State obligated to enforce the law

Published 1:16 pm Thursday, January 24, 2008

A Thursday letter on sobriety checkpoints states, “I don’t remember signing away my constitutional rights to exercise my driving ‘privilege.’ ” This is true, but you will sign away most, if not all, of those rights if and when you (in the general sense) take someone’s life while driving under the influence. Problem is, by that point, it’s too late.

When you sign on to take a license, you agree to operate your vehicle of choice in accordance with the Revised Code of Washington. I do not know if this, in essence, constitutes a contract with the state, but it seems there is implied obligation, on the state’s part, to enforce the RCW when people choose to ignore or shun their responsibilities while on the roadways.

I hope this discussion continues. I believe there are reasonable arguments to be made on each side. In the end it is my hope that, checkpoints or not, those of us that drive according to the responsibilities bestowed upon us not only by the state, but by those sharing the road with us, are on the winning side of the outcome.

Tim Lofton