislature."
----------------------------
"Give judges more
say so in sentenceing If all dwi were the same then the current laws
would make more sence"
-----------------------------
"Only change I
suggest is a work license for 1st time offenders."
-----------------------------
"too strict"
------------------------------
"The laws
pertianing to DWI in New Jersey are horrendous. All our constutional
rights go down the drain with DWI. No miranda warning, no call to an
attorney, being forced to take a breath test, no jury trial,no pre
trial intervention, no plea bargen, nothing, just guilty until proven
guilty..period! The cops can write down anything they want on the
breath test since there is no printout, i hear the municipalities get
money for the towns for a DWI, they sure get enough with the fines and
surrcharges 3k in NJ, how absurd. Other states don't have a three
thousand dollar surrcharge to add to the already high car ins. rates.
The bottom line is a DWI in NJ can ruin your life, your job,I was a
police dispatcher on my way to become a cop...not anymore, my life is
over due to ONE indiscretion. The laws in NJ MUST be more lienent...period!!"
----------------------------
"Im very thankful
to have gotten my DUI in NJ, where I wont be considered a felon. Im a
nice homemaker who had too many fuzzy navels at a house wedding. I
wouldnt want to be lumped together with Charles Manson or Ted Bundy,
lets use our heads here and not act like nazis."
-----------------------------
"Im glad to know
NJ has some decency and common sense left and hasnt succumbed to the
hysterical punishments other states have. First time offenders who
never repeat the offense should not be treated as common criminal with
a felony to their names. That would make it hard for first time
offenders to find employment. Being socially ostracized to this degree
is cruel and unusual, everyone has bills."
----------------------------
"Too strict with
over zealous police officers. Drinking should be punished if someone
committs a traffic infraction not random police check points."
----------------------------
"After looking at
the DWI penalties of other states, I would consider New Jersey's Dwi
laws to be very lenient. I would impose much stiffer penalties for
second and third offenses which would include higher fines and much
longer periods of revocation of licenses."
-----------------------------
"The First offense
punishment is much to strict. Too many peole have just made a mistake.
A social drinker may not have the experience to determine if they
should get a taxi or drive. Driving record, ability to continue to
support yourself and a family has t be a consideration. The
financial burden imposed is already extremely harsh. This is not
necessarily wrong. But how can a person who can not drive to work pay
these fines. I mentioned above a person made a mistake. I don't
mean to say that a DWI should go unpunished, but a no accident, low
BAC offense needs to be handled differently then a 2nd or 3rd
offender. This type of punishment can only add to factors of why some
people may drink. !st Offence: Substantial fine, Alcohol consuling
Conditional lisense. Even a voluntary urine test to keep conditional
lisense.
2nd Offence: Fines as we have now. Mandatory Alcohol counseling.
Depending on BAC, if accident, and time since last offence.
consideration for conditional lisense with mandatory urine
testing.
3rd Offence No excuse, Keep punishment as it is."
-------------------------------
"New Jersey should
have work licenses. After 20 years of drug and drink i cleaned up my
act. Im strapped with a 10 year loss of license. Thank god i do not
have a wife and 5 children to support. This could be done so people
could support themselfs and their familys. Mandatory breathilizers in
cars. I would just love to be able to move up in my company but i
would need to drive to meetings. It is really hard. But i also have
grown mentally. some people deserve this."
--------------------------------
"A day light hours work permit
should be available. The current penalties are too strict in that
often forbids a person to continue to work and hence they become a
burden on the community. It can also cause more reason for the person
to drink."
---------------------------------
"cases should be based on each
case."
