The representative proposes to abolish the criminalization of drunk driving, do you support or oppos

I am against denying the abolition of drunk driving sentences, because now drunk driving criminalization every year there are still many drunk driving major car accidents, if the drunk driving criminalization is canceled, then this phenomenon will be more, this is undoubtedly a joke with life. Not only do I oppose the abolition of drunk driving, I think the punishment for drunk driving should be increased!

Zhu Lieyu's opposition to "drunk driving and criminalization" has four reasonsFirst, the punishment effect of "drunk driving into a criminal sentence" is not obvious, and the number of criminal cases is too large; Second, the criminal record generated by drunk driving will make it difficult for the offender to return to society; Third, through the corresponding administrative punishment, it can also have the effect of punishment and education; Fourth, to deal with drunk driving and other social diseases, we should not rely too much on severe criminal punishments.

Every year, so many people are sentenced, standing on the opposite side of society, which increases the difficulty of social governanceIt should not be a reason to raise the threshold for drunk driving or abolish the punishment for drunk driving, otherwise it will be a bit of a "law does not blame the public" mentality.

By analogy, if the threshold can be abolished or raised if the number of offenders is too large, should the "second major crime" theft also be abolished or raised? Or, according to Deputy Zhu's intentions, it is also possible to adopt the method of administrative punishment to deal with the problem?

The increasing number of drunk driving cases is due to the rapid increase in the number of motor vehicles and drivers, and on the other hand, the increasingly strict investigation of drunk driving. Moreover, in recent years, experts and scholars have suggested raising the threshold for drunk driving.

Let's ask, the threshold for entry into prison has been raised, and drunk drivers who have been sentenced before can not be sentenced according to the later standardsWhat about such groups? Is the annulment of the judgment restored to its rightful legal status? Is it fair to such groups?

As for the social problem of difficulty in integrating drunk drivers into society after being sentenced, Deputy Zhu Lieyu put forward another proposal of more practical significance: Referring to the system of sealing juvenile criminal records, we should establish a system for sealing criminal records for drunk driving crimes to help criminals reintegrate into society.

It stands to reason that this is a good solution to reduce the negative effects of drunk driving penalties. ButWhat puzzles me is why the misdemeanor expungement system is supposed to be for all offenders, so why it only targets drunk driving. Is this fair to other minor offenders?

As far as I know, in recent years, there have been many misdemeanor offenders, such as raising a parrot or a turtle, cutting down their own forests, being implicated in working in a company, and many young people in their twenties who sell cards or "run scores" and are convicted of "aiding trust." Most of these groups are the same as drunk drivers, and the punishment of less than one year is also young and middle-aged. IfDrunk drivers can be sealed, why can't such people be sealed?

It's really puzzling.

In my opinion, perhaps it is the fairest for everyone, especially ordinary people, to unify the standard of drunk driving criminalization, adopt a "one-size-fits-all" approach, adhere to the "numerical theory" of drunk driving criminalization, and judge the same case in the same case. Instead of controversy, how to handle leniency and severity!

In fact, many drunk drivers also support the criminalization of drunk driving, after all, they and their family members are also part of society, and they also hope that the road safety situation will get better and better.

Recently, according to relevant reports, lawyer Zhu Lieyu, a representative of the National People's Congress, will submit a bill on "canceling the punishment of drunk driving" again during the two sessions this year, which is the second time he has proposed this bill. As soon as this news came out, it immediately aroused widespread public attention, and most of the people were opposed to this proposal, and they were also one of them, and the following reasons for the objection were made, but they were only personal suggestions.

Drunk driving itself is first and foremost a very scary and dangerous thing, and many families have become fragmented and tragic because of traffic accidents caused by drunk driving, which could have been avoided. Therefore, it is not feasible to feel that the cancellation of drunk driving criminalization, although under the implementation of this policy, there will still be drunk driving, but after all, it can still play a certain deterrent role, if once the drunk driving criminalization is canceled, then for those who love to drink and do not have much sense of responsibility for the driver is even more unscrupulous, they will hold a kind of luck after drinking: they may think that even if something happens, they will not break the law, should be fine, etc., which may cause more tragedies.

Therefore, in daily life, whether it is a family gathering or a company dinner, everyone must not drive after drinking, cherish life and stay away from drunk driving, because this is not only responsible for themselves, but also responsible for their families and society. I feel that the state cannot cancel the punishment of drunk driving, and some penalties for drunk driving should be more strictly formulated, so that those who are lucky after drinking will not dare to drive on the road, which is not only to protect themselves, but also to protect others. Ladies and gentlemen, do you agree with what I said?

