DUI (red) license plates rejected by panel (california)

[Ernesto]

(snip) A proposal to force two-time drunken drivers to display red "DUI" license plates on their vehicles failed Tuesday to win support of the Assembly Public Safety Committee.
The proposal, AB 2099, authored by Assemblyman Ray Haynes, R-Murrieta, would have required drivers with two or more drunken-driving convictions to keep the plates on their cars for two years or the period of probation, whichever is longer.
The bill failed by a 5-2 vote.



http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/14239015p-15059254c.html

[jpgray]

1. Great news. The "scarlet platter" approach is not a good idea

[saltpoint]

2. I agree with you wholeheartedly, jpgray. And you are exactly

right to call it a "scarlet letter approach."

Hat's off to ya. :thumbsup:

[dysfunctional press]

74. exacty- the car isn't guilty of drunk driving...

and neither are the other drivers of that car.

[NV Whino]

3. Ha!

There would probably be more red plates than regular plates.

[trotsky]

4. Minnesota does something like this.

You have to get special plates, but they're not red or otherwise broadcasting what they stand for. They are plain lettered plates (unlike our regular plates that have shading, a loon, or some deer on them), and they always start with the letter "W". (How appropriate, eh?)

(On edit: the omnipresent "W" on these plates has earned them the nickname "Whiskey plates.")

The idea is to help officers target repeat offenders better. I think that's a noble cause. Don't want a special plate? Don't drink and drive, moron.

[Debi]

5. Yeah, cuz god forbid you get sober, join AA, straighten out

but still get to be branded for life as a freakin drunk.

Maybe we should have facial tattoos for felons & prostitutes too. Nobody deserves a second chance :eyes:

[pinniped]

6. You're right. Maybe after the third instance they will seek help....

since their second chance didn't convince them.

--two or more drunken-driving convictions--

[Debi]

16. Maybe, or maybe the second conviction will do it

and maybe the person will have entered a treatment program and been sober for a while before they get their license to drive back. But they'll get to be targeted because they're just drunks who deserve to be branded.

[trotsky]

7. Do we have to resort to hyperbole?

You don't get the plates for life.

[crikkett]

9. Nope - because folks will just have their wives/brothers/friends

buy and register the cars.

[trotsky]

11. And then their wives/brothers/friends will go to jail.

Drunk drivers are some of the lowest scum on this earth.

[baby_mouse]

38. Do we have to resort to hyperbole?

I think you're being a bit *partisan*

:eyes*

[trotsky]

40. I respond in kind.

Obviously if the person thinks it's a valid argumentation tactic...

Partisan, shit. If being partisan means I want drunk drivers off the road, then I'm FUCKING PARTISAN.

[shanti]

42. it sounds like

this is personal to you...

[baby_mouse]

69. It does.

If T genuinely buys into the public dusplay of "judgement", why not brand marijuana users with pot leaves on their foreheads?

This is total nonsense. What GOOD comes from a public display of guilt? Nothing. Cops pull you over for no good reason, that's all.

[trotsky]

72. Have you read anything I've posted?

This isn't the same as a forehead tattoo for smoking a joint.

The plates are issued to REPEAT OFFENDERS. People who can't stop drinking and driving. No other means of stopping them are working. Take away their license? Fine. That doesn't stop anyone from physically operating a car.

I continue to be shocked at just how much support drunk drivers get on here.

[crikkett]

70. what the heck is a valid argumentation tactic

I'm being practical here.

Now if you'd like to talk PRACTICALITY instead of ARGUMENTATIONALISM, let's talk about having convenient and affordable mass transit and mixed-use neighborhoods where people don't have to drive to get a meal.

And let's NOT talk about profiling. Profiling is one step away from making people wear stars on their clothes, Trots.

Thank you,
very much.
Crikkett

[trotsky]

73. ONCE AGAIN, this is about repeat offenders.

People who've had at least one, possibly several chances to STOP this behavior. This isn't anything close to committing an act of adultery and wearing a scarlet letter for life. This is about people who refuse to stop a harmful behavior, and giving law enforement a tool to help identify vehicles that have a high probability of being driven by a repeat offender.

While you lobby to get the tax dollars necessary to support mass transit, and lobby each and every city council in the country to spend the next 20 years redeveloping every neighborhood, this is at least something that can be done RIGHT NOW.

