Is there any way to get around having this special license for a year? My court sentence has been completed. Pa. still will punish me further, how can this be?

Is there any way to get around having this special liscense for a year? My court sentence has been completed. Pa. still will punish me further, how can this be?



Was the special lock system part of your sentence? It is also possible that under Pennsylvania law the lock system is mandatory for one year for people convicted of your offense.

You could also complete your Court sentence and discover that your particular State will not renew your driving privileges or has revoked your license. That's State law in some jurisdictions.

(I would guess your auto insurance premium is going to be a killer!)

No, interlock was not part of my sentence. However, I must abide by all the terms and conditions of the Intermediate Punishment Program, and this is where the interlock comes in. I truly believe that I am being punished twice.

No, interlock was not part of my sentence. However, I must abide by all the terms and conditions of the Intermediate Punishment Program, and this is where the interlock comes in. I truely believe that I am being punished twice.


Are you talking some form of driving while intoxicated? I suppose the interlock is better than losing your License.

Why are you upset by it? Just the "double punishment" idea?

Yes, that is what d.u.I. is. I am upset because I have not had a license since Feb. 2006, which constitutes my sentence from court. now PennDot requires a special license for another year which I call a "drunk liscense" that would allow me to only drive vehichles that have the interlock device installed. It is a bunch of state political crap that I am stuck in for now. Thanks, Michelle

Michelle, in consideration of Judy, you never mentioned it was a DUI, those that don't know you had to guess.

Now, since you had a DUI you must abide by everything your state sets forward for your to get your license back.

Sorry you have to go through all of this, but you did commit the crime. You have to do what is ordered by the state to get your rights restored.

You committed the action, now you have to suffer the consequences.

Michelle, you know I have never treated you with kid gloves and I tell it to you as I see it. While I don't mean to sound harsh, I speak reality.

There are responsibilities to our actions. You committed a crime that put many lives in danger, now you have to earn the trust and respect back that you lost.

I saw your other post about trying to circumvent the system and going to another state. You should be ashamed.

I'm really appalled at the amount of people who break laws and think that the laws don't apply to them.

yes, that is what d.u.i. is. I am upset because I have not had a liscense since Feb. 2006, which constitutes my sentence from court. , now PennDot requires a special liscense for another year which I call a "drunk liscense" that would allow me to only drive vehichles that have the interlock device installed. It is a bunch of state political crap that I am stuck in for now. Thanks, Michelle



This concerns me - you were asking about a License in another State so you don't have to have the interlock system - ? Saw the other post. Looks like you didn't learn very much about trying to beat the system (such as DUI).

Sorry but don't drink and drive and you won't have to worry about an interlock system in ANY car you operate. The State of Pennsylvania is welcome to put an interlock system on my car any time they want.

Maybe instead of complaining about "State political crap" you should look at why this is so important to you.

Was this for your first DUI? I think a year suspension and then a year with the interlock is a pretty harsh sentence for a first charge when it's Under the Influence and not Intoxicated unless there was an accident with injury or something similar.

Just to clarify some issues: first, I firmly believe for "those who do the crime, must do the time", second, I have already done my time according to the court! Now, the state of Pa. wishes to impose further punishment! I think that is unjust! Does anyone agree? Third, Would anyone care to pay for this "unjust" political crap! Please, get the facts before you all condemn. Thank you, Michelle

Is there any way to get around having this special liscense for a year? My court sentence has been completed. Pa. still will punish me further, how can this be?
I have not had a driver's license since 2-2-05. I do believe that constitutes 18 months, which was my sentence

On one hand I understand what you are saying. You were convicted and sentenced and fulfilled the terms of your sentence. Having done your time you expect the restrictions to be removed.

On the other hand, Alcoholism is a disease that you can't be cured, just controlled. If you had a physical disability that required a specially modified car, you might not think twice about it.

So don't look at this as continued punishment, but simply a modification for your disability.

Sorry to cause confusion by not fully explaining, Pa. will not accept my time of no license as time towards having a "drunk liscense", which you must have for one year. I would only be allowed to operate cars that have the interlock device installed (at 1200 dollars). Now, I ask, what is the difference in having this "drunk liscense" for one year, or me not having a regular license for one year?