Support, no accidents, no need to be criminalized, and drunk driving revocation of driver's license for 5 years, for those who perform well, you can write a letter of commitment personally, resume the driver's license in advance, strive for the direction of most people's initiative not to drive drunk, and guide social drivers to gradually move towards correct safety awareness. It is not good to blindly punish or sentence, and those who have no intention of reforming or driving drunk for the second time will be sentenced to a heavy sentence.

I oppose it, because of this law and regulation, it has eliminated the occurrence of drunk driving and drunk driving, created a harmonious social order, and regulated road traffic and travel.

Yes, now 90% of hundreds of thousands of drunk drivers are accident-free every year, and they are sentenced because more than 80 per 100ml of blood are sentenced, which affects the whole life and the whole family, which is unfavorable to the whole society

The voice of opposition is to drive or not to drive, drunk driving is wrong, but the fault is not so bad that one person makes a mistake and the whole family will be implicated, so to speak, the whole world is a good person, but everything that happened to them is watching the excitement, and everyone has a different metabolism after drinking, there is no standard word for dangerous driving drunk, such as running a red light, driving a drug addict, and driving in the opposite direction. Is there a sentence for it? To put it bluntly, many people don't know how much the cost of drunk driving is, only know that drunk driving is illegal, I personally think that it can be dealt with discretionally, no one is perfect and can give a chance to change, and the murderer is also justified defense, the heavy penalty is easy to cause social problems, the starting point of drunk driving punishment is to make everyone understand that driving is not drinking, and besides, who will feel that they are bad people!

Support the abolition of drunk driving criminalization, give people who have reformed a chance, and believe that there will be no next time, calling for drunk driving offenders who behave well in the future can shorten the time of 5 years, just like those who have been in prison for many years and the death penalty and have good performance can get a suspended sentence, why not give drunk driving a chance to perform well.

I am against the cancellation of drunk driving, drunk driving is already a major cause of traffic accidents, and the cancellation of drunk driving will allow drivers to realize its seriousness.

It is not supported to abolish the conviction for drunk driving, because it itself carries a certain degree of harmfulness. However, it supports the expungement system for minor offenses and misdemeanors, because it is a sign of a mature society governed by the rule of law.

Yes, there is no subjective motive for committing a crime that is artificially turned into a criminal, and in order to reflect the fairness and justice of the law, the punishment for drunk driving is abolished. Increasing the severity of administrative penalties for drunk drivers can have the same effect.

In the tank! The abolition of criminalization is not a lack of punishment! Rather, let a first-time offender!

The circumstances are not serious, and there is an understanding that mistakes must be corrected!! In ancient times, there were sins that did not affect parents, and wives and children!! Why does a person in modern society make a mistake and receive the punishment he deserves, and it still affects the children, and it is a disaster for three generations!!

In the tank! Any law should have a "one centimetre right". First-time offenders should be treated correctly so that they have a chance to turn over a new leaf, and should not be beaten to death with a stick. Anyone who drinks alcohol can commit a crime, but what is the punishment for this?

I am against it because it is a bad act, and it is not conducive to the safety of other people's lives, and it is very unfair to others, so I am against it.

Individuals are against it, and such advice will make many people ignore the risks of drunk driving, and many people will ignore the law and continue to have drunk driving behavior.

I suggest canceling, those who drink will be recommended to cancel, those who do not drink will be advised not to cancel, some things have not happened to their own bodies, they are not able to experience, it is best that there is no alcohol in the world, there will be drunk driving, no one wants to drink and drive, drink the brain numb, is it their own control, wine is strong and courageous,

support, you can use other ways to restrict the offender, and you should not implicate the children! For example: record the case record, if there is another violation, you can increase the penalty, plus a heavy economic penalty! Driving ban for life!

First, the word "drunk" itself is a conceptual and non-strict artificial standard; Second, there is no difference between drunk driving and drug abuse in the case of unlicensed and substandard vehicles, so why is drunk driving specifically criminalized as dangerous driving; Third, drunk driving accidents can be punished as aggravating circumstances, and it is not necessary to specifically convict them of dangerous driving; Fourth, the danger in dangerous driving is also a conceptual non-standard word, such as minors driving a vehicle, scolding the car to hit a red light, driving in the wrong direction, etc., which are obviously dangerous driving, whether it should also be defined as dangerous driving. Therefore, it is absolutely unscientific to position drunk driving as a dangerous driving crime. should be revoked.