Profiling, my ass. They've already broken the law, multiple times, and they won't stop. I think that's one group that it's fair to "profile," even though I don't think the term applies here.

Stars on their clothes is bullshit. Gotta draw out the Nazi comparisons, of course.

[crikkett]

80. thanks for making my point

This is about people who refuse to stop a harmful behavior, and giving law enforement a tool to help identify vehicles that have a high probability of being driven by a repeat offender.

Yes, so they can be profiled = stopped without cause. Like the CHP's who stopped drivers for being brown (that was proven).

Profiling, my ass. They've already broken the law, multiple times, and they won't stop.
Yes, that's why they lose their licenses and can't get insured.

I think that's one group that it's fair to "profile," even though I don't think the term applies here.
Yes, you've made that abundantly clear.

[trotsky]

81. There was a point?

Profiling people who themselves have committed the same crime repeatedly. OK, whatever.

I find it offensive that people would compare assuming someone is guilty based on the color of the skin with checking on a person who is KNOWN to have repeatedly broken the law. Yeah, those are exactly the same. :eyes:

Yes, that's why they lose their licenses and can't get insured.

Yet they keep driving anyway, and cops have really no way to know or stop them unless they commit a crime again. Unless they have the plates, in which case they can be stopped without any other reason.

I'm sure drunk drivers are happy to have friends. I'm not one of them.

[crikkett]

84. dude, calm down

Yes, that's why they lose their licenses and can't get insured.

Yet they keep driving anyway, and cops have really no way to know or stop them unless they commit a crime again. Unless they have the plates, in which case they can be stopped without any other reason.

My point is, and we're going back days here, that the people who dodge the law by driving w/o license are going to dodge the law by driving a car w/o red tags.

You say yourself that red plates can lead to drivers stopped for no other reason than the red plates. No matter who's driving the car. Families share cars. A red tag on the *family car* of a DUI convict fits your definition of profiling.

Therefore, red plates are not the answer you're looking for, because they unfairly target innocents, and they do not effectively stop the behavior you so abhor.

[trotsky]

85. Sorry, I just don't see it the same way you do.

Family members can be stopped. Their license will be checked, and then they proceed. It's not like the cops stop them, beat them down, arrest them for suspicion, hold them for a day or two, and then finally let them go to teach them a lesson. They stop the car, and if the driver is not the CONVICTED OFFENDER, they go on their merry way. Yeah, it's an inconvenience. But we're ALL inconvenienced by the law at some point or another.

Maybe people have to have their lives affected by drunk driving before they see things the way I do. I sure hope it doesn't have to come to that.

Besides, Minnesota's plates aren't even red. They're very subtle, but different enough that officers can easily identify them. And what no one seems to understand, you don't get them until you've had multiple offenses! You had your "do over", you had your chance to think about what effect this will have on yourself and your family, yet you went and did it again anyway. Fuck drunk drivers and fuck their sympathizers.

[Debi]

13. Oh, what, just until theirs is ruined?

As if Court costs, fines and whatever financial and emotional damage has been done to them and their families (and anyone else's families) they also have to be branded.

Just plain stupid.

[trotsky]

15. No drunk driver will get compassion from me.

Sorry.

[Debi]

17. Good to know that there are still people out there pure enough

to judge others. I thought they all had become saints. Glad you're here.

[trotsky]

18. More hyperbole.

Sure I'll judge drunk drivers. They made a dangerous choice and there should be significant consequences.

[Debi]

19. Not hyperbole

Judge not lest ye be judged.

Glad you feel pure enough to judge others for their mistakes or poor choices.

I'm not as pure as you. :shrug:

[trotsky]

20. Obviously you're MORE pure than me

because you don't "judge" drunk drivers. Holier-than-thou crap.

[Debi]

21. I think either the person selected to judge them (the judge) or

a jury of their peers selected to judge them (the jury) should do the job. You obviously feel comfortable making that judgement all by yourself.

I think they pay fines, court costs and a multitude of personal costs (especially if their drunk driving caused harm to another person).

I don't think branding them is appropriate.

[trotsky]

25. Um, hello?

It's a judge (and jury) that assign the plates.

I support the process. Sheesh, unbelievable what you think "I'm" judging here.

