I’m afraid you offered a license to drink and drive in your Oct. 16 editorial, “Our View: Maine taking right steps to fight drunken driving.”
Yes, the judicial use of the ignition interlock system could be a good application of technology to monitor this reckless behavior. However, your endorsement of its overuse invites disaster.
Yes, it is fair to give to give first-time offenders a second chance. Breath-analyzing controls that require that a driver be sober can provide a good check on those who are willing to correct their ways. (While hopefully learning from their error, they still have the opportunity to maintain their job and family requirements.)
But allowing four-time offenders a shortened sentence is a tragedy waiting to happen. They should not be given fifth, sixth and seventh chances with a pattern of behavior so dangerous. If they haven’t learned to not drive when they are drunk by that point, there should not be a softening of the consequences.
Tolerance for drunken driving merely enables the irresponsible drinker. Repeat offenders need to be kept from behind the wheel – not put back there more quickly.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.