Your article (Dec. 10) concerning the ex-judge who foiled a hit-run attempt by a drunk driver stated that the driver had his license suspended twice, the first time until July, 1986, then until 1989. Also, in the last 30 months he has been cited four times for speeding, once for running a red light, and once for running a stop sign.
My question is: Why was this menace permitted to drive? It obviously does no good to suspend his license. Most of us have had experiences with unlicensed or uninsured drivers who merrily go on driving. The one way to make sure that such drivers do not drive illegally is to impound their cars, at their expense.
Why was his license renewed each year with this background? Take away his car and you may save one or more lives.
Driving is not a right. It is a privilege and should be given only to those who drive sober and who drive with a license. Since they flout the law, the instruments--their cars--should be impounded. It would cost the taxpayers nothing, because if they do not pay for the cost of impounding, the cars can be sold at the point where the cost of impounding reaches the value of the car.
JEAN R. BERRY