Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (7199)	6/25/2007 1:11:15 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10087

The problem is that they are including the lesser offenses, and considering going 75 on the Beltway (or 80 in a 65 zone) to be a major offense. Also one part of the law struck me as odd. They are penalizing being a passenger in a hit and run accident. What do you do when the driver pulls away, attack him? Maybe they mean failure to report a hit and run when you where the passenger. That at least makes some sort of sense. Otherwise they just created a powerful disincentive to report the hit and run. DUI should have fines in the thousands, not hundreds, to be a deterrent. Well you can go to jail for it. Also as they lower the DUI levels it becomes less about punishing reckless endangerment. I'm all for severe penalties for very drunk people, but as .1 turns to .08 or .07 in some jurisdictions (or less if someone thinks it effected your driving), or something like .001 for minors you start to have much less real reckless endangerment being an issue. See Message 22043407 Message 23156136 Message 23625130