[Michellerenee]

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!

[Michellerenee]

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.

[oneguyinohio]

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.

[ScottGem]

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.

[Michellerenee]

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.

[oneguyinohio]

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.

[froggy7]

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...

[JudyKayTee]

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?

[twinkiedooter]

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.

[onyx410]

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

[Michellerenee]

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.

[JudyKayTee]

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!

[Michellerenee]

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

[Synnen]

Closed.