Quote:
Originally Posted by FishermanTim
Instead of doing the right thing and criminalizing all types of self-initiated distracted driving (texting, reading books, applying makeup, shaving, DUI) our powers that be (useless, that is) have continued to see fit to lessen the legal ramifications for these acts.
How many, really, HOW MANY flippin repeat offenders does it take?
How many DUI arrests will it take before any actions are taken to remove a POS from the road? Apparently we haven't found that "magic number" yet based of our states DUI history.
We must not forget the godd ol' "Do you know who I am?" gang either! These worthless piles of monkey excrement are some of the lowest forms of life right next to lawyers and politicians. Maybe that's what fuels the repeat offenders club?
All I can say is that if a member of my family were to be on the receiving end of one of these accidents, the guilty party would have to keep looking over their shoulder as I am not as forgiving as our spineless state!!!
|
In Massachusetts their is never a repeat offense, because no one is ever found guilty anymore. All former guilty finding with regard to traffic offenses are referred to as responsible or not responsible, and marked down that way. Why, because the next time you come in for the same offense, since you were not guilty the first time the judge wont have to deal with a "second and subsequent" fine. The #^&#^&#^&#^&heads dont mind minding paying the entry level "first time fine" and the judges no that that. Pay the $35.00 and not the $105.00 for third offense and the judge gets money in his account to pay all the hacks working at the courthouse, whose budget is historically under funded. Judges started this years ago with criminal offenses. The finding in their regard is called a "CWOF" or continued with a finding. That way every time a perp comes in on the same charge they dont mind paying the basic fine and not go to jail. Their attorney looks like a hero and the criminal walks out. I have seen certain people in the courts eight and ten times on the same charge, and the finding is always a CWOF with a fifty dollar fine. Its like deja vu all over again everyday in criminal courts all over the commonwealth of Massachusetts. The reason these CWOF's were invented was that in the early 90's so many new hires were sent to courthouses, otherwise known as hacks, the judges had no way from one year to the next to pay for these hires out of the current budgets. So the CWOF program was invented to pay for these people. All fines paid by criminals go directly into the particular courts bank accounts where the criminal appeared and was fined. So if you expect to go to jail and instead are just fined, you'd think one, "my attorney is awesome", and two "the #^&#^&#^&#^&ing judge" is even more awesome. So thats why many times the people who should go to jail in the state never do. Becasue all the hack hires need a paycheck, and what the law-abiding people need just doesn't matter. The CWOF's were not started for any other reason other than what I have stated. Sure our judges are liberal and have difficulty believing anyone is a bad boy or girl. They couldn't refuse to accept the new hires that state reps and senators sent thier to work, then their budgets would be slashed.