This weekend, Mount Vernon police pulled over and arrested a Skagit Valley man for his 14th DUI. Our only question--why does this guy still have his license? We're not big on removing judicial discretion from sentencing, but it would seem to this Seattlest that the DUI is one conviction where "three strikes and you're out" should apply. Three DUIs, and say goodbye to your license. Instead, since this is the man's fourth DUI arrest in under ten years, he can be charged with a felony; this seems only to punish him, rather than to protect other drivers he may come into crashing contact with when drunk behind the wheel next time around.

Around The -Ists This Week


The article says he was driving on a suspended license.
What I wanna know is....why the hell isn't he in jail, or being involuntarily committed to rehab so he can get some help?
From the (short) story: "The documents say Bridge was also driving with a suspended license."
This is the problem with alcohol abusers, it screws up their judgment. It wouldn't have mattered to him if he didn't have a license. Lock him up? Maybe. Definitely think they should serve jail time after the second or third DUI.