Don’t go soft on drunk drivers

The Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman and state Legislature are both failures.

Back on Sept. 12, 2004, the Frontiersman printed a limp-wristed editorial on drunken driving after a 16-year-old boy was killed by a drunk driver.

In that editorial, the Frontiersman said, “We urge our legislators to toughen the penalties for drunken driving — and especially for repeat offenders. Repeated drunken driving must incur a significant jail sentence. The right to drive is not protected. The right to life is.”

Since then, the Frontiersman has done squat to put the heat on legislators or judges.

It is not uncommon for a so-called judge to release a drunk driver on his or her own recognizance with no bail required, or on a (meager) $250 bail. And, the drunk drivers get to keep their “weapons” they endangered the public with. Don’t bring up that useless eyewash about marking a driver license.

The same (is true) for minor consuming (alcohol) and driving. If you impound the cars of drunk drivers for 30 days you would get their attention. A minor caught consuming is tomorrow’s drunk driver — or tomorrow’s dead driver.

R.K. Butts

Wasilla