Penalties for criminal street racing in Kentucky would increase 5x if new House bill passes
FRANKFORT, Ky. (FOX 56) — A new bill targeting criminal street racing in the Commonwealth is advancing in Congress, but not without its critics.
The House Judiciary Committee approved House Bill 465 on Wednesday, according to a news release.
Rep. Beverly Chester-Burton, who represents part of Jefferson County, said the bill was modeled after the Louisville Metro Council's efforts to curb the illegal competition.
London mayor Randall Weddle faces another defamation lawsuit
'House Bill 465 is presented today as an effort to address the issue of street racing where it's been significantly affecting my area in Jefferson County,' she said. 'However, I have had other members throughout the community who have contacted me about street racing.'
The current penalty for street racing in Kentucky is a $200 fine, according to a news release. HB 465 would increase that amount to $1,000 for the first offense, potentially increasing to $2,000 for a second offense, Rep. Chester-Burton said.
John Blanton, R-Salyersville, said the bill could harm Kentucky tourism and dissuade drivers from participating in recreationally permitted street racing. Sponsors for HB 465 said it contains a provision that keeps recreational road racing exempt and only impacts illegal racing.
'I'm supportive of the bill, but I want to make sure we don't inadvertently prevent the tourism aspect that's going on in southeast Kentucky, where we're doing permitted road racing there,' Blanton said.
'I do have constitutional concerns, and I would like to research this further,' said Rep. T.J. Roberts, R-Burlington, who decided to vote 'pass,' on the bill, citing a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on excessive fines under the Eighth Amendment.
Rep. Mary Lou Marzian, D-Louisville, thanked Rep. Chester-Burton and House Majority Whip Jason Nemes for sponsoring HB 465, calling the legislature important.
London driver charged after vehicle found in Somerset Road ditch catches fire
All JOANN locations to close following buyout, including Kentucky hopeful
Penalties for criminal street racing in Kentucky would increase 5x if new House bill passes
'It's heartbreaking to see what happens—the devastation and the deaths of people—it's going to be all over the state before we know it,' Rep. Marzian said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Easter Sunday shooting suspect caught in Baton Rouge
RAYNE, La. (KLFY) — A man was arrested in connection with an Easter Sunday shooting on Lyman Avenue, Rayne Police Department said. Courtney Kendell Rogers, 35, was arrested and charged for attempted first degree murder, illegal use of weapons and aggravated criminal damage to property earlier today, police said. The incident, which occurred on April 20, allegedly involved multiple individuals in a violent exchange of gunfire on Lyman Avenue. The investigation, leading to multiple arrests. However, Rogers remained at large and was believed to be in the Baton Rouge area, police said. Yesterday, officials said they located and arrested Rogers in Baton Rouge. He was taken into custody based on his outstanding arrest warrant for attempted First Degree Murder. Rogers was subsequently booked into the East Baton Rouge Sheriff's Department Jail. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Duson man charged with attempted murder in Easter shooting in Rayne According to police, Rogers was transported to the from the East Baton Rouge Parish to the Acadia Parish Jail. He is currently held on a $700,000 bond. Church Point residents are no strangers to floods An Unsettled Weekend With More Storms in the Forecast… Storms pours eight inches of rain in St. Martin Parish Easter Sunday shooting suspect caught in Baton Rouge Congressman curses fellow lawmaker on House floor Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
After Trump restores fort names, it's time to end the silly renaming wars
After President Donald Trump restores the names of military bases that once honored Confederates, the left and the right need to call a name-change truce. During Tuesday's speech at Fort Bragg (formerly Liberty, and before that, Bragg again), Trump announced that his administration would be reviving the names of Fort Pickett, Fort Hood, Fort Gordon, Fort Rucker, Fort Polk, Fort A.P. Hill and Fort Lee. Those forts were renamed during the left's crazed push, in the aftermath of the George Floyd protests in 2020, to purge public-property references to any figure it deemed controversial. Advertisement Much of the frenzy was a ridiculous exercise in woke revisionism: The hysteria got so bad that not even Teddy Roosevelt, a once-hero of progressivism, was