Re:This test is UNBEATABLE! (Score 1)

Currently, there is an attitude that "taking away the vehicle of the family breadwinner" would constitute an undue hardship on some individual. Yes, it would. But having that individual kill off some other family's breadwinner constitutes what I would call "an undue hardship" on that other family.

The reasoning behind this attitude is solid. I have lived in New Mexico all my life and, with the exception of a few areas, it is pretty much impossible to survive without a vehicle. Public transportation, where it exists, generally does not go to all areas and has a limited schedule. Many people have to commute long distances to get to and from work. The net result is that people will drive. You can take away their license, but people will drive. This isn't excusing their behavior; it is a simple fact.

Personally, I think a better solution would offer more public transportation/safe ride(s) home--preferably very cheap or free (NM is a poor state) and would lock those convicted of drunk driving up every Friday & Saturday night for a certain length of time (the length depending on a number of factors--how many convictions, how intoxicated the individual was). Granted, this wouldn't stop them from druck-driving other nights, but I do think it would help reduce the problem.