----------------------------------
"My sons both have serious
problems with alcohol and encouted prblems with the DWI law in NJ. I
like you, do not condone it nor by no means want anyone UDI on the
road but the law needs to be changed in many areas and I intend to do
just that with the help of people like yourself because you and I bot
know there is no true honest due process although DWI is treated as a
m/v. offense yet it is criminal in nature.The punishment is
devastating subsiquently your life can be changed drasticly even
though you may have learned your lesson and made a 360 degree turn
around as so far as one of my sons has done so far. The bottom line is
just that!The strong punishment and fines without reabilatation
defeets the end results and that is to get the impaired off the
road.The towns and the state have turned the DWI law into a cash cow
and without driving previlages you cannot work to pay the fines ,surcharges,lawyers
or rent.Is it so hard to allow a red license to work on! ly with.,or
an auto inter- lock system to check breath levels to start cars to
illiminate the force of law breakers to violate their restrictions.
Above all the entrapments and over zealious police ,prosocuters and
municiple love triangles would cease to milk the cash cow they have
legally abused for years now and finally ,hopefully the police would
stop fabricating their stories while taking advantage of their
authority by beating on handcuffed assailants whom may not be normal
at the time and most of the time can hardly prove otherwise in the
confines of a police station where the invisable blue line of silence
prevails.There is no justice unless you at least get a jury trial of
your peers to listen to the case and you give a little compassion to
those who might someday become socially acceptable through help and
fairness . there are many other parts to this saga that I hopefully
will address some day in the proper arena. thank you for your
anticipated concern,"
-----------------------
"im not following this question
I asked, I am in a out patient program and I still have to go away for
2 days in this IDRC??? I think that is so stupid, Does DMV honestly
think they can make me stop drinking. NO only I can so if there gonna
send me away then let them do it, I really feel all this state cares
about is money and they could care less about my well being"
-----------------------
"Much to harsh, IF you are
routinely stopped, if you hit something that's another story. 6 months
loss is devastating to most."
------------------------
"Laws and penalties are fair.
However, employers should not be allowed to have knowledge of the dui
or ask for the DMV information unless the position involves driving
for the employer"
------------------------
"Too strict, people should be
judged on rehabilitation and willingness to sustain a sober life
"
-------------------------
"The laws are too lenient -
maybe we need to have federal laws rather than just at the municipal
level."
-------------------------
"resticted license"
-------------------------
"They are far too strict. A
mistake is made. However, the state makes it impossible for the person
to rectify the situation, and places them in a state of financial
crisis for the rest of their lives. I am certain if the fines were
based on annual income these laws would be changed. Example a
person making 35,000 a year pays 1000.00 for three years plus
unreasonable insurance surcharges. This hurts that person dramaticaly.
However, a person making 250,000.00 doesn't really feel that burden.
Why not make their penalty 10,000.00 for three years. It's all
relative. If the state were to do this I gaurentee the laws would
change. As it stands now, the laws only punish the working poor."
--------------------------
"Work licenses should be
granted on a special program.Also a person convicted of a third or
more offense be able to enter another special program to get their
full license returned,Only if they can prove they are no longer a
threat and serve half the penalty."
---------------------------
"TOStrict less fines"
---------------------------
"I would propose another form
of the "step down" rule , stating if you can step down from
a 3rd DWI to a 2nd after 10 years, why not a 2nd to a first after
another 10. This would not expunge any DWI's as you have stated but it
sure would give people incentives who have 2 or even 3 DWI's
already!!"
---------------------------
"Alcohol offenses seem to have
more strict penalties than those of drug offenses. I feel alcohol laws
are too strict."
----------------------------
"I would impose tougher laws on
drunk driving"
-----------------------------
"How about a blood alcohol
level of less than .10% ?"
------------------------------
"The laws are to strict for
first time offenders. There should be a system that allows
rehab/suspended penalties for first time offenders. Repeat offenders
do not deserve lenient punishment and I feel for them our current laws
are fine."
-------------------------------
"Too lenient. Offenders should
be made accountable for any and all damage they cause and be made to
pay retribution to their victims."
--------------------------------
"I believe that people do not
feel enough of a deterent against driving intoxicated. I think that
every conicted drunk driver should go through mandatory classes on the
effect and realities of what can happen if an accident
occurs."
