Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, July 20, 1993 TAG: 9309040356
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Some will kill, sometimes for no other reason than that it was just too boring to sit at home watching television when they could drive over to a nightspot and have a few drinks, a good time. They chafe at any restrictions placed on their freedom to go where they want, when they want. And who is to stop them?
Fines are meaningless. Court orders are ignored. Even jail time doesn't seem to deter some scofflaws - and with jails and prisons already overflowing with prisoners of the war on illegal drugs, where is there room to lock up unsafe drivers, anyway? The police, the courts, the Department of Motor Vehicles - none of them can make some people respect the law or force them to recognize the life-and-death responsibility they carry when they get behind a wheel.
But stop them we must. We won't get all of them off the road before they kill themselves or, as is all too often the case, somebody else. But we must get all that we can. Which means the consequences of driving with a suspended license must be greater for drivers who have demonstrated a disregard for life.
Not every person driving with a suspended license has shown this disregard. Considering they number one of every eight drivers in the state, this, at least, is reassuring. Many of these drivers have had their licenses suspended because they have failed to pay fines for minor infractions. They might, indeed, have so little sense of social responsibility that they will drive recklessly, or drunk, and maybe kill someone some day. But they have not been caught demonstrating that threat. These are not the drivers the state must go after most aggressively.
The state should, however, rethink some traffic offenses that are now categorized as minor: Failing to stop for a police officer is a minor offense? Drag racing, a minor offense? Let's hope no motorists or pedestrians get in the way.
And the state definitely must target those drivers who have been convicted of drunken driving or other major offenses, who have had their licenses suspended, and who are caught driving. Their cars should be seized.
Virginia repealed its confiscation law in 1989 because it was too time-consuming and too expensive to store and sell the cars. But these are the weapons being wielded by unrepentant killers. Must it be cost-effective to seize them? Society doesn't make any money on incarcerating murderers, either, but it does try to get them off the street to eliminate the threat.
One would hope that a tough seizure law would get the attention of someone who doesn't care, really, if he kills a 9-year-old boy, but who does care mightily about losing his own set of wheels.
It is important, in any case, for every locality to combine a seizure measure with the kind of police enforcement tools being used in Hampton. In a pilot program, the DMV has been giving Hampton police the names, addresses and vehicle descriptions of habitual offenders with three or more DUI convictions.
With that kind of information, it will be easier for police to spot the most dangerous drivers before they kill or maim - and get them off the roads.
To those who complain they must drive to work to hold a job, must drive to the pharmacy to get a prescription, must drive to the grocery store to eat: Sorry. Call a friend, call a relative, call a cab. Your inconvenience is not worth a single innocent life.
by CNB