Our challenge is to stop people from driving drunk. Punishing them afterwards doesn't bring back the victim or make the family feel better. The idea is to stop the DWI before it happens.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There's no question that we need tougher drunk-driving laws for repeat offenders. We need to take a lesson from European countries where driving isn't a right but a privilege.
I am the person who is a mother against drunk driver.
No one will deny that the excessive use of alcohol and alcoholic beverages would do more than any other single factor to make impossible a total war effort.
The purpose of the criminal justice system is both to rehabilitate and to punish. If we can rehabilitate somebody, that's a huge, huge win.
We must do all we can to empower parents and communities to protect our youth and to encourage healthy behavior free from binge drinking and other forms of alcohol abuse.
With such compelling information, the question is why haven't we been able to do more to prevent the crisis of underage drinking? The answer is: the alcohol industry.
If we were really tough on crime, we'd do more to stop it from happening in the first place.
Zero-tolerance on drinking and driving - meaning no drinking at all before driving - is a collective punishment that, in essence, only affects responsible adults who follow the law.
If the Internet, ubiquitous as it now is, proves too dangerous in the hands of the psychologically fragile, perhaps access to it ought to be restricted. We ban drunks from driving because they're a danger to others. Isn't it time we did the same to trolls?
Nowhere in this country should we have laws that permit drinking and driving or drinking in vehicles that are on American highways. This is not rocket science. We know how to prevent this, and 36 states do.