Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins
Yikes, Steve - ten year suspension??!! Holy shee-it. That seems pretty damn hard to justify for an accumulation of what they term (at least up here) as "non-criminal infractions". I'm not sure what the particulars of Oregon law might be, but in Washington, that classification essentially means there is no burden of proof whatsoever placed upon the accusing officer. If he says ya done it, ya done it... end of story. We are absolutely unable to contest on evidence of any kind; the only way to win is on some procedural or book keeping technicality. A ten year suspension is far too much to risk at that level of infraction, with such a low (non-existent) requirement for evidence of any kind. Yikes...
|
Yikes is right. Oregon passed some somewhat draconian traffic laws over the years (but they still treat DUI drivers with kid gloves) in an effort to keep the worst scofflaws off the road. Since traffic violations became infractions instead on class 3 misdemeanors, one has no appeal or real recourse in traffic court with a bogus ticket. As they say in Las Vegas terms, "the House gets the push",........
Quote:
|
As an aside, he mentioned that she has told him darn near 20% of all drivers we see on the road in Washington these days have suspended licenses. That sounds high to me. If it's really anywhere close to that, that alone should tell us all something about how over the top, out of control enforcement has become. I have a very hard time believing that one out of five drivers poses enough of a threat to the rest of us to actually yank their license. No way.
|
Driving while suspended here in Oregon is a Class C felony; serious stuff, and an incentive not to do that (for most honest people). Most of the folks caught DWS had multiple DUI's so its a good thing to try keeping this types off the road.