Town Square

Post a New Topic

3 DUI convictions could lead to license suspension for 10 years

Original post made on Jan 3, 2012

Starting yesterday on Jan. 1, Californians who are convicted of a DUI three or more times could have their license suspended for up to 10 years.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Sunday, January 1, 2012, 4:54 PM

Comments (19)

Posted by only a start, a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Jan 3, 2012 at 3:19 pm

This law is a good start but not punitive enough to stop people from just driving without a license. It happens all the time already.
One DUI should be thousands of dollars in fines and stiff probation.
Two DUIs, tens of thousands in fines, 30 consecutive days in jail. Not just weekends, this needs to cost them their jobs.
Three DUIs, a year in jail, revoked license forever, payment of all costs including the year in jail, seizure of all vehicles.
Oh, and if they caused an accident that injured anyone, don't even get me started. Hmmm, they cannot drive again without arms or legs, right? Or maybe a year in a Turkish prison . . . .

Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore
on Jan 3, 2012 at 3:21 pm

I say convict, convict, convict. Keep those of us who do not drive safer!


Posted by True Libertarian, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Jan 3, 2012 at 4:30 pm

Yet another example of the Nanny State, attempting to obstruct my personal freedoms. If I want to drive drunk, that should be my own affair. I've driven drunk most days and nights over the past 40 years or so, and I've never hit another person, only two stubborn car bumpers, an ill-placed mail box, and a telephone pole that had no business being that close to the highway. Now some yahoo liberal-commie types want to further restrict my driving habits? Why don't they just admit they're all communists who want to regulate us all to death. Live free or die without a drink in your hand.

Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore
on Jan 3, 2012 at 6:52 pm


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore
on Jan 3, 2012 at 9:05 pm

I agree that it should be your affair as well as that of the State Attorney General of California.
I've forwarded your comments re: driving drunk to Ms. Kamala Harris in Sacramento.


Posted by Another Libertarian, a resident of Birdland
on Jan 4, 2012 at 1:04 pm

If there's one thing the Tea Party taught us, its that the state shouldn't be able to regulate our lifes when it isn't in the Constitution. MADD is a communist organization that wants the state to join us in our cars and living rooms. First it was seatbelts. But think about it, have you ever read George Washington or any of the Founding Fatters write about that? No. Seatbelts are unconstitutional, introduced when the commie dems were in office. Now its all the tyrannical state imposturing against drinking and driving. Next it will be mandatory home safety helmets and increased taxes on tanning salons. We need to fight the tyrants! Liberty for all. My freedom to drink stops when I doze off, not before.

Posted by Maja7, a resident of another community
on Jan 5, 2012 at 7:38 am

Are you serious? It's your right to drive drunk? How about my right not to be killed by you! I thought it was a commonly accepted principle that your rights end when it interferes with my rights. You have the right to be drunk 24x7.Go ahead, drink up!!!!! But for goodness sake don't drive a car while intoxicated. Granted I do not agree with all laws, for example, if you don't want to wear a helmet on your motorcycle, that should be your right. But getting behind the wheel of a car when you are intoxicated (or high) just isn't right. Seems like common sense.

Posted by Lily, a resident of Grey Eagle Estates
on Jan 5, 2012 at 8:31 am

I actually don't think this is severe enough because of how many people drive without a license anyway. I went to traffic court about six months ago with a friend and lots of the people that appeared were cited for driving on a suspended license or not having one at all. If they don't care about breaking the law while driving drunk or high what makes lawmakers think they are suddenly going to become law abiding and not drive without a license?

I'm no liberal, but I say there should be jail time involved for even a second offense and big fat fines. I think this will provide a better deterrent than losing a license. Do what you want to yourself, but put the lives of other innocent people at risk, and you can rot in hell.

Ignore the person on here saying its his right to drive drunk. He's just trying to bring drama on here. No one in their right mind thinks what he is saying, and if he does believe it, he's clearly not in his right mind so theres no point in debating it with him.

Posted by Another Libertarian, a resident of Birdland
on Jan 5, 2012 at 9:50 am

Look, folks, I'm just being consistent in my beliefs. If you're against govt regulating industries that kill us with their pollution, if you're against govt regulation of workplaces where people die on account of unsafe and unhealthy work environments, if you're against govt regulation of wall street which is responsible for untold numbers of suicides, decimated pensions, and people being unable to afford basic life necessities, then you should be against govt regulation of drunk drivers, too. What? You're too stupid to see the difference between drunk drivers and corporations drunk from greed?

