TV & Film Magazine
Update: July 17, 2007

Thanks for visiting this site, but it is no longer being updated. I've moved on over to http://www.mediapundit.net/ and I invite you to join me over there from now on. Thanks for your understanding.

Bitch What?


  -  Digg!Submit to NetscapeBookmark at del.icio.usreddit

Since nobody is reading this thing anyway, I might as well degenerate into a bitch-fest for a while, since that was the original purpose of this blog. I think I'll start with the insanely rich and useless human being whose only positive attribute is being named after a hotel. I'm not so sure I'd like being named after a Hotel, or being useless, or putting other peoples lives in danger. I can say with all certainty that I would love to be insanely rich.
What's this about putting people in danger? Oh, that's right. The news stupid! The news!
"The officers observed that Hilton exhibited the symptoms of intoxication. A field sobriety test was conducted at scene, and the officers determined she was driving under the influence," Isabella said, reading from a police statement. He said officers stopped Hilton because she was "driving erratically."

Over and done with. The girl who embarrassed herself on national television by admitting she had no idea what Walmart was proved the point by getting herself a criminal record. But what kind of party would this be without a publicist to come in and lie a lot?

The DUI was "probably the result of an empty stomach and working all day and being fatigued," Mintz said.

No, the DUI was certainly a result of the girl drinking alcohol, then getting into a car and driving, you stupid putz. I know it is your job to spin, but for christs sake, she could have murdered people with this stunt. There is no excuse for drinking and driving. Not ever.

So many people die needlessly because of this crap that we really need to step up punishment for this crime. If you look at most criminal offenders, thieves, drug dealers, that sort of thing, most of them will not be negatively affected by jail time. Most of them have been there already, and most are going to end going back. But not white-bread debutantes, right? Paris has now seen the inside of a county jail cell, but not prison. Drunkards can laugh off 24 hours in the detox cell, but do you think they'd be laughing at real punishment? Try this:
  • First DUI: Revoke license for five years, one year in prison (not jail; prison.)
  • Second DUI: Revoke license for life, five years in prison.
And to give the license revocation more kick:
  • First time caught driving with a revoked license outside of an emergency: Mandatory one year in prison. License revoked for life.
  • Second time caught: five years in prison, and you lose the car you were driving.
Don't like it? Don't drive drunk. Think I care? I couldn't give less of a shit. Hell, as long as we're putting feet to fire that might make people think twice about breaking the law:
  • First speeding offense (10mph above or more): Revoke license for five years, six months in prison.
  • Second offense: Revoke license for life, three years in prison.
The three strikes law that a lot of states have bugs me but it would make sense for a given crime to have escalating punishment. Double the punishment for every offense, say one year for DUI, then two, then four, then eight, etc. It may not sound like much, 1-2-4 for DUI's, but you have to remember to add them. A three-time offender will have ended up serving 7 years. That sounds about right, though I would prefer life for a three time DUI.

Of course, that's not even close to what Paris is facing. She can't even be sentenced to jail time for a first offense. I mean, geez, she only got drunk and then started driving down the highway. The worst possible result only could have been a dead family of five coming back from a wedding or something. Poor girl, she had to wear handcuffs and everything (that must have felt familiar..)

What can she get? According to the paper, 36-60 months (3-5 years) of probation, and a $390 fine for a woman with billions in the bank. Her fucking shoes could probably pay the fine. Just the left one, even.

Just like Mel Gibson, because she is rich and famous, she will receive special treatment, and get the minimum. Even if you disagree with what I think should be the minimum penalties for DUI, do you honestly think Paris would ever drink and drive again if she had to spend half a year of her young, hot, 25-year-old life in prison?

Oh yeah, if you're convicted of drug possession when the drugs were found in your car, the state gets to keep your car. It was envisioned as a way to kick drug dealers in the nuts, but it never did a damn thing to stop drug dealing. Hey, I have an idea, let's take Paris' car. Yeah, should could just buy 500 more, but you know that little whiny bitch would be furious over it. Maybe that's what it would take to show rich people they aren't above the law: start taking their possessions and money. Hey Mel, you wanna DUI and then run from the cops? Coolio! We're just going to take your car, and fine you about say...10% of your income for last year. That sounds perfectly fair to me. A guy making about $35k a year would have to pay a $3500 fine. Mel on the other hand would probably be looking at a $3 million dollar fine, or something insane.

Hit them where it hurts: never-seen-the-inside-of-a-police-station gets a full year in prison.

Rich? Lose your car and the only thing that matters to your beady little heart: money.
Like this post? Subscribe to RSS, or get daily emails:

Sep 8, 2006, 6:52:00 AM
The punishments you propose are a little outrageous. I agree that some jail or prison time should be required, but not the amount you suggest. 3 months of prison for a first DUI seems more appropriate, and a large fine for speeding.

Had you actually caused an accident, yes, throw them in prison for a long fucking time.


Sep 11, 2006, 2:09:00 PM
Wow. You got way pumped up on rich people and forgot the little people.

Do the suggestions you did, you'd see more than a 50% increase in prison inmates in the first 3 months alone in nearly EVERY single state.

That's no fucking answer. More money to public assistance programs for kids/young adults/adults work better.

Sounds like a lotta bullshit but at least the programs work _MOST_ of the time. Im in one of them, and facing that kind of extreme PRISON time in texas? Have you even BEEN to Harris County jail? the inmates there rather be in FEDERAL prison, or on death row. Sticking a good percentage of the population in jail/prison isnt the answer. That's my thought after being through the system.


Sep 12, 2006, 11:08:00 PM
Ray:
It only takes a single DUI to murder an entire family. 3 months is a joke for someone putting other people at such incredible risk *for no other reason* than they are stupid enough to think they are the one special human being out of 6,000,000,000 that does not have their reactions slowed by alcohol.

I think waiting UNTIL they kill someone to throw them in prison when that is the inevitable result is reprehensible.

Richards:
I would take a 50% increase in prison population for a 10% decrease in DUI related deaths.

Publicly funded programs for people with drinking problems is fine, but anyone that is not an alcoholic doesn't need tax payer money to coddle them, they need to learn responsibility which they obviously have not done.

It's really freakin easy to not drive a car after you've been drinking -- we're not talking about stiffer penalties for drug abusers or fighting off a chemical addiction. If you drink, you stay off the road; or you go to prison.

I have zero sympathy for anyone that drinks and drives.


Got something to say? Post a Comment. Got a question or a tip? Send it to me. If all else fails, you can return to the home page.


Recent Posts
Subscribe to RSS Feed Add to Google
Add to Technorati Favorites
Add to Bloglines
Archives
Links
Powered by Blogger
Entertainment Blogs - Blog Top Sites

The text of this article is Copyright © 2006,2007 Paul William Tenny. All rights reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Attribution by: full name and original URL. Comments are copyrighted by their authors and are not subject to the Creative Commons license of the article itself.