Legislators Vote Themselves Exempt From DUI Arrest

jamesrage · 02-08-10, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoplite

This may sound like a great idea, but I assure you it goes terribly wrong. In California, we have a system whereby voters can essentially over-ride law makers through ballot initiatives or "propositions". Most of what our law makers do is voted on by the people which sounds swell but you end up with people staring at bills designed to raise money to PAY for all the nice new schools and streets we voted for last election cycle.

People see "tax", get scared, vote no. Also, if they dont completely understand a bill, voters will often simply vote no. This means we often wind up with serious budget problems because all the ways we PAY for what we vote for have been voted down.

That has nothing to do with lawmakers trying to create special laws for themselves.Nor does it have anything to do with cracking down on corruption,making politicians read the bills or anything else that is simply voter initiatives. That has to do with people trying to pass things that require funding without funding attached to it.A simple solution is to require that funding be attached( if it requires funding), for example they want a new school, then there should be another question on that same ballot on raising taxes to pay for it or some other solution and both do not pass then neither passes.

Quote:

There IS such a thing as too much democracy.

Ballot initiatives are wonderful thing.Yeah sometimes things do not go your way especially if you are in the minority and a ban on gay marriage is passed or they increase cigarette taxes, or something else. But it is way better than some Clown in office doing it.

Hoplite · 02-08-10, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamesrage

That has nothing to do with lawmakers trying to create special laws for themselves.Nor does it have anything to do with cracking down on corruption,making politicians read the bills or anything else that is simply voter initiatives. That has to do with people trying to pass things that require funding without funding attached to it.A simple solution is to require that funding be attached( if it requires funding), for example they want a new school, then there should be another question on that same ballot on raising taxes to pay for it or some other solution and both do not pass then neither passes.

I was not responding to the idea of law makers creating special laws for themselves, but to the comments of one specific poster about voters having such extensive say about what laws went into effect.

Quote:

Ballot initiatives are wonderful thing.Yeah sometimes things do not go your way especially if you are in the minority and a ban on gay marriage is passed or they increase cigarette taxes, or something else. But it is way better than some Clown in office doing it.

Again, while it SOUNDS like a good idea, in reality you often end up with voters who vote against a majority of what it takes to fund what they vote for. I would hold up California currently as an example of the problems this kind of system can create. Also I would point out that gay marriage bans have been lifted in other states without the initiative system which damages your idea that "if the people dont, no one will."

danarhea · 02-08-10, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winnb

I'm no fan of politicians, but this law isn't terrible. It just keeps politicians from being arrested on their way to work if they do something while driving to work. The Officer can still give the pol a citation and he has to arrange for other transportation for the pol. And they are not exempt from felony violations.

Now granted if this were you or I driving the car they'd slap the cuffs on our drunk ass and throw us in a cell.

I believe our legislators in DC have this same law which "protects" them on their way to work. It doesn't mean they're innocent, they can still be charged and convicted, they just can't be detained on their way to the office.

If they can't be detained, but only cited, that means they cannot be held and given a breathalyzer test. Then they can claim, in court, that they were merely a little tired, and "where is the proof that I was drunk?". That is pretty one sided. I don't give a damn who they are. If they are drunk and driving, they should face the same consequences the rest of us face if we do it. This is not a monarchy, and they are not kings. No "get out of jail free" cards for any of these assholes.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to danarhea For This Useful Post:
jamesrage, Reverend_Hellh0und, samsmart