My colleague Aaron recently wrote a blog on “Occupation license – friend to repeat DWI offenders.” In the blog he pointed a case of Jeffrey Heath Dunn who was convicted of drunk driving three times, but was able to drive with an “occupational license”. Aaron wrote that the judges should apply tougher restrictions when approving an occupation license so that people with two or more DWI conviction stay out of the road.
One of the laws passed in 2001 tried to insure that a driver who is suspected of drunk driving and refuses to take a breath test will lose his or her license for 180 days. If a person fails a breath test, his or her license gets suspended for 90 days.[1] The law was passed so that the person with DWI stay out of road. But that purpose was weakened when the lawmakers decided to allow those with suspended licenses to get an occupational license.
To get an occupational license, the DWI suspect hires a lawyer who presents the application in front of a judge. The DWI suspect provides proof of insurance to the judge, and pays about $500 in administrative fees, and he or she is back to the road.
The Statesman and KVUE report found that the request for occupation license almost always gets approved - often with little questioning - allowing suspects to drive wherever they want in some cases.[2] Some judges say, “They generally conduct no formal review of the facts concerning the drunken driving arrest before signing off on an occupational license request. And they acknowledge that they almost never require the drunken driving suspects to appear in court to question them under oath about their driving needs, nor do they necessarily require proof of employment.”[3] It is alarming how easy a person with DWI conviction can get back to the road.
Steven Wolens, a former state representative from Dallas who worked to strengthen DWI laws said, “The provisional license takes the teeth out of it. It only leaves the law with some gums.”[4]
John Bradley, a Williamson County's District Attorney said, "We continue to see people with four, five, six, as many as 10 DWI's still driving with perhaps an occupations drivers license or, in many cases, with no license at all".[5]
Some of the facts that I read in statesman.com says:[6]
1) According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Texas leads the nation in drunken driving fatalities.
2) Texas reported that the state’s 2009 total alcohol-related fatalities outpaced California, which has the nation’s largest population.
Given these facts, I agree with Aaron regarding tougher rules for occupation license. I believe Texas should implement tough requirements for the occupation license. When a person drives a vehicle while intoxicated, he is not only putting his life in danger, but also putting lives of several other innocent people in danger. Texas should let people with habitual alcohol problem know that they should not drive while intoxicated, and if they do they will have to go through consequences of not being able to drive for next several months.
Some people argue that you could lose your drivers license not because you were convicted of DWI but because you got stopped by a police officer and he could tell that you had been drinking too much.[7] So they think people should be allowed to drive until convicted. They argue that people have to go to job; they have to drop their kids to school etc. I think they are right, but I think it should apply to the person who has never been convicted before. If the person has been convicted before and he is caught again, then we simply cannot afford to put him back on wheel. The risk is too high, so it is appropriate to suspend their driving license. The main goal is saving life rather than punishment.
(Note: I posted this article as a comment in Aaron’s blog. It says, "Your comment will be visible after approval.")
No comments:
Post a Comment