Drunk driving is a "bad punishment", support cancellation! Human beings set up punishments to punish bad people and wicked people, but most of the people who are caught drunk driving are not bad people and evil people......You can't turn good people into sinners......Punishment is not responsible!!

Resolutely support the criminalization of drunk driving! It is recommended that if there is no recidivism after a certain period of time, the criminal record should be expunged.

support, the degree of administrative punishment can be increased, and it should not be criminalized if it does not cause consequences.

First of all, the Chinese population is large, the automobile development is fast, the wine culture and living habits are deep-rooted, it must be treated with strong medicine, and there must be no alternative treatment plan, so it is good to be able to control it. Second, the criminalization of drunk driving is control at the source, just like not being able to hold a gun, it is qualitative control, and it cannot be judged only by the results, not quantitatively. Third, before the drunk driving standard, there was also drunk driving, and there was already a buffer zone.

Fourth, is it a difficult thing to drink and not drive? Is it unaffordable to pay for the substitute driving service? Finally, once the cancellation is made, if there is a **, or if it causes serious consequences, will the representative be able to pay for it?

Definitely yes, there should be no criminal liability if there is no accident.

As a family member of a drunk driver, I have been accompanied by regrets, pain, and tears for several months, and my work and family have been greatly affected, just because I am ignorant and drunk and driving a tricycle and being hit by others, I have to bear all the costs! In a fit of anger, he didn't help his husband, but voluntarily surrendered! Although he is a victim, he has to face a series of severe punishments such as criminal punishment!

Now it is facing the breakdown of the family, and if you don't agree with the other party, you will break up unhappily! Because of this, the two were estranged, and the originally happy family was suddenly disillusioned! While hating alcohol, I hate the mistakes I made, and at the same time, I really hope that the law can give me a chance to mend my ways!

The child is innocent and must be involved, and we are deeply hurt and blamed in our hearts! It is said that the law has temperature, and I also hope that Mr. Zhu's proposal can be adopted, no matter what the conclusion is in the future, we will do a good job of actively publicizing it, and through our own experience, we can let more people know the cost of drunk driving!

Support the cancellation of drunk driving into the industry. Don't take a one-size-fits-all 5-year revocation. The circumstances are not serious.

Support, give a chance to rehabilitate, accomplices can be dealt with severely!

Zhu Lieyu, a deputy to the National People's Congress, once again called for the abolition of the punishment for drunk driving. Zhu Lieyu said that the abolition of the crime of drunk driving does not mean that the illegal act of drunk driving will not be investigated. On the contrary, while restricting the application of the criminal law, it is recommended to increase the intensity and scope of administrative penalties for drunk driving.

Abolishing the crime of drunk driving can make the law more humane and warm, and can also greatly reduce the crime rate, which is conducive to the construction of a harmonious society.

Therefore, he suggested that most drunk driving situations that did not cause actual harm and "subjectively have no obvious malice" should be replaced by administrative punishment, and he also proposed that a system for sealing criminal records of drunk driving should be established to help offenders reintegrate into society. For such a point of view, most netizens unsurprisingly expressed strong opposition, believing that leniency for "drunk driving" is cruelty to the victim. In such a situation, data from the same Ministry of Public Security show that in 2020, the proportion of drunk drivers per 100 vehicles investigated has actually decreased by more than 70% compared with before the "drunk driving criminalization", which can be described as incredible in China, where the material conditions are getting better and better, and the wine table culture is prevalent.

The fear that the law will affect many aspects of life for criminal penalties for drunk driving is not a reason to amend the law, because "you can choose not to drink while driving, or ask a substitute driver". According to the traffic police, not only the criminal law will include "drunk driving", some units have also formulated supporting punishment measures, drunk driving often loses their jobs, and at this stage, the situation of public employees driving under the influence of alcohol is "almost gone". At present, some of the drunk driving cases found are often people with weak awareness of the rule of law in remote areas, but the overall number is also decreasing.

There are many voices of opposition to the abolition of drunk driving criminalization, but some people agree with it, believing that the crime and punishment should be applicable, and that drunk driving in foreign countries is an administrative punishment, which is two concepts of crime. The lawyer said that whether to abolish the punishment for drunk driving should be widely heard. In addition, regardless of whether the "drunk driving criminal" is abolished, the safety of the public's life and property should always be put first, which is a basic premise of the relevant discussion.