Hang ’em high

Less than two hours into 2008 a drunk (who registered .16, or twice the legal limit) killed two people on an Albuquerque street.

For the most part, NewMexiKen is opposed to the death penalty. But I suggest that, if you drink and drive and kill someone, and if you are convicted by a jury of your peers, you be hanged by the side of the road where the homicide took place and that your body be left hanging there permanently as a warning to others.

Yes, I am serious. Drunk drivers kill more people every three months than have been killed by all the terrorists in our country’s history. Which are you more afraid will kill you?

7 thoughts on “Hang ’em high”

  1. Ah the power of the Alcohol Industry and their minion John McCain.

    Why does the party of family values allow hard liquor to advertise on TV again? Notice the ads are absolutely slanted toward twenty-somethings.

    NASCAR and the PBR are such hypocrites with their right-winged family BS payed for by alcohol and tobacco sponsors.

    When Arizona passed its medical marijuana law, 98% of the anti funding came from alcohol.

  2. I am amazed that people continue to drink and drive. There have been so many tragedies, so many families affected, so many public service announcements but there are always those jerks that think it doesn’t apply to them. That guy that killed the couple on 4th street had been driving really, really fast, did a u-turn, and then ran a red light. He must have been hammered. Drunks don’t make good decisions, that’s true, but really, couldn’t there have been something in that back of that jerk’s head that said, “Maybe I should call a friend or a cab…” But, no; instead he got behind the wheel of his weapon and killed two people.
    Makes. Me. Crazy.
    And sick.
    And tired of hearing the same old thing, over and over again.
    I am NOT a proponent of the death penalty but, geez, what’s it going to take to get people to stop drinking and driving?
    Those that do always think it will happen to someone else… until it is their sister, brother, mother, father, cousin, best friend who is killed.
    Enough is enough!

  3. We allow people to advertise hard liquor on TV because we’re a free country and the government is not empowered — in most circumstances — to control what people say. Thankfully, even the “party of family values” lacks the power to control speech, even if it is speech that you disapprove of.

    The way to stop people from drinking and driving is to put the drunk drivers who actually cause accidents in jail. The neo-prohibitionists in MADD keep screwing down the legal definition of “drunk” to the point where we’re now expending a lot of police time arresting and prosecuting people who have almost no alcohol in their system and who don’t cause accidents. The zero-tolerance roadblocks the police like to stage and the media like to cover do nothing to solve the problem, which is not two-drink-a-night “drunk drivers” with almost no alcohol in their systems. The very real problem of drunk driving is being used by moralistic hysterics to justify all kinds of government intrusions into our personal lives and doing nothing to solve the problem.

    Ultimately, though, it’s worth remembering that cars are going to crash into each other. People are going to die on the highways. Raising the speed limit from 55 to 70 is a very popular policy decision that has killed thousands of Americans. Freedom of movement has a cost, and the idea that we can have the free

  4. NewMexiKen absolutely agrees with Tom’s first and second paragraphs. When MADD and others first got the definition of “drunk driving” changed to a blood-alcohol level, that level was .15. Now, at least in New Mexico, it’s down to .08. To what avail?

    The drunken killer here in Albuquerque New Year’s morning was spotted by a police officer on an emergency run. But where were the other police? Perhaps they were manning one of the many checkpoints that night (checkpoints which here often seem to require the same manpower as the Berlin Wall used to).

    I think you will find that statistics do not bear out Tom’s claim that raising the speed limit back to 70 from 55 has killed thousands. Most fatal accidents are in urban areas, where speed limits are well below 70.

    More than 40% of traffic fatalities involve alcohol!

  5. The alcohol abuse issue in our country is not a free speech issue, it is a public health issue.

    Install ignition lockout devices into all vehicles, and that would certainly curtail the DUI problem. Frankly, .08 is too high, it should be .02. The data clearly show that any alcohol in your system impairs physical ability.

  6. Oh come on Julie, .02? Mouth wash would give you that. Does mouth wash impair your driving? Would you take out the radios, too? How do you test for sleepiness? Kids arguing in the back seat or needing their fallen sippy cups, what do you do about that distraction? 30% of all people killed in traffic fatalities are not wearing seat belts, which are mandatory in every state. What would you do about them?

    As Tom says, the killers are the serious drinkers, often with multiple prior DWIs. Execute the SOBs.

  7. I totally agree with the site. Hang em High, for sure. Now let’s talk about pedophiles and child abusers. Oh, no that is another dangerous topic. However, when they are incarerated, having worked in the prison system, the other inmates will definietely take care of them in their own way, believe me.

Comments are closed.