On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:56:01 -0500, Vic Smith wrote:


All sounds reasonable. I wonder how other states handle it.

In New Jersey, that's been the law for roughly 10 years. Don't quote me
on the penalties, but I believe if you are convicted for a first offense
BUI, you loose your boating operator's license for a year, and your
automobile driver's license for either 3 months, or a year, depending on
your Blood Alcohol Level. Fines, and the big expense, insurance rates,
are additional. New Jersey has been known to set up checkpoints on the
water and at the ramps, and have a special "field sobriety" test for
boaters.

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:40:15 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Jul 10, 10:38*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message

...



On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:22:14 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Jul 10, 5:56 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:48:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

http://www.thelog.com/news/logNewsArticle.aspx?x=9656

I think it's a good idea myself.
I wonder what happens if you've lost your drivers license due to
previous DUI's though?

jail time?

Sounds good to me.

All sounds reasonable. I wonder how other states handle it.

--Vic

Not sure, but I think it maybe proposed to be fed. law.

That would suck! *More states rights killed. *Actually you can lose you
license in California for lots of things not including driving.
Jaywalking
counts 1-2 points. *At a light it is 2 points. *Bicycle tickets count
points. *You could get your 4 points and not be able to get a license when
you turn 16. *Minor with 0.01 alcohol reading. *Not near a car.

What about a high-speed chase. *See them on TV sometimes.
How many points?
Seems pretty lame to go after a driver's license for non-driving
offenses.
How about non-moving (what we call them in Illinois) offenses.
Broken taillight, for instance.
Don't worry about that California stuff becoming Fed law.
Country won't put up with it.
Don't know why you tolerate it there.

--Vic

More points for highspeed chase. *Get a wreckless driving conviction also.

They need to take this guy to the cleaners.

http://www.thedailytimes.com/article...NEWS/907109989

I heard once, not sure if it's true or not, but on the average
weekend, 25% of all boaters are close to, if not outright, legally
inebriated.

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:46:30 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:56:01 -0500, Vic Smith wrote:


All sounds reasonable. I wonder how other states handle it.

In New Jersey, that's been the law for roughly 10 years. Don't quote me
on the penalties, but I believe if you are convicted for a first offense
BUI, you loose your boating operator's license for a year, and your
automobile driver's license for either 3 months, or a year, depending on
your Blood Alcohol Level. Fines, and the big expense, insurance rates,
are additional. New Jersey has been known to set up checkpoints on the
water and at the ramps, and have a special "field sobriety" test for
boaters.

In CT, it's not quite as drastic.

The penalty for a first violation may be: a fine between $500 and
$1000. One year suspension of boating privileges, 6 months (at least
48 hours which cannot be suspended) in jail or suspended plus
probation requiring 100 hours community service.

The penalty for a second violation within ten years may be: a fine
between $1000 and $4000, three years suspension of boating privileges,
two years (at least 120 days) in jail and probation requiring 100
hours community service.

The penalty for a third and subsequent violations within 10 years may
be: a fine between $2000 and $8000, suspension of boating privileges
for life, three years (at least 1 year) in jail and probation
requiring 100 hours of community service.

Penalties for refusal to submit to a chemical test are more
substantial than failing the test.

These pretty much mirror the motor vehicle laws as far as penalties,
fine and what not with the exception that motor vehicle licenses
aren't lost in combination with the boater's "priviledges".

The problem is, once again, enforcement. You can register a boat or a
car or a truck or a motorcycle - any vehicle in CT without having a
driver's license. And unless you're stopped by DEM or locals with a
water patrol, the chances of them asking for your boating certificate
is about zip.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:45:52 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:22:14 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Jul 10, 5:56 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:48:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

http://www.thelog.com/news/logNewsArticle.aspx?x=9656

I think it's a good idea myself.
I wonder what happens if you've lost your drivers license due to
previous DUI's though?

jail time?

Sounds good to me.

All sounds reasonable. I wonder how other states handle it.

--Vic

Not sure, but I think it maybe proposed to be fed. law.

That would suck! More states rights killed. Actually you can lose you
license in California for lots of things not including driving.
Jaywalking
counts 1-2 points. At a light it is 2 points. Bicycle tickets count
points. You could get your 4 points and not be able to get a license
when
you turn 16. Minor with 0.01 alcohol reading. Not near a car.

