Journal prints pictures of DWI offenders

_

As part of a city ordinance, the Albuquerque Journal has been printing the mug shots, names, ages, towns, blood-alcohol content, and violation dates of DWI offenders.

I'm curious what the Moving Train folks think about this...

blackredyellow

scb wrote:

As part of a city ordinance, the Albuquerque Journal has been printing the mug shots, names, ages, towns, blood-alcohol content, and violation dates of DWI offenders.

I'm curious what the Moving Train folks think about this...

While I don't really like the idea, as long as they do it for people convicted instead of just charged, then I am ok with it. It is public record at that point.

know1

If it's public record and they are guilty (as opposed to just charged or arrested), I have no problem with it. I think it's pretty common for their names to be printed anyway.

Uncle Leo

I think it's stupid. I agree that for convicted offenders there is not anything
"officially" wrong or illegal about this. It is public record. But it seems like some lame attempt to deter. "you will have the humiliation of seeing your face in the paper. Maybe people will throw things at you on the street or you won't have success at that job interview."

_

Uncle Leo wrote:

I think it's stupid. I agree that for convicted offenders there is not anything
"officially" wrong or illegal about this. It is public record. But it seems like some lame attempt to deter. "you will have the humiliation of seeing your face in the paper. Maybe people will throw things at you on the street or you won't have success at that job interview."

I agree. I had never heard of this until today, and apparently they've been doing it for 18 months. How can the threat of having your picture in the paper deter you if you don't even know about it?

Also, how does this help anyone else avoid being victims of these people? Maybe if they were rapists or child molesters or something people could avoid them.

jimed14

years ago, back in Massachusetts ... they wanted to give out special license plates to all those convicted of drunk driving a special "D" license plate ... so instead of 3 numbers, 3 letters ... your license plate would read "D-####" ... their hopes, it would reduce drunk driving for fear of shame.

I thought that was pretty harsh, but, supported the idea, as, driving isn't some sort of constitutional right.

jimed14

Uncle Leo wrote:

I think it's stupid. I agree that for convicted offenders there is not anything
"officially" wrong or illegal about this. It is public record. But it seems like some lame attempt to deter. "you will have the humiliation of seeing your face in the paper. Maybe people will throw things at you on the street or you won't have success at that job interview."

good point, I wouldn't want people getting shit thrown at them or their cars keyed, that could create many issues.

jbalicki10

I thought the US Consitiution protects us from "cruel and unusual punishments". Oh well...

cincybearcat

jbalicki10 wrote:

I thought the US Consitiution protects us from "cruel and unusual punishments". Oh well...

Stating the facts with a picture is now cruel and unusual?

How so?

stuckinline

in ohio, you get special license plates


http://www.dui.com/dui-library/ohio/news/ohio-state-license-plates


Specialized License Plates for Drunk Drivers
More States are creating legislation that could mandate specialized license plates for repeat DWI and DUI offenders

Over the past several years, no less than four states have attempted to pass legislation that would mandate specialized license plates for repeat driving while intoxicated (DWI) or driving under the influence (DUI) convictions in hopes that the plates would increase road safety. There has been much voiced dissent in each state regarding the stigma the plates may generate, however, Ohio’s legislation passed the bill proposed in their courts, and since that time, drivers who have been convicted of DWI or DUI twice in a ten year span can be ordered to place yellow license plates on their vehicle – “red-flagging” them to police, and to the public.

The bill in California, Assembly Bill 2099, failed in courts just a few months ago. AB 2099 would have required anyone convicted of DWI or DUI more than once in a 10 year span to purchase red license plates for every vehicle they were registered to operate, and at $250 per plate, legislators worried about some being able to afford the plates. Their concern also surrounded the stigma that would accompany driving with the plates. Some argue that’s what the guilty deserve, while others fear for any other family members who will be improperly targeted if driving these red-plated cars. The bill, although many felt was good in theory, was found impractical and the terms overly strenuous, leading to its defeat.

While California has no legislation allowing for these specialized plates just yet, Minnesota and Georgia have joined Ohio as states that mandate coded or colored plates for repeat offenders. With the increasing popularity of this method to curb drunk driving, it will not be surprising when more states follow suite.

The most recent bill proposed in New York asks not for red or yellow plates, but rather a code of either letters or numbers, the belief is that the validity of complaints regarding the “red-lettering” of the public will decrease if the plates look the same with the exception of this DWI or DUI repeat conviction “code”. The guidelines stating who is required to attach these plates are also more lenient than the bill proposed in California. The bill in New York asks that someone convicted three or more times in a five year span be required to wear the plates.

Regardless of those state legislatures that have not passed the proposed DWI and DUI plate bills, their popularity, whether liked or disliked, is on the rise and states across the nation will certainly be meeting them with ever increasing frequency.
Posted Tuesday, June 13, 2006

jbalicki10

cincybearcat wrote:

Stating the facts with a picture is now cruel and unusual?

