2008 House Bill 264 (Tighten penalties on certain DUI convictions)

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. Milward Dedman, Jr on January 10, 2008, to extend the lookback provision relating to prior DUI convictions from five years to ten years.
- Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on January 15, 2008.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Rep. Milward Dedman, Jr on January 10, 2008. New Comment

1) Another stupid bill [by D-Fens on April 9, 2008]
Another stupid proposal to pander to the "tough on crime" folks. It will do little more than clog our jails and take our tax money.
Reply New Comment

Line

2) missed fortune [by Anonymous Citizen on January 11, 2008]
Why dont you just extend this look back to the time the driver got his licence?
Do you have anything to do with the budget?
Reply New Comment

Line

3) Other substances? [by David Dunn on January 11, 2008]
What does this bill mean by "other substances"? And why urine tests?

Does "other substances" include THC? THC can show up in urine tests for up to 30-days after ingestion regardless of how ingested.

Trace amounts of THC are in cannabis foods, beverages, cremes, salves, balms, lotions, soaps, shampoos, conditioners and can be absorbed through the skin.

THC, an oil-based substance, is excreted slowly and shows up as metabolites in urine tests. Is this bill assuming that any THC showing up in urine tests means a person is driving under the influence of cannabis?

Why are there no set amounts of "other substances" to determine DUI? Are these assumptions based on anything other than legislative paranoia?

Until measurable standards can be made for "other substances," reference to "other substances" should be removed from this bill.
Reply New Comment

Line

Home
Create an account
Legislation watch
Search Legislation
Search Voting Record
Reports
- Recent Laws
- Missed Votes Report
Links
About
Tell a friend about this site