What about a high-speed chase. See them on TV sometimes.
How many points?
Seems pretty lame to go after a driver's license for non-driving
offenses.
How about non-moving (what we call them in Illinois) offenses.
Broken taillight, for instance.
Don't worry about that California stuff becoming Fed law.
Country won't put up with it.
Don't know why you tolerate it there.

--Vic


I think some of this DUI frenzy is counterproductive,
If a convicted DUI can get into the same trouble for driving a bike
drunk as driving his car he will drive the car.
I don't care about the drunk but I do care about who he runs over.

Very true. Some years ago, they arrested a guy in a small town near here
for riding his horse drunk. He said the horse knew the way home, and he was
not driving.

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:04:11 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:28:57 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

I think some of this DUI frenzy is counterproductive,
If a convicted DUI can get into the same trouble for driving a bike
drunk as driving his car he will drive the car.
I don't care about the drunk but I do care about who he runs over.

Very true. Some years ago, they arrested a guy in a small town near here
for riding his horse drunk. He said the horse knew the way home, and he was
not driving.

He needed a designated driver

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/designated%20driver.jpg

Hehe. Reminds me Cat Ballou.
I've got no problem using boating violations against a driver's
license for impaired driving. The other option is to require a
license to drive a boat, and go after that.
But jaywalking and bicycle riding?
Your logic is right on.

--Vic

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:04:11 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:28:57 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

I think some of this DUI frenzy is counterproductive,
If a convicted DUI can get into the same trouble for driving a bike
drunk as driving his car he will drive the car.
I don't care about the drunk but I do care about who he runs over.

Very true. Some years ago, they arrested a guy in a small town near here
for riding his horse drunk. He said the horse knew the way home, and he was
not driving.

He needed a designated driver

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/designated%20driver.jpg

ROTFL!!!!

Don White wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:22:14 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Jul 10, 5:56 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:48:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

http://www.thelog.com/news/logNewsArticle.aspx?x=9656
I think it's a good idea myself.
I wonder what happens if you've lost your drivers license due to
previous DUI's though?
jail time?
Sounds good to me.
All sounds reasonable. I wonder how other states handle it.

--Vic
Not sure, but I think it maybe proposed to be fed. law.

That would suck! More states rights killed. Actually you can lose you
license in California for lots of things not including driving.
Jaywalking
counts 1-2 points. At a light it is 2 points. Bicycle tickets count
points. You could get your 4 points and not be able to get a license when
you turn 16. Minor with 0.01 alcohol reading. Not near a car.

What about a high-speed chase. See them on TV sometimes.
How many points?
Seems pretty lame to go after a driver's license for non-driving
offenses.
How about non-moving (what we call them in Illinois) offenses.
Broken taillight, for instance.
Don't worry about that California stuff becoming Fed law.
Country won't put up with it.
Don't know why you tolerate it there.

--Vic

A state of limp wristed girliemen...right Swill?



You type, but you really don't know what you are typing. Since you are
dumb, you might want to abstain from replying in cases like this.

D

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:28:57 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

I think some of this DUI frenzy is counterproductive,
If a convicted DUI can get into the same trouble for driving a bike
drunk as driving his car he will drive the car.
I don't care about the drunk but I do care about who he runs over.

Very true. Some years ago, they arrested a guy in a small town near here
for riding his horse drunk. He said the horse knew the way home, and he
was
not driving.

He needed a designated driver

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/designated%20driver.jpg


Very good.

On Jul 11, 4:04*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:28:57 -0700, "Calif Bill"

wrote:
I think some of this DUI frenzy is counterproductive,
If a convicted DUI can get into the same trouble for driving a bike
drunk as driving his car he will drive the car.
I don't care about the drunk but I do care about who he runs over.

Very true. *Some years ago, they arrested a guy in a small town near here
for riding his horse drunk. *He said the horse knew the way home, and he was
not driving.

He needed a designated driver

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/designated%20driver.jpg

This guy needed one a minimum of 5 offenses ago:

http://www.fdlreporter.com/article/2...N0101/90706029