Sunday, April 1, 2012

Denying of Court Supervision-Excessive Speeding

The state of Illinois is once against going along with their failed philosophy of getting tough on crime. It seems as though the state is once again attempting to strip its citizen of cash for speeding tickets and victimless crimes. According to Sauk Valley Newspaper’s article, the bill was passed in the state senate in a ratio of 46-0. They voted Friday to deny the option of repeatedly taking advantage of the option of court supervision in excessive speeding cases. The speeding limits must be broken by at least twenty five miles per hour on city streets and thirty miles per hour on highways and rural roads. The most beneficial incentive in court supervision is the opportunity to have the speeding ticket completely erased from your permanent driving record. This form of punishment helps deter offenders of committing any other crimes during which they must stay offense-free. If they complete the time period assigned to stay clean, the original charge will be erased, resulting in a dropped charge by the state. The whole idea of denying the supervision to excessive speeders is derived from an Oak Forest Senator Maggie Crotty who was aware of a teenager that resided in her district that was killed in an accident by an individual who was convicted of more than six previous speeding tickets, all in which were punished by court supervision. In Mrs. Crotty’s determination to deny the supervision, she developed the proposal to be called Julie’s Law in honor of the young individual who was killed.

I want to first comment on the focus of this proposal. The bill proposed by the Oak Forest representative seems to take a heavy stance on hitting the offender harder with denying supervision. Im not sure if stripping the supervision opportunity from excessive speeders is a strong enough deterrent to turn drivers against driving fast. Instead, I would hope that the court system is able to look at this situation and conclude that the court system is the failing component here. Instead of stripping the habitual offender from the supervision simply based off speed, they should look at the frequency of the overall speeding tickets. Myself along with others would agree that we would be most interested in looking at the frequency and number of violations that are occurring instead of the actual speed over the limit. In my opinion, a habitual speeder is more of a threat to the overall society than an offender that sped one time at least thirty miles per hour over the stated speed limit. It seems to me that the focus is in the wrong direction. I’m not totally sure if I completely agree with the denying of supervision to excessive speeders. I naturally have a negative attitude towards the hierarchy and forms of law making government so being bias is ingrained in me. I feel as though this may just be another way for government officials to control society and strip us of our money. I’m not disagreeing that habitual excessive drivers need to be punished heavier, but I do feel as though laws that are being passed are started to become excessive. Money is a driving factor in most of these proposals so naturally I feel as though it is another form of money making for government.

There are numerous other issues that should be dealt with in the state of Illinois than dealing with minor driving fines. There is a larger picture that should be addressed and seriously examined before worrying about minor crimes such as speeding. There is no way I am taking away the fact that someone was killed due to a habitual speeder, however in my opinion there are plenty of other issues that need to be scratched at the surface than our highway and city road speed limits.

http://www.saukvalley.com/2012/03/30/ill-may-get-tougher-on-excessive-speeding/acyrmnn/

3 comments:

  1. Banning court supervision for just excessive speeding should not occur, yes I do agree. When a person is killed in the midst of a person speeding, then that is when I agree that there should be no court supervision given and that person should be convicted with a stiff penalty.I think the state has to look at the offense on the plate before making a decision on to deny court supervision to all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with you 110%. Yes it is a terrible thing that happened to the young girl who was killed but to just unanimously put every speeder into the same category is wrong. Each case and each individual should be treated separately and each deserves to have their individual case and circumstance ruled on independently. There are so many things that can weigh in on a judges decision in a specific traffic case including; rate of speed, history of the offender, are they a habitual speeder, and previous punishments for the same crime. I do not feel that just because someone speeds 25-30 miles over the speed limit on certain roadways that they should be refused the right to court supervision and grouped with all offenders in this category.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have just downloaded iStripper, so I can have the best virtual strippers on my taskbar.

    ReplyDelete