Sorry to cause confusion by not fully explaining, Pa. will not accept my time of no liscense as time towards having a "drunk liscense", which you must have for one year. I would only be allowed to operate cars that have the interlock device installed (at 1200 dollars). Now, I ask, what is the difference in having this "drunk liscense" for one year, or me not having a regular liscense for one year?

The difference is that in one case, you aren't driving at all. (Right? You didn't drive on a suspended license, did you?) That's the punishment phase. The other is more like probation... you've done your time, but the state still doesn't quite trust that you won't do it again. So they want to see for a year if you are willing to not drive drunk. Consider it a learning experience. If I understand correctly, the interlock system will keep the car from starting if you are intoxicated. So you can use this next year to learn how to drink responsibly, what options there are for alternative transport, etc. This may help you learn when you need to not drive, because I've seen a lot of people who think that they are less intoxicated than they actually are.

Just to clarify some issues: first, I firmly believe for "those who do the crime, must do the time", second, I have already done my time according to the court! Now, the state of Pa. wishes to impose further punishment! I think that is unjust! does anyone agree? third, Would anyone care to pay for this "unjust" political crap! Please, get the facts before you all condemn. Thank you, Michelle


Why do you feel the lock is political crap? If you feel this is excessive punishment, you DO have the ability to go back to Court and attempt to get it set aside. I am surprised that your Attorney and/or the Court did not advise you that the lock would follow the sentence. Often it's suspension followed by counselling. Did you enter a plea (in which you should have agreed to this) or were you sentenced?

So that I have all the facts and don't judge you - At least in NYS DUI (which you refer to) and DWI (which I referred to) are two different charges - what was your blood alcohol level? Was a personal injury involved? Was an accident involved?

Again - why are you so upset by this and why are you questioning the means to obtain an out of State license to avoid it?

Do you continue to drink and drive?

I'm not questioning that alcoholism is a disease; I do believe drinking to excess is not - and I don't know how anyone tells the difference.

I just looked at Pennsylvania Law again - The law requires an individual convicted of a second or subsequent DUI offense, regardless of the date the offense occurred, to have an approved ignition interlock installed on each motor vehicle they own, operate, or lease for one year before they are eligible to apply for an unrestricted driver's license.

This has been on the Pennsylvania books since 2003 - someone HAD to advise you on the first offense that if you were found guilty a second time you were facing the mandatory restriction (the usual restriction is 12 months, it can be extended beyond that, for whatever reason yours was extended to 18 months) and someone HAD to advise you upon your conviction the second time. In theory the first warning keeps you from having the second offense - you are NOT locked out on a first offense.

If not, go back to Court and protest - but you are not going to win because it's by Statute and automatic.

Why do you feel the lock is political crap? If you feel this is excessive punishment, you DO have the ability to go back to Court and attempt to get it set aside. I am surprised that your Attorney and/or the Court did not advise you that the lock would follow the sentence. Often it's suspension followed by counselling. Did you enter a plea (in which you should have agreed to this) or were you sentenced?

So that I have all the facts and don't judge you - At least in NYS DUI (which you refer to) and DWI (which I referred to) are two different charges - what was your blood alcohol level? Was a personal injury involved? Was an accident involved?

Again - why are you so upset by this and why are you questioning the means to obtain an out of State license to avoid it?

Do you continue to drink and drive?

I'm not questioning that alcoholism is a disease; I do believe drinking to excess is not - and I don't know how anyone tells the difference.
I have all the facts for you, in another letter. M.

Hello, here are some actual facts.
First, I believe it is mostly a money making scheme for the Commonwealth of Pa.
Second, I entered a guilty plea, walked over to the probation office and they took over
Third, my BAC was +16, with no injury or accidents, 2nd DUI
Fourth, I have not used alcohol since June 27, 2005
Fifth, I turned in my license 2-2-06

While I won't argue against this being more for making money for the state, then preventing accidents, the point is really moot. The fact is that it is the law and even if someone was remiss in explaining it to you, it still exists.

Hello, here are some actual facts.
first, I believe it is mostly a money making scheme for the Commonwealth of Pa.
second, I entered a guilty plea, walked over to the probation office and they took over
third, my BAC was +16, with no injury or accidents, 2nd DUI
fourth, I have not used alcohol since June 27, 2005
fifth, I turned in my liscence 2-2-06


Again - why do you think Pennsylvania is making money from the interlock program? Pennsylvania doesn't install the interlock systems - they are installed by private contractors licensed to do so.

