Comments on: MADD “Statistics” Again Debunked

By: panasonic bread Makers

panasonic bread Makers — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:32:45 +0000

Link exchange is nothing else except it is just placing the other person’s web site link on your page at appropriate place and other person will also do similar in favor of you.

By: deep fat fryers for sale

deep fat fryers for sale — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 03:07:49 +0000

I read this piece of writing fully concerning the difference
of newest and earlier technologies, it’s remarkable article.

By: Blog » Blog Archive » Woodstock DUI Lawyer says government should tell the truth about DWI/ DUI deaths in this country

Sat, 02 Aug 2008 16:34:19 +0000

[…] Governor Richards does not know that the statistics concerning deaths caused by drunk drivers are false.Â Perhaps Governor Richards does not know that there is a standing $20,000.00 offer by a concerned […]

By: RichardAlan

RichardAlan — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 23:24:29 +0000

This is a very interesting thread. Could we agree to disagree that if mandatory interlocking devices were law that the entire DUI Industry would cease to exist? No more MADD– mission accomplihed lets re-write the United States Constitution? If a motor vehicle is rolling down the highway then it is automatically presumed that the operator is not guilty of DUI, this includes sheeple that have never had a drink of alcohol in their entire life…

Everyone is sober because the new machine says so…

No more DUI’s, we are Free to go, or are we?????

By: mcguirebruce

mcguirebruce — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:27:02 +0000

We have a great resource in Mr. Taylor. He has answered many of my Questions and i know i am overstimulated by this experience. I think you should listen to him and learn and educate others for yours as well as their benefit. Help cand be part of the solution or just be ashamed and continue to be part of the problem.

By: mcguirebruce

mcguirebruce — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 01:20:47 +0000

Madd has already gotten the IID’s approved for repeat offenders and in some cases even first timers. I hate to see what will happen when they finally convince the gov. that a .05 will be safer. There are many things bad in America and DUI while terrible when someone is harmed or property is damaged is not our largest problem im sure. This just has been played on so much that america has been brainwashed to believe that the reason for less deaths is just the Laws being passed but those of us who have gone throught the experience and didnt just sit back and let it happen have learned that this is more of a revenue generating law and that the people who are repeat offenders are never really educated in the law they are just collected from and passed through to repeat the same mistakes. There is nothing we can do until someone can afford to stand up and say enough is enough. I suggest that you who know the truth and the way the law is written to entrap you by saying drink responsibly and as long as you are not above .08 this level you are ok. To let people know that there is a hidden limit in the words and that limit could be as little as .00 BAC. All the officers have to do is convince a judge or jury that you were impaired. There is no safe level of alcohol for someone to be behind the wheel of a vehicle, bicycle, wheelchair, or motorized cooler. Some of this is sarcasm but it should help drive home the point of how intrusive the laws for DUI are getting. I wish i had the means to fight beyond what i am but i too am limited funds well into the 8000 range and not evwen gone to court. Pass on your knowledge and help those who need to be helped and educate as many as you can on what you know. I feel this will help in dealing with the DUI experience you are going through. I think it is helping me. I feel i am helping others and i have met some repeaters who really do not understand what they are being charged with and why. I have brought the light to a few eyes to thwe point they can say they never knew that.

By: n7uqa91

n7uqa91 — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:06:44 +0000

Jim, first off, would you PLEASE give this a rest already? I know you are upset about your DUI experience, all of us are. Let me touch on a few things in your numerous posts.

1.â€œmy proposal would eliminate people from breaking the law.â€

No. Knowing DUI law through my experience, they would simply state that the ignition interlock reading is not â€œforensically accurateâ€ and subject to interpretation, even if you could show that it’s been â€œcalibratedâ€.

2. â€œit would be possible to make a cheap, reliable, effective, tamper proof , interlock device, to go on every vehicle, preventing 99% of those milion occurances over the next month, and preventing the police from taking away our rights at motor vehicle stops.
it is a win win proposal.â€

Wrong again. There will never be a â€œtamper proofâ€ interlock device. I have 30 years of electronics background, there is ALWAYS a way to circumvent electronic countermeasures, regardless of the law. Besides Jim, why should I have to PROVE my innocence every time I drive my car? This would also be akin to forcing GPS disciplined governors on cars so they cannot exceed the speed limit.

â€œjoeâ€“ someone could go out today at have 3 beers and a shot at a bar and grill in 45 minutes, be at a true BAC of 0,08%, and drive the one or 2 miles home, and the chances they will be arrested for dui is one in a million.â€

This assumption is correct. The dinner and drinks people (like myself) don’t believe they are breaking the law. Including the Politicians, Judges, Lawyers, Police officers and Firemen who are also guilty of the â€œdinner and drinksâ€ law. Current DUI laws are just for revenue generation, as is seatbelt and mobile communication device laws. Always done under the guise of â€œsafetyâ€. But I guess the policeman with a cell phone, two-way radio and laptop in his car aren’t distracting? It would be nice to see statistics of the reasons why some police officers get into accidents with their patrol vehicles.

Jim, if you really believe that IID’s would really work why not force them into semi trucks, police vehicles, ambulances, firetrucks etc, etc, etc. Regardless of the backlash, you could argue that someone could STILL drive these vehicles drunk.

As far as I’m concerned, the DUI defense community should be taking the LEAD in changing DUI laws for the better. Otherwise, card carrying MADD members will continue to force even harsher penalties on all of us.

By: posterposter

posterposter — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:42:54 +0000

Jim,

I agree with your solution but it is fatally flawed.

There are many ways to circumvent interlocks. It can be as easy as having a sober friend blow into it.

The only way achieve the goals you’re seeking is to prohibit the private ownership of motor vehicles.

Constitutionally speaking, that is a little less absurd than forcing by law the purchase and use of an interlock device.

The correct solution is to get rid of the victimless “crime” of drunken driving.

By: standup

standup — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:02:51 +0000

Let’s solve the cheap,reliable and effective problem first.

By: jim

jim — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:02:48 +0000

joe– someone could go out today at have 3 beers and a shot at a bar and grill in 45 minutes, be at a true BAC of 0,08%, and drive the one or 2 miles home, and the chances they will be arrested for dui is one in a million.

lowering the legal limit from 0.10 to 0.08 did not decrease the amkount of people breaking the law, it increased it.

people are not changing their behavoir, because they know the odds of being caught at 0.08% bac are extremely low.

but just because people are not being caught does not mean they are not breaking the law.

my proposal would eliminate people from breaking the law.

how does one know if he is at 0,08% bac, he doesnt, he couldnt possibly know.

with the interlock device, not only would he know if he was at the limit, he wouldnt be able to break the law and drive.