---------------------------------
"Too strict. Why not allow the
lock devices? One might argue that one might bypass such a system, but
to anyone can just jump behind the wheel while revoked. I am 38, and
just got two DWIs just a couple weeks apart. I was going through a
rough time. I didn't hurt anyone. I no longer drink at all. There is
no public transportation in this part of Warren County. Now I can't
get a job despite two college degrees. I'm in the middle of doing 30
days community service which they are manageing to stretch out to
several months by only having me do ten hours a week. I pay $175 a
month for insurance surchage even though I no longer own a car or
drive. This is in addition to the $150 fine I pay monthly. I
voluntarily went to an in-patient rehab for two weeks, and go to AA
meetings almost every day. What more do they want? "
---------------------------------
"I believe the DWI laws in New
Jersey are much too strict. Each case should be individualized and the
driver should be able to plead his or her case in order to reinstate
their driving priviledges. Some drivers may ave been under a great
deal of family stress, not necessarily out joy riding after a party or
get together.Some of these people may ave been going through a great
deal of emotional turmoil which they required ongoing councelling
during their trying times. To suspend these particular peoples drivers
license for 10 years or more can be very devistating for that
drivers livelihood, their moral, their self worth and ultimate
happiness.These are some of my beliefs about the excess stringency in
New Jersey concerning the DWI laws.I am a victim of such circumstances
and have gone trough the darkest times of my life during and following
my divorce which I did not want. I have worked through my problems for
the most part and attended multiple programs and counceling on my own
in order to obtain a better then ever quality of life. To work
something out with the Dept. of Motor Vehicles would be the humane
thing to do! and also to consider tat there were no accidents involved
during tis dark time of my life. Thank You "
-----------------------------------
"The Laws are not strict
enough. Innocent people die."
-----------------------------------
"First offenses should not be
as harsh."
------------------------------------
"To strict and to general,
everyone is in the same category. Are there mandatory sentences for
murder, robbery, rape - are you automatically guilty and face an even
greater fine and or jail time if you don't submit to a Lie Detector,
or DNA Evidence, etc., Where is the justice. If convicted of a
robbery, rape or murder, is your vehicle impounded, do you insurance
rates increase because you used this vehicle in the crime? My 90 year
old father should not be driving, would he be treated like a person
convicted on a DWI if stopped? I doubt it, but his
"resources" are way less than mine after 2 or 3 drinks, he
doesn't see clearly, nor could he perform a FST. It is all subject to
the individual circumstances as should be the case in DWI's. There
should be two BAC levels, and consideration given to 1st time
offenders with clean driving records. I am your typical
"social" drinker, I never even knew what a BAC was, I was
never concerned. Now, my life will never be the same. You! ! are a
common criminal and all rights have been taken away. In short, fines,
penalities, suspensions of licenses should be individualized based on
the evidence. This is the only "crime" where the state has
"evidence" against you that cannot be surpressed and without
a doubt presumes you are guilty! "
----------------------------------
"They are not too strict."
----------------------------------
"The laws are much to strict
for first time offense of a motor vehicle violation. A fine and year's
probation would make more sense as with first offense with controled
substances."
-----------------------------------
"There should be two levels,
.1-.15 would be driving while impared, and would not require loss of
licence. The fines and surcharges would be half. The laws for BOC
above .15 would remain the same. "
------------------------------------
"The laws are to strict for 1st
time DWI drivers, what am i to do about getting to work."
------------------------------------
"A little too strict -- laws
should be stricter for those charged for DWI and involved in
accidents, especially when someone was either hurt or injured than
those who have not been involved in an accident or serious traffic
violation."
--------------------------------------
"Too strict. Each case needs to
be handled on a case by case point, not an all around blanketing
aspect."
-------------------------------------
"Work license."
-------------------------------------
Call
on New Jersey DWI lawyer,
Greggory M. Marootian when you need experienced
professionals to give you the facts, and restore your integrity.
Home
| NJ DWI Law | NJ DWI
Procedure | Changes & Developments | Questions
& Forum
DWI Law Summary | Myths | DWI
Lawyers Outside of NJ | Links
| Finding DWI Lawyer
|