If you were arrested once and then found guilty of a second - or pled guilty to a second - DUI (particularly a 16 blood alcohol) that's why the system must be used - it's Pennsylvania law.

Again - if you are not using alcohol, have not had an alcohol since June 2005 why are you asking about getting a License in another State so you don't need to use the interlock device?

I guess it is merely a political issue with me. I just wonder how many judges and other supreme beings from the state of Pa. that had this device installed. So, it is not a matter of drinking alcohol, but a matter of Pa. law, with which I have to deal with. When things like this happen to me, I just think "thank God I'm not living in a cave in Iran"

Michelle, it's a matter of economics.

You see, it costs the state money when a person gets arrested with a DUI/DWI. It costs the state time off the roads for the police officers who have to write this up, investigate, haul the offenders off to jail. Then it costs the state dollars to house the people who are arrested.

Now, should the taxpayers pay for all of this? Or should the state find the money elsewhere? Specifically from the people who broke the law in the first place.

Someone has to pay for this. Do you think the law abiding citizens should pay for this?

Again - why do you think Pennsylvania is making money from the interlock program? Pennsylvania doesn't install the interlock systems - they are installed by private contractors licensed to do so.

If you were arrested once and then found guilty of a second - or pled guilty to a second - DUI (particularly a 16 blood alcohol) that's why the system must be used - it's Pennsylvania law.

Again - if you are not using alcohol, have not had an alcohol since June 2005 why are you asking about getting a License in another State so you don't need to use the interlock device?
My answer was posted above(where you might not have seen it) so I'll sum it up again, I feel that it is just political stuff. I also wonder how many judges used the interlock device. I will merely "pull in my horns" so to speak... and buy a horse! No, just kidding... be legal!

Michelle, it's a matter of economics.

You see, it costs the state money when a person gets arrested with a DUI/DWI. It costs the state time off of the roads for the police officers who have to write this up, investigate, haul the offenders off to jail. Then it costs the state dollars to house the people who are arrested.

Now, should the taxpayers pay for all of this? Or should the state find the money elsewhere? Specifically from the people who broke the law in the first place.

Someone has to pay for this. Do you think the law abiding citizens should pay for this?
No, but that was in with the fines that I have paid. And then some...


Again - why do you think Pennsylvania is making money from the interlock program? Pennsylvania doesn't install the interlock systems - they are installed by private contractors licensed to do so.

If you were arrested once and then found guilty of a second - or pled guilty to a second - DUI (particularly a 16 blood alcohol) that's why the system must be used - it's Pennsylvania law.

Again - if you are not using alcohol, have not had an alcohol since June 2005 why are you asking about getting a License in another State so you don't need to use the interlock device?
You must pay ten dollars to apply for the drunk license and then it doesn't matter if you operate a vehicle or not, if you do, it must be installed with a device, then the monthly charges to monitor this. Even though I don't drink, this crap still infuriates me.

Sometimes it takes a tough hit in the pocket book to get people to stop doing the illegal behavior repeatedly. More power to the state on this one! Better that they take your money, as opposed to you taking someone's life through your illegal activity. You should be thanking the state that something finally got through to you. All the warnings weren't enough, the first time you got caught didn't stop you from more of the same... so now here you are.

I just hope you don't use this "anger" as an excuse to go out drinking and driving again.

Earlier you said; "I firmly believe for 'those who do the crime, must do the time',". But everything you have said seems to belie that. What you refuse to accept is that the Interlock is part and parcel of the punishment for this crime. You weren't caught once but TWICE (note I said caught, we don't know how many times before and after your first conviction that you risked your life and the lives of others).

The Interlock is designed to save lives by inhibiting someone with a history of drunk driving from doing it again.

Earlier you said; "I firmly believe for 'those who do the crime, must do the time',". But everything you have said seems to belie that. What you refuse to accept is that the Interlock is part and parcel of the punishment for this crime. You weren't caught once but TWICE (note I said caught, we don't know how many times before and after your first conviction that you risked your life and the lives of others).

The Interlock is designed to save lives by inhibiting someone with a history of drunk driving from doing it again.
Correct, I don't believe that this rule has applied to everyone, only those who cannot afford to buy their way out. I firmly believe that the interlock is not the answer, only a state moneymaker. I would truly like to know of one Pa. judge that had this installed on their vehicle, after being charged with the same crime.

Read this with an Italian accent...

