Just a quick question which might be innapropriate for this thread but might also start some good conversation in another thread.
Just in regards to something i heard on the news tonight about Elle McPhersons sister being picked up for the third time drink driving. Now, she is not the only one to be caught drink driving numerous times and then have her license handed straight back to her after whatever period of time.
You hear it time and time again about people being caught drink driving numerous times and still having their license.
Just by looking on the VicRoads website it pulls up the statistic that in about 1/4 of all deaths on our roads, the driver has a BAC of .05 or higher.
What im getting at is, in Victoria and other states. Drivers only need do something that, at the officers discression is labelled "Hooning" ( i wont argue against that some people are complete and utter morons and need the penalty applied to them) and their car is taken away for increments of time per offence along with a fine and eventually the car is taken off of them.
I cant find a statistic anywhere but im willing to bet that it is not 1/4 of deaths on the road which are attributed to "Hooning"
Why is the government so eager to punish people for "Hooning" yet in comparison, people who not only drink drive but also serial drink drive are at times let off with a slap on the wrist? Is it because they "shock horror" dont care about the people and just like to be able to flout the figures of how many Hoons they've stopped while people are dieing every day of un-hoon related incidents?
Sorry if i've totally missed a piece of legislation which also allows for people who drink drive over a set number of times to have their cars taken from them, but if there isnt, maybe there should be one because as i said, im willing to bet that there are more people dieing as a result of drink driving than of people doing burnouts.
You raise a fair point.
There is a difference between the two different issues being hooning and drink driving. Drink driving in regards to loss of licence etc is straight down the line and mandatory whether it be for a first offence which is dealt with (in Victoria at least) by way of penalty notice (ticket) giving a disqualification period. For a second or subsequent offence it is dealt with by the Magistrates' Court.
The issue of hooning and seizing cars is dealt with directly by police. The car is taken and the offender is brought before the courts in relation to the relevant charges. It is then out of police hands as to what happends to the person's licence.
I see what you're getting at. The bottom line is that there is no controlling what magistrates do, they do what they like and cop very little criticism. I've heard of cases of a person being wrongfully imprisoned due to an administrative error made by a magistrate - it barely made it into the media where as if I locked up the wrong person for a crime it would be all over tomorrows morning paper.
There however have been Victorian magistrates recently being very harsh on repeat drink driving offenders, telling a number of them not to even ask for their licence back.
As the media has outlined, Mimi McPherson has been caught a couple of times before. This time she was caught in Queensland, the other two occasions were in other states. So yes it is unfair that she has been caught before (and hasn't learnt) and gets to be treated as a first time offender.
Queensland I think is also a bit more lenient on drink driving offenders. I have always known Victoria to be the harshest. There was a time here that you could be like Ms McPherson and hire a hot shot barrister and this would see you pay a couple of thousand dollars (pocket change for them) and keep your licence. The last person to do that here I think was Darryl Sommers. After that things changed and magistrates powers of discretion in relation to drink driving was taken away.
Also you mention about car seizing appearing to only be for hoon driving, it's not. It's also for excess speed, if someone is clocked more that 45km/h over. It is also for persons caught disqualified, if they became disqualified after July 1st, 2006. So in actual fact, when a drink driver gets disqualified and goes driving again, the to can be subject to car impoundment.
Hooning would be attributed to road deaths. Not as much as .05 I would conceed that. Hoon driving incites other bad driving behaviour, such as speed. Speed probably the biggest killer on the road. Hooning is not only dangerous but is seen as anti-social behaviour. I bet you wouldn't find it pleasant living, as those people in Noble Park live, to have to put up with the screech of tyres and revving of loud engines on your front doorstep every weekend.