DUI Offenders Politically Re-Classified as “Violent”, Returned to Prison

Posted by Lawrence Taylor on January 4th, 2010

In today’s DUI double standard department:


Early Release Sends Some DUI Offenders Back to Prison

Chicago, IL.  Dec. 25 — Anti-drunken driving advocates reacted angrily earlier this week when the Chicago Sun-Times revealed that Gov. Quinn’s administration had released 18 felony drunken drivers from prison early to serve the rest of their prison time on home confinement.

On Thursday, those same anti-DUI advocates were cheering after the governor ordered all 18 back behind bars to serve the remainder of their prison time. Each will be paroled between mid-January and mid-October under the terms of their original sentences.

"That is a delightful Christmas story," said David Malham, a victim-services specialist with Mothers Against Drunk Driving in Chicago. "MADD is absolutely delighted that the governor reacted to this serious issue in such a way."

The Sun-Times revealed Tuesday that the 18 felony DUI drivers and 40 burglars were among 204 inmates released early from prison under a new program aiming to save taxpayers $5 million a year by putting certain "low-level, nonviolent offenders" on home detention. Eventually, 1,000 inmates are supposed to be released early.

MADD officials said repeat DUI offenders should have been considered violent. After reviewing the program, the state Corrections Department agreed.

The 18 DUI offenders were rounded up during the past two days. No more DUI drivers will be eligible for early release.

"A decision was made to eliminate any and all DUI offenders from the electronic-detention program," Corrections Department spokeswoman Januari Smith said.

 

Apparently, drug dealers were not "re-classified" by the politicians. But then "MADD" doesn’t stand for "Mothers Against Drug Dealers".

Chalk up a MADD endorsement and a few more votes for the Governor come re-election… 
 

Share
  • David W

    Apparently, drug dealers were not “re-classified” by the politicians. But then “MADD” doesn’t stand for “Mothers Against Drug Dealers”.(quote).

    Of course not. I mean, what does packing heat have to do with potentially being violent ?

    They truly are amazing with their mindset and rational when it comes to the definition of “violent” offender. (regardless of what the Supreme Court says)

  • Justin

    Judging that the supreme court is the reason we have a .08% national law I’d say they would agree with Chicago.

  • David W

    Judging that the supreme court is the reason we have a .08% national law I’d say they would agree with Chicago.(quote).

    Maybe Justin if the issue were to come to their bench again. But as of a couple of years ago, they ruled on a case that was “violent/non-violent” specific involving a hispanic that was here illegally. They ruled it was not a crime of violence and whatever sentence had been initially passed down be remanded for re-sentencing leaving the violent factor out. Larry has it in here somewhere.

    This shows nothing but the driving force behind the mindset of MADD nuts. If anything was established here in the realm of legality, this was cruel and unusual regardless of the crime committed. To send them home, then go “surprise”, no more Holiday for you? We changed our minds because MADD got upset ? Who is victimizing who now ?The guy gloating above in the article about this reversal says it all.

    This was purely political. Another case of MADD exerting “their will” threatening to advertize a smear campaign that the governor is a supporter of drunk drivers if he doesn’t reverse his position.

  • Justin

    Which would just lead me to believe that if you don’t like what the Governor is doing — vote him out.

    There are always two sides to a coin.