[Debi]

37. Post #15 - no judgment there n/t

[trotsky]

39. Ah, I see. You're confusing my lack of sympathy for those who

choose to drink & drive - repeatedly - with the legal process that would assign them special license plates (in which I have absolutely no role).

Odd thing to get confused about, considering they're two completely unrelated things, but hey, stranger things have happened.

[Debi]

43. the plates are a brand that is placed on the individual AFTER

they have been convicted, after they have paid their debt to society and after the privilege to drive has been restored. After all that you believe it is appropriate to brand them again? To remind them and everyone on the roadways of the mistakes they've made?

I'm no fan of drunken driving - that would be silly to imply that. I am a fan of allowing a person to turn their life around after being convicted of a crime and serving their time (and paying their fines and court costs and proving to the authorities that they deserve another chance).

It's why I agree with allowing felons the right to vote after serving their time in jail and paying their fines and costs, why I don't think they should have to identify themselves as former felons in any way.

[trotsky]

45. You don't even understand the point of the plates.

First, they aren't handed out until the person has had MULTIPLE arrests.

Second, they are issued mainly because the car can't be impounded, because other family members might need to drive it. Or because the drunk got a special limited license to drive it to work.

The plate serves as a quick visual reference for an officer to know "this car has been associated with a drunk driver." The plate serves as probable cause for the officer to pull it over and check the driver's license TO MAKE SURE the person is not repeating - AGAIN - because they have a proven, documented history of repeating. Is the family of the drunk driver inconvenienced? Yes. Are we all sometimes inconvenienced by the law? YES.

In Minnesota, the plates are subtle. They're not flashing neon "I'M A DRUNK" signs that result in the vehicle or the driver being stigmatized. (Not that I would mind if they did.)

[Debi]

48. Laws are already in place to keep a person convicted of drunken

driving (even more than once) for a significant amount of time. The person has to have paid all their fines and court costs, served all their time and taken courses (and shown proof of participation in treatment programs) in order to receive the privilege to drive again. After multiple arrests there is a VERY long time before a special work related license will be issued and all the above have to be met before that is issued. There is no reason to brand a person after they've met all the standards set out by the law and courts. They paid their dues, there is no reason to make them pay more.

The plate serves as a 'heads up' and permission to harass someone who has done everything correctly to get their license back. Does MN have a bank robber plate? So police can watch cars go through the drive through and monitor their behavior? The plates state exactly what you say they don't, they tell society "I'm a Drunk" They also tell society "I cannot be reformed" That is more than an inconvenience.

[trotsky]

49. "Laws are already in place"

Sure they are. And how do they get enforced?

How can an officer tell if someone who shouldn't be driving, is?

Not having a license doesn't physically stop you from operating a car.

The plate serves as a 'heads up' and permission to harass someone who has done everything correctly to get their license back.

Nope. You didn't read what I said. Nor are the plates "for life." But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your noble campaign to stand up for drunk drivers. I'm sure they appreciate it, at least.

[Debi]

51. You are way off. n/t

[trotsky]

53. The feeling is mutual. n/t

[Raine]

30. Me either

My boyfriend's sister was killed by a drunk driver and I hate bastards who drive drunk!

[Kixel]

36. Whiskey Plates...

Are NOT a bad idea. I know a lot of guys (small town USA) who have gotten two DWI's who normally would not have thought twice about getting back into a vehicle after their first DWI. The whiskey plates do go a long way in changing their driving behavior. They are not obvious, but they do serve a very important purpose. I haven’t talked to anyone with whiskey plates who feels victimized, they just realize it’s part of their sentencing.

[crikkett]

8. Good. It's wrong to profile people

And these plates would have been big fat targets.

[trotsky]

10. Profiling is when you target a certain class of persons without reason.

This would not be profiling. They've already committed crimes.

Sheesh, the amount of compassion that drunk fucking drivers get.

[superconnected]

27. Profiling is not exclusive to class.

Drunk drivers should be dealt with at conviction time. They should have stronger sentencing.

This way of dealing with them is no higher intellectually than Scarlet Letters - singling them out as a target for animosity.

[trotsky]

35. Except that the scarlet letter was for adultery.

Drunk drivers kill. Lousy analogy.

[superconnected]

64. social distinction is social distinction no matter what your reason

for creating a "facist" situation.

[trotsky]

65. Ah, the obligatory Nazi reference.

A flame war wouldn't be complete without it.