Posted by steve, a resident of Parkside
on Jan 5, 2012 at 3:55 pm

You're so right, Another Libertarian, unless of course, you possess common sense. Since you obviously don't, I'll refer you back to Lily's comments, in her last paragraph above.
At least we should be thankful that while you're trolling, you're not behind the wheel of your Prius, weaving to the next fern bar.

Posted by Really?, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2012 at 7:58 pm

I hear your point Another Libertarian- so many dont want the government involved until it is something they believe in. If you question it, your called a communist. Such a hateful crowd. They really dont even make sense, contradicting their beliefs at every turn.

Posted by Another Libertarian, a resident of Birdland
on Jan 5, 2012 at 9:49 pm

Yes, Really? Regulating drivers who've had a couple of beers = common sense. Appointing a commissioner to oversee Wall Street's extravagences = tyranny. Go figure.

Posted by Really?, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2012 at 10:21 pm

Oh but Congress was in session --haha- for 30 secs.

Posted by John, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2012 at 10:53 pm


"Another Libertarian" may not be serious, but many libertarians do oppose drunk driving regulations.

Web Link

Posted by steve, a resident of Parkside
on Jan 6, 2012 at 8:33 am

John, I'm fully aware that the poser calling himself a Libertarian is the same troll that regularly posts on the PW forums under different names for each story. I feel I have an obligation to counteract his/her nonsensical rants, which are miserable attempts at sarcarsm.
What's really telling, is that some residents actually thinks he/she is serious and/or sane----Really?

Posted by Really?, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 6, 2012 at 1:33 pm

Yeah, Steve, you've made yourself the resident mean guy- just posting mean retorts on every post. Not really adding to the conversation, just ripping on those who do. We NEVER take you seriously, your posts are on the same level as those you critique. (I'm sure you will critique my right to critique you shortly, you're so predictable)

Posted by steve, a resident of Parkside
on Jan 6, 2012 at 1:41 pm

really..if you take Lib seriously, as you seem to imply, there's nothing else I need to add. You've implicated and discredited yourself. You don't need any more help from me...........Feel free to parade your big govt rants to all that will's your right, while you have it.

Posted by Tango , a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Jan 6, 2012 at 6:44 pm

Driving drunk is horrific. But what to do with those that do? Our jails are over crowded and there are not enough parole officers to keep check on people that have a drunk driving sentence of parole . It is a conundrum. Driving without a license is done all the time. Same problem what to do with these people? Maybe working in the county morgue for a month might help. There they will see the results of a drunk drivers actions. Maybe they should be taken to funerals of people who have died at the hands of a drunk driver. Listen to the anguish of those left behind without a father , mother ,son or daughter. It maybe someone's best friend that is gone. They need to learn that Gone is Gone and to suffer the anguish of the families. Maybe they need to help pay for the funerals and to take care of families that have lost the breadwinner. Only some suggestions.

Posted by Libertarian's two cents, a resident of Birdland
on Jan 7, 2012 at 12:44 am

Many many people drink and drive. Most do not get into an accident. Red cars tend to get in more accidents than non-red cars. Pick-up trucks with two twenty-something males in the front seat are the highest risk. Should we toss red car owners and pick-up truck drivers into jail when they hit someone? What about old people who are verging on senility. It seems this 'common sense' people are talking about is pretty 'common' but not very 'sensible'. Libertarian's point is a good one. And a red star on Steve's forehead for recognizing Lib's tongue-in-cheek meaning -- what a genius he is! Point being, at the end of the day, that there are far greater evils out there in society than drivers with a couple of drinks under their belt. Yet the libertarian-leaning right, quick to judge those who drink and drive, on the one hand, are also quick to defend polluters and greedy capitalists, on the other. Why? Well, for an answer, we'd have to pull their heads out of the sand.

If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Understanding Early Decision in College Admissions
By Elizabeth LaScala | 1 comment | 2,325 views

New heights for NIMBYs
By Tim Hunt | 31 comments | 1,509 views

Weekly, TV30 to host Pleasanton mayoral, city council candidates' forum
By Gina Channell-Allen | 2 comments | 1,090 views