This is a life sentence which could impact your ability to support yourself. I imagine this could result in quite an impact on getting any job which requires driving. You should have options for getting this thing removed at some point.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driving_under_the_influence#Ri...
The article states that you're not allowed to operate a car without one installed.
Perhaps extrapolate your statement out to other forms of justice meted out by society and ask if you'd say the same about those crimes?
I'd certainly hope I could get a driving job today if worse came to worse. I did my time and certainly paid my dues. Technically it's been long enough that my crimes are wiped off the record and I can legally not mention them to workplaces/authorities.
It's very easy to demand heavy lifetime justice for everyone you don't sympathise with, a lot harder to make it fair and equitable to the longterm benefit of a society. I honestly don't understand how the US treats their convicted criminals, it's basically a life sentence in many respects.
Just can’t do it twice, I think that’s fair.
As in you can't ever drive again afterwards? I'm fairly honest here about my own failures in life, by this judgement do you think I should never be able to drive a car ever again? Most of my life has been living in places with absolutely no public transport, how exactly do I go to work as a middle aged person having being deemed unworthy of 60 years of no license because of being a young idiot once upon a time? Please go down this path and say what should happen
I am not trying to be snarky here, but absent living in rural environs, there are usually options for personal transport that do not require operating a motor vehicle. Again, it is a tradeoff society makes between personal liberties, i.e. the privilege to drive versus public safety. And different jurisdictions may have differing standards on where that line is drawn.
There was a case with a 14 year old girl here in Denmark who got hit and murdered by an ex teacher of hers who was super drunk and crashed into her in an intersection -- the impact was so bad it basically blew the bike a part.
And it is the most stupid crime possible to commit, since the upside is so small and the downside so huge.
Personally I would support an instant death penalty for drunk driving if I didn't think it would be abused, so yeah I am okay with somebody not being able to support themselves after murdering a 14 year old girl. I hope the starve themselves to death on the street.
[0] In Denmark manddrab (manslaughter) is the term used by the Danish penalty law to describe the act of intentionally killing another person. No distinction between manslaughter and murder exists. The penalty goes from a minimum of five years (six years in the case of regicide) to imprisonment for life. The standard punishment for manslaughter - i.e. where there are neither aggravating or mitigating circumstances - is 12 years imprisonment.
I, for one, find this to be a barely passable minimum punishment for two DUIs
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/trudeau-sparks-outrage-wit...
Might be (first source that popped up). Does it make it untrue?
The point is: One the one hand people are willing to forgive terrorists and reintegrate them into society, on the other hand you're forced to have a breathalyzer in your car for the rest of your life for drunk driving twice within ten years.