[crikkett]

71. profiling = making people wear stars on their clothes.

And watch your language, Trots.

[slackmaster]

12. Proviling convicted drunk drivers would be OK

Profiling their cars would not, because someone who is not a convicted drunk driver might be driving.

[trotsky]

14. I see this as a non-quite-perfect solution to a problem that has NO

perfect solutions.

[Kingshakabobo]

23. Our legal system isn't perfect but punishing INNOCENT people...

....has NEVER been acceptable.

[trotsky]

26. Okey dokey, if that's somehow punishing an innocent person. n/t

[superconnected]

28. it well would be.

Why should these people be "punished" by the people of society individually. Why not support the court system punnishing them through the jail system, when they are convicted.

Guess I'm appalled by mob mentality.

I have to wonder what next. Public stonings providing it's a crime you don't like.

[trotsky]

31. I wish it was that simple.

The court and prison systems are overwhelmed. Drunk driving is far too common. Having the special license plates is a way for law enforcement to be aware of a prior conviction immediately.

Having lost a friend to a drunk driver, I'm all for giving law enforcement the tools they need to crack down on it. Drunk driving is a choice, not an accident.

[Occulus]

59. There are a lot of people out there who share a car.

So, you see a woman driving her husband's car, which has one of those plates. You automatically assume the driver is at fault.

Otherwise, the purpose of the plate is soundly defeated.

That's why they're a bad idea- because they can be wrong. Literally, the driver may not have actually received the plate; it may have been the owner.

Such plate have absolutely no point other than childish, extended punishment via social vilification. We should be well beyond that as a country.

[trotsky]

66. That's not the primary reason for the plates.

The sole argument against them seems to be "It's not fair to stigmatize." In other words, you're blaming others for their reaction to seeing a special plate.

As I've noted in several places on this thread, the purpose of the plate is to tip off law enforcement officers and give them probable cause to pull the vehicle over.

The scarlet letters did nothing but draw public scorn. The plates serve a law enforcement purpose. Plus I have yet to see any "scorn" directed at drivers. I worked with one for awhile, nobody gave him any shit about it. I think maybe the fact that drunk driving DOESN'T seem to work many people up contributes to why it's such a problem.

[unda cova brutha]

33. it's wrong to be still driving after getting 2 DUI's

Have you ever had a loved one killed by a drunk driver? I'm guessing that you have not.

[corkhead]

22. No surprise, how many politicians do you think would have DUI plates?

[arwalden]

24. Smart Move!!

[Raine]

29. I suppose the drunks

would have just gotten rental cars anyway.:-( I wish they would come up with a workable way to get the drunken fuckers off the road! :mad:

[Debi]

46. How about getting rid of places that people drive to in order to be served

alcohol and drive home? Let's get rid of fucking wine and cheese parties and meet-ups at bars. Let's have social functions and sporting events that don't revolve around a keg or wine bottles or martinis or shots. Let's treat alcohol like the addictive life ruiner that it is (no different than cigarettes just that the cancer alcohol causes allows the victim to work and be social while destroying their life and the lives of their friends and loved ones - and often times complete strangers). Let's quit treating alcoholism like a lack of fucking will power and look at it for the evil, crappy, horrendous destroyer of families, jobs, relationships and lives that it really is. Death in a fucking bottle, 100 proof.

Yes, there are plenty of people who can go to a bar and have one drink (and maybe two but with most states at .08 two drinks put a person over the legal limit for alcohol consumption). Sure, in a perfect world we all go to bars with a designated driver (or to christmas parties and family cookouts where drives home have been arranged). Alcohol is used as a social lubricant and those who can't drink it (recovering alcoholics) or don't want to drink it (intelligent people) have rare opportunities to attend 'dry' social settings or functions. Alcohol = unity and success in too many instances in this society and yet mistakes made when over the influence are treated (quite hypocritcally) as moral infractions - and alcoholism is looked upon as a major moral failing. If a party is held most times it is easier to not invite a recovering alcoholic than to not serve alcohol and ruin everyone elses fun.

Let's quit glamorizing drinking and we'll see a more public outcry of drinking drivers.

How many photos have been posted right here on DU of meet-ups in bars and of oh so cute pics of drunken DUers? See how funny it is? How cool drinking is? Thank God people on DU who go to these meet ups have designated drivers. Or do they? How many here will admit to driving drunk and just not getting caught?