... if you were a judge, then you might have gotten some other type of treatment see... but you're not, so why cry about it? No?. you messed with the system when you were in no position to get special favors... just because the judges do, doesn't mean you should also. You got to earn that kind of respect, see. It comes with time and knowing some friends. It isn't a perfect system but its all we got.. Now go on, getta out of here, before I call Paulie. And be good to you sista.

You must pay ten dollars to apply for the drunk liscense and then it doesn't matter if you operate a vehicle or not, if you do, it must be installed with a device, then the monthly charges to monitor this. Even though I don't drink, this crap still infuriates me.

So pay the ten bucks and don't drive for another year. Or, if you truly feel that this falls into the realm of civil disobedience, tell them that you aren't going to abide by the rule and will gladly suffer whatever punishment they dole out in order to show other people how wrong the law is. Of course, that means that you will most likely be sitting in jail for contempt of court, but if you feel that strongly about it...

Correct, I don't believe that this rule has applied to everyone, only those who cannot afford to buy their way out. I firmly believe that the interlock is not the answer, only a state moneymaker. I would truely like to know of one Pa. judge that had this installed on their vehicle, after being charged with the same crime.


If a State Judge is "caught" DUI - or anyone else for that matter - he will have the same device installed on his vehicle - it's the law in Pennsylvania!

Perhaps if you are so angry and unhappy you should be angry with yourself (I believe you said you entered a plea - ?) or your Attorney. You could have gone to trial and perhaps the result would have been different. Why didn't you take it to trial - unless there is a possibility of jail time with a 1.6 on a second offense in Pennsylvania.

Am I correct that you feel the $10 additional charge on your driver's license is unfair and you shouldn't have to pay it - but you were willing to travel to another State (which would cost something, I believe you were talking about travelling from Pennsylvania to Georgia), pay whatever that license fee is in order to avoid the interlock?

I see no remorse here, just a lot of empty words and anger.

What do you think the "punishment" should be for two DUI's, one of them a 1.6?

So how much time did you spend in the county jail for all of this one woman crime wave M? You didn't state any so I guess you didn't do any.

What part of drinking and driving is illegal and/or dangerous to other people don't you understand? $10 is no big deal. And no, I don't think you can pull an O.J. Simpson and just "buy your way out" of this problem, either.

Be happy that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will even let you drive at all, interlock or not.

It sound like the sex offender laws. After u finish your sentence, u then get a special sentence for 15 - life of being on a parole. The supreme court ruled that is is noot punishment but a need precaution for the public. So your special license probably fall under the same situation

If a State Judge is "caught" DUI - or anyone else for that matter - he will have the same device installed on his vehicle - it's the law in Pennsylvania!

Perhaps if you are so angry and unhappy you should be angry with yourself (I believe you said you entered a plea - ?) or your Attorney. You could have gone to trial and perhaps the end result would have been different. Why didn't you take it to trial - unless there is a possibility of jail time with a 1.6 on a second offense in Pennsylvania.

Am I correct that you feel the $10 additional charge on your driver's license is unfair and you shouldn't have to pay it - but you were willing to travel to another State (which would cost something, I believe you were talking about travelling from Pennsylvania to Georgia), pay whatever that license fee is in order to avoid the interlock?
I see no remorse here, just a lot of empty words and anger
.

What do you think the "punishment" should be for two DUI's, one of them a 1.6?
Oh yes, I know that I did wrong. I don't see the difference in holding a 10.00 drunk license for a year and not using it, as opposed to not holding any license for a year and a half, which I have already done. Do you understand now? It is not a question of remorse.

Oh yes, I know that I did wrong. I don't see the difference in holding a 10.00 drunk liscense for a year and not using it, as opposed to not holding any liscense for a year and a half, which I have already done. do you understand now? It is not a question of remorse.



Sure, that part I understand - so it's more a question of the unfairness (as you see it) from a double punishment angle than anything else?

OK - got it!

Sure, that part I understand - so it's more a question of the unfairness (as you see it) from a double punishment angle than anything else?

OK - got it!
Actually yes, I thought that just by not having a license for over a year would be the same as having a drunk license for a year but no car... at least that's how I thought that it would work out. I guess that I will ask my lawyer for his advice. Which is probably five hundred more. Oh, but I should have gotten my car out of my name last year though. It is all a ball of confusion right now, thanks for your research, Michelle

Closed.