Will the prospect of 'holding paper' over the heads of chronic alcoholics who are serial offenders reduce the number of drunk drivers on the road? Will the states revocation of driving privileges deter serial offenders from driving to work, the liquor store or anywhere else? Evidence suggest that it will not, in fact data from other states who have extended their "look-back windows" to "get tough on drunk driving" shows that most individuals in violet of these stringent statutes are individuals who achieve a period of sobriety and relapse years later, forcing them to be punished again for offenses already atoned for. Does this not create a discriminatory paradox for alcoholic individuals under the guise of public safety?
Many libertarians are sometimes quick to dismiss the "harms no one but themselves" aspect of offenses when public safety is concerned out of personal fear and unknown probability, especially when the offense involves a individual deemed 'morally less-than' in society's eyes. The reality is compounding punishment for any offense expost facto is not only constitutionally questionable but realistically only serves the interest of the state who's role in cases like this is to punish and extort through the court. All this bill has really accomplished is insuring that the state can "reach back and fuck someone for something they were already punished for" according to one anonymous recovering alcoholic, "This bill is more about taking the states licensure privileges away from second-class citizens than deterrence and it will do little to dissuade individuals in active alcoholism from hanging up their keys for several reasons"