[rocktivity]

32. Two-time drunken drivers SHOULDN'T HAVE LICENSES AT ALL.

Punish the driver, not the car!

:headbang:
rocknation

[Debi]

41. Forever? for the rest of their lives? Even if they get sober and

have paid their debt to society?

[trotsky]

44. Do you think there should be a limit to the number of chances they get?

The number of lives they take?

Or should they always get a "do over" card when they promise they've changed their ways?

Driving is a privilege, not a right.

[Debi]

50. You are correct

which is why I think bars should be gotten rid of. Why provide a place that people can drive to in order to drink and then drive home - drunk. Quit serving alcohol at parities! Quit providing the murderous tool used in drunk driving cases, if a person isn't drinking they can't drive drunk!!!!!!!


We are a loathsome society that glamorizes drinking and then ostracizes those who don't 'do it right'. I hate drinking PERIOD.

Alcohol destroys lives. Alcoholism destroys lives. Drinking and driving is just one VERY SMALL problem of alcoholism.

If our society treated using alcohol the way we do smoking we'd have far less drinking drivers. If we addressed our double standard of drinking for socialization and popularity but then denouncing those who make terrible mistakes when drunk we may be on to something.

How fucking sanctimonious all of us can be here. I think people who make terrible mistakes deserve the chance to start over. I don't think they should be punished for a lifetime.

[trotsky]

52. How fucking sanctimonious indeed.

People can do whatever the hell they want with their own bodies. But the moment their choices start affecting others, that's it. Game over. Appropriate actions must be taken to protect the innocent. But what about the people who keep making the same bad choices? What do you propose we do? I notice you didn't bother answering my question - just how many "do overs" does someone get? How many people can they kill before it's "too much"?

Eh, enjoy your crusade. I don't give a rat's ass about drunk drivers, so I guess it's a good thing they have somebody.

[Debi]

56. Yes, I can tell you don't give a rat's about drunk drivers. n/t

[Solon]

60. Problem is that doesn't WORK...

Hello, we tried that type of stuff already, it is now viewed as a RESOUNDING failure, so don't even go there. Why not, I don't know, reward RESPONSIBLE behavior, and punish irresponsible behavior? Even better, why not, I don't know, provide people with means to act responsibly when they can't drive, like provide a "drunk bus" that can send some people home. I know many bars have taxi cab services on speed dial and REFUSE to serve people that are already intoxicated, that SOP for many of them, some even confiscate car keys from drunks if they think they are going to drive home. For house parties, I don't know, do what me and my friends used to do, you get drunk at the party, you crash at the party(spend the night), its really simple, we had a jar, told everyone, at the door, to throw their keys into it, then put the jar on top of the fridge, out of plain sight near the back, hell one time it fell BEHIND the damn thing, one of the few times I'm glad it WASN'T plastic, it probably would have melted otherwise, jammed between the walls and the coils behind the fridge. The point being there are responsible ways to "have a good time", nowadays, for myself, I lost the taste for alcohol around the age of 22, don't ask me why, I can't really explain it. Now, I go to bars and clubs for socializing only, being the de facto designated driver because I don't drink anymore, my friends still do, and I make sure they get home safe. That's responsible behavior, if people can't think ahead to HOW they are going to get home, they shouldn't be drinking in the first place, and they ALSO should be punished, severely, for endangering others by driving while intoxicated. Driving is a privelege, how about, instead of special license plates, why not special licenses in their wallets? This wouldn't be a scarlet letter, so to speak, but basically pins down their history for breaking the law, a condition of being allowed to have a license to drive in the first place, it is a privelege after all.

[Debi]

62. I see your points. I agree prohibition didn't work. I still don't

think branding people's vehicles is the way to thwart drunken driving.

[rocktivity]

61. That would depend how on far apart the offenses took place

If the second DUI occured within, say, five years of having your license restored after the first one, I don't see why you should get a second chance.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Debi]

63. okay. nt

[Duer 157099]

34. What I want to know is who is driving while asleep?

Remember that article about people taking Ambien and then sleep-driving?

Those are the people I want to watch out for on the road. Ambien makers should put something in their drug, oh say maybe something that makes your skin glow green or something, that only has a short half-life, consistent with when the person should be asleep (in bed) anyway. You know, then when you see green-glowing drivers, well, you really avoid them as best you can.

