Vermont Considers Special Car Locks for Repeat Drunk Drivers

April 23, 2008

  • April 23, 2008 at 9:16 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Shawn Burritt, 33, of Jericho, had three previous drunken driving convictions and was driving a borrowed car with a suspended license when he went the wrong way on Interstate 89 and crashed into the car in which Fournier was a passenger.

    *****

    here the problem w/that law — see the para above: he borrowed that person’s car. first of all, that person who loaned him the vehicle should be responsible for 2 reasons. it was probably a friend and he knew that this person has had a few dui’s. secondly, he/she should have double checked to see if he had a valid license because of those dui’s. so the owner should be somewhat responsible for loaning the vehicle.

    this goes to show that there are ways around the law, but we still need to hold that driver accountable. in many states after 3 dui’s, you are not able to drive – revoked for the rest of your life in most cases. we all know that it’s against the law for a dui and we understand that you might get 1 and you will truly pay for that 1 incident, but as a society we can forgive so long as you understand the pain and suffering you have caused for others. once you have made it a 2nd or more times, then that becomes a habit that truly needs to be stopped in it’s tracks. breathers in their own personal vehicle, would not have stopped this driver because he borrowed a vehicle. we can’t make all cars have these in them because it’s costly and why should we penalize those who follow the law. the law should include that you be limited to using your own vehicle that has the breather in it, caught driving someone else’s – can bear more penalty.

  • April 23, 2008 at 11:46 am
    lastbat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I can’t agree with assigning liability to the owner of the vehicle. The vehicle owner was not the one that decided to drive while drunk.

    I do agree with limiting someone convicted of DUI to driving their own vehicle. I saw a post on a different article that said those convicted of DUI should be barred from going to bars for the period their license is revoked. I can agree with that too. All responsibility should fall to the idiot that decided to get behind the wheel of a car while drunk.

  • April 23, 2008 at 11:57 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    well, true to a point that the driver who is drunk should be 100% responsible, but if you loan a car out — are you not supposed to make sure that the so-called driver have a valid license? the only other problem, is now this becomes a lendloss. now the owner of the veh’s insurance will have to make pymt.

  • April 23, 2008 at 2:02 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    How could the average Joe accurately determine that the borrower’s license is valid? Other than running an MVR, I can’t see how just anyone could determine the validity of a license, though I will admit that I am assuming that those who have a revoked or suspended license still have possession of their license, which will more than likely show a future expiration date.

    My other thought about partial blame going to the owner of the car: I was borrowing my mom’s car for the past 2 weeks as my car was in the shop. How would she have known or had any control if I had gone out over the weekend and acted irresponsibly, as this driver did? The only difference between this idiot driver and me would have been that I do not have any priors – and maybe it was something he failed to disclose to anyone?

  • April 23, 2008 at 2:21 am
    Lawyer says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Negligently entrusting your car to someone can result in civil penalties. If the victim’s family can show that the car owner knew or should’ve known that DUI Guy was likely to drive drunk, they can probably recover. There may also be some arguments for criminal liability, but I imagine that it would be hard to convict.

  • April 23, 2008 at 2:27 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    well, would you not ask if his lic is valid? i would! afterall, your letting him use your car. and then if something happens, your insurance company is going to pay for it. just like this case.

  • April 23, 2008 at 2:28 am
    Casual Observer says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Loaning one’s vehicle to another is akin to choosing a babysitter for one’s infant – one should know the person very well and should have checked references, too. To give the owner a total pass shouldn’t be acceptable

  • April 23, 2008 at 3:14 am
    Dread says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Anyone who is busted for DUI or DWI and doesn’t get the message needs a smack upside the head to get their attention when it happens a second time. If the jerk doesn’t perceive a significant consequence, the behavior won’t change as evidenced by the current problem. Special locks with blow tubes that anyone can blow into isn’t going to get it done.

    Here’s a suggestion that is Draconian enough to get the attention of the largest idiot. On a second conviction, whatever vehicle the perp was caught in should be impounded for at least 60-days. Doesn’t matter who owns it. The perp should serve a mandatory jail sentence of 7-days, pay a $1,000 fine, and have his license suspended for 90-days. I can only wish some lawmakers would have the stones to take some serious action.

  • April 23, 2008 at 3:35 am
    wudchuck says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    i agree. in fl, last time i remember, they put you in jail for 48 hrs…once you have been found guilty, they place you in the classifieds as a drunk driver and not as a small picture… i know they did this in Key West when i was stationed there in the navy. they do need to be taught a lesson and a hard one! start putting the blame on the driver and not the bartender or anyone else for that matter. u bring up another good point, what if they have someone else blow into the breather? then they have bypassed the same system meant to keep them from driving. i do know that they are expensive and the courts make the driver put it in his veh at his own costs. insurance companies weigh this very heavily.

  • April 23, 2008 at 3:53 am
    HanValen says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    How often are you loaning your vehicle to people you don’t know?
    More specifically, how many of your friends have had a DUI and then asked to borrow your car?

    This arguement seems to be coming from a place of ‘if anyone asks to borrow my car, I just ask if they have a valid license and then toss them the keys.’

    This isn’t how I loan my car out and I would expect that, situationally, most people are brighter then what you are describing.

    If the various chuckle-head friends of mine who have had DUI’s would have come to ask about borrowing my vehicle, I would have asked many questions as to what they wanted and when they would be back. If they answered badly, then I wouldn’t loan the vehicle out.
    And this is before I became an insurance agent.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*