How so?

Because not all crimes are DWI. How come they single out only DWI or DUIs? Why not all petty crimes, thefts, rapes, murders etc?

vedderelf

I lived in New Mexico. The entire state has a huge problem with drunk driving. Because of the desert, the flat land and the speed at which the accidents occur, most are fatal.


Something should be done nationwide. I live in Missouri. I know someone who has had 3 DUIs. He currently does not have a license, however his parents just bought him a brand new Lexus after he crashed his third car. This isn't one of those "I was only a little buzzed" drivers. This guy has fallen asleep in his car while in traffic, spun around on the highway to go backward because he missed his exit and once reported his car stolen because he was so drunk, he left it a mile away from his house and didn't remember walking home. Most of my friends laugh it off and say "oh, that's

---

." No one will care until he actually kills someone, then we'll all talk about how something should have been done sooner.

_

stuckinline wrote:

in ohio, you get special license plates


http://www.dui.com/dui-library/ohio/news/ohio-state-license-plates


Specialized License Plates for Drunk Drivers
More States are creating legislation that could mandate specialized license plates for repeat DWI and DUI offenders

Over the past several years, no less than four states have attempted to pass legislation that would mandate specialized license plates for repeat driving while intoxicated (DWI) or driving under the influence (DUI) convictions in hopes that the plates would increase road safety. There has been much voiced dissent in each state regarding the stigma the plates may generate, however, Ohio’s legislation passed the bill proposed in their courts, and since that time, drivers who have been convicted of DWI or DUI twice in a ten year span can be ordered to place yellow license plates on their vehicle – “red-flagging” them to police, and to the public.

The bill in California, Assembly Bill 2099, failed in courts just a few months ago. AB 2099 would have required anyone convicted of DWI or DUI more than once in a 10 year span to purchase red license plates for every vehicle they were registered to operate, and at $250 per plate, legislators worried about some being able to afford the plates. Their concern also surrounded the stigma that would accompany driving with the plates. Some argue that’s what the guilty deserve, while others fear for any other family members who will be improperly targeted if driving these red-plated cars. The bill, although many felt was good in theory, was found impractical and the terms overly strenuous, leading to its defeat.

While California has no legislation allowing for these specialized plates just yet, Minnesota and Georgia have joined Ohio as states that mandate coded or colored plates for repeat offenders. With the increasing popularity of this method to curb drunk driving, it will not be surprising when more states follow suite.

The most recent bill proposed in New York asks not for red or yellow plates, but rather a code of either letters or numbers, the belief is that the validity of complaints regarding the “red-lettering” of the public will decrease if the plates look the same with the exception of this DWI or DUI repeat conviction “code”. The guidelines stating who is required to attach these plates are also more lenient than the bill proposed in California. The bill in New York asks that someone convicted three or more times in a five year span be required to wear the plates.

Regardless of those state legislatures that have not passed the proposed DWI and DUI plate bills, their popularity, whether liked or disliked, is on the rise and states across the nation will certainly be meeting them with ever increasing frequency.
Posted Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Interesting...

Have there been any studies about whether or not this has actually worked to decrease the DWI rate? Or whether or not people driving cars with these plates are "profiled" by cops?

godpt3

Next to pain, shame is the second-greatest motivational force. I approve.

JOEJOEJOE

If everyone was smart enough to refrain from driving drunk, we wouldn't need to come up with prevention measures such as the D

---

license plate.

Some people make it sound as if they have no choice when it comes to driving drunk.

godpt3

jbalicki10 wrote:

I thought the US Consitiution protects us from "cruel and unusual punishments". Oh well...

A mandatory 20-year sentence for a first-time DUI is excessive, but it is neither cruel nor unusual.

mickeyrat

scb wrote:

Interesting...

Have their been any studies about whether or not this has actually worked to decrease the DWI rate? Or whether or not people driving cars with these plates are "profiled" by cops?

actually those plates are only for those with resticted driving priviledges.. we have automatic 180 day suspension on the first offense.If you apply for work or medical issue driving privalidges , the cops can instantly spot these drivers.record check by them would show what houre they sre allowed on the road, as not everyone has a 9-5 job.

Saw someone with these the other day weaving within her lane. Can't say if she just can't drive or was intoxicated.

_

mickeyrat wrote:

actually those plates are only for those with resticted driving priviledges.. we have automatic 180 day suspension on the first offense.If you apply for work or medical issue driving privalidges , the cops can instantly spot these drivers.record check by them would show what houre they sre allowed on the road, as not everyone has a 9-5 job.

Saw someone with these the other day weaving within her lane. Can't say if she just can't drive or was intoxicated.

Huh... that's really interesting. Thanks for the info!

Anon

As long as they do it for people convicted instead of just charged, then i don't see the problem. Maybe they might think twice, next time they jump in a car when they have been drinking, or at least have the decency to kill themselves instead of some innocent bystander.

Zero sympathy.