Who's on board here, anyone? :-)

But seriously... those sleep-drivers scare me

[xxqqqzme]

47. enforce the laws

repeat offenders have their licenses revoked no need to wear a red 'D' around your neck. I'm sick of this rethug 'big daddy' bullsh*t.

[trotsky]

54. The problem comes in because

revoking a license doesn't stop someone from driving.

[Debi]

57. Maybe we should hobble them n/t

[dysfunctional press]

75. putting them in jail for awhile will.

there should be serious MANDATORY jail time for DUI's.

if people knew that they would have to go to jail for 5 years for the first offense- DUI's would drop A LOT starting immediately.

[trotsky]

77. I agree with a lot of pie-in-the-sky ideas to stop drunk driving.

You have an excellent idea. But it would require building about twice the number of jails we have right now. How many billions would that cost?

The plates are cheap, they're easy to administer, and they help law enforcement identify repeat offenders. It's something we can do RIGHT NOW.

[dysfunctional press]

78. the plates won't stop people from driving drunk-

jail time will.

pass a law tomorrow that a first dui offense carries a mandatory 5-year prison term, and LOTS of people will become much more sober VERY quickly.

it's the only thing that's gonna work- that's why we have jails and laws in the first place.

[trotsky]

79. Of course not.

But they're a tool to help law enforcement target the worst offenders, and most importantly it can be done cheaply. I think you overestimate the number of people who would A) be aware of the law, and B) change their habits because of it.

[dysfunctional press]

82. the plates are useless-

what about when the worst offenders borrow a car...or rent one...or buy a cheap one and get temporary tags...

and what about the innocent sober people that drive the car with drinker plates who end up getting harassed by law enforcement, and the police time wasted in doing so...?

[trotsky]

83. They're not useless.

They're a useful tool in preventing drunk driving. MADD agrees. They're the law here in Minnesota, so too bad for drunk drivers here. Maybe they can move to your state and have an easier time there.

[ellie]

55. We have these in

Ohio. They are yellow with red letters and very easily identifiable. And there are a lot where I live.

[Ernesto]

58. The difference between a red state & a Blue state? n-t

[yellowdogmi]

67. Here is a reasonable solution

How about supplying a portion of the alcohol taxes collected to the counties to provide a shuttle that operates specifically to shuttle people from bars and taverns to their homes. It would be a simple solution to combat the problem. As far as the license plates, I find them abhorent. I sympathize with any of you who have lost a loved one but there should be a way to punish people with out ruining their entire lives. The loss of a license can adversely affect the ability to gain employment. How long should a person pay the price for a mistake?

[trotsky]

68. "a way to punish people with out ruining their entire lives"

How can a license plate, assigned only when someone has MULTIPLE offenses, come even close "ruining" a life? The person has had several chances to sober up and STOP DRIVING DRUNK. Avoiding the plate is quite easy. How many free passes do you propose they get?

In your perfect system, let's say this shuttle is up & running but someone chooses not to use it and drives anyway. Now what? We're right back where we started.

[dysfunctional press]

76. i support mandatory jail time for a first offense

if people knew that they would go to jail for 5 years for the first DUI offense- drunk driving would drop off precipitously tomorrow.

[yellowdogmi]

86. perhaps.

But then our penal institutions would be overcrowded and anyone can make a mistake. With the new level at .08 in most states I would dare to venture that a large portion of the population has commited the offense within the last year. My idea is to provide a safe solution to the problem that does not ruin anyones life and is funded with the use of taxes already collected for alcohol sales.

[hedgehog]

87. Way upthread someone said that these plates say:

"I am a drunk driver and can not be reformed" If someone managed to be caught and convicted of two DWIs, I think that that is a fair statement. It only makes sense to place them under probation to be stopped and checked at random whenever they are driving to ensure that they are sober. The plates would merely identify them to a patrol officer.


Draconian punishments don't stop drunks from driving because drunks will never admit that they are impaired whether they've had three beers or thirteen. How do you write a law to cover the person who has one to many at a party once a year and the guy who pounds down as much as he can hold every Saturday? Taking away licenses doesn't help because all you need to drive is a car and a set of keys. At least a red plate helps the police to spot likely offenders before they kill or maim someone.