safe. Trump has made his disdain for the whole gambit clear: One of his first acts as president was giving Mount McKinley its name back. But both the left and the right made the argument for nixing the names of traitorous Confederates from public property, especially in cases where the names were picked during the 1950s and '60s, purely out of hostility toward the Civil Rights movement. Advertisement So both sides should be happy to learn that the restored fort names technically won't honor Confederates. During Trump's first term, Congress passed the bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act, which required the Pentagon's newly established Naming Commission to remove Confederate-linked names from Defense Department-owned property. So in order to give the forts their names back, the DOD is nodding to service members with identical surnames. That silly trick doesn't might go a bit too far: For instance, Fort Bragg is now named after a relatively unknown World War II private, Roland Bragg, instead of Confederate Gen. Braxton Bragg. Advertisement Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters But many of the new honorees do merit the recognition: Fort Rucker will now be named after heroic World War I Capt. Edward W. Rucker, instead of Confederate brigade commander Col. Edmund Rucker; Fort Robert E. Lee will now be simply 'Fort Lee,' paying tribute to Army Private Fitz Lee, a black Medal of Honor recipient who served in the Spanish-American War. This seems a fair compromise: The bases no longer reference men who fought against the Union, but locals will be able to call the forts by their long-held names. And Trump's move makes a point — the ever-escalating, Orwellian push to scrub flawed men from the history books needs to stop. Advertisement Tens of millions of taxpayer dollars were shelled out to change the fort names once, and a similar amount will presumably be spent changing them back. 'Round and 'round we go. In fact, every time any publicly owned building, street or base goes through this process, it's a costly, divisive mess. Without a cease-fire, it'll never stop; any man or woman deemed worthy of honoring today could be vilified tomorrow, as the standards and values of the time change. Enough is enough: By finding a solution that should satisfy both sides, Trump is offering an opportunity to end the expensive, renaming war the left started. An opportunity neither side should miss.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
2 women marry in Mexico's embassy in Guatemala fueling a debate over same-sex marriage
GUATEMALA CITY (AP) — Two Mexican women were married inside the grounds of Mexico's embassy in Guatemala on Friday, sparking anger in a nation that doesn't recognize same-sex marriage and debate over diplomatic sovereignty. The ceremony held in the embassy gardens was intended to celebrate Pride Month , which is celebrated every June, and the consulate said the marriage marked a step toward inclusion, respect and equality for all. 'We celebrate love without borders,' wrote the embassy in a post on the social media platform X. 'This is the first civil wedding of a same-sex couple at the Embassy of Mexico in Guatemala. It's a right granted to all individuals when both are Mexican citizens.' Shortly after, the ceremony sparked an outcry among conservative politicians in Guatemala, a largely Catholic country and one of a handful in Latin America that still doesn't recognize same-sex marriages. While such marriages aren't explicitly prohibited, Guatemalan law only refers to unions between a man and a woman. Allan Rodríguez, the head of the VAMOS party bloc and ally of former president Alejandro Giammattei, was among those to reject the wedding, writing in a statement that 'although the act may be protected under external jurisdictions, it clearly contradicts Guatemala's current legal framework.' According to the congressman, the properties where embassies are located 'are not foreign territory; they merely enjoy diplomatic privileges' and therefore are not a part of the Mexican state. He claimed considering them as such would 'violate constitutional principles of sovereignty, territorial unity, and the rule of law.' Rodríguez, a former president of Congress, is sanctioned by the United States for obstructing anti-corruption efforts and undermining democracy in Guatemala. The office of progressive President Bernardo Arévalo said that under international law embassies like Mexico's 'have territorial immunity and operate under the jurisdiction of the state they represent.' 'In this case, it is an activity carried out by the Mexican Consulate in Guatemala and aimed at Mexican citizens. Therefore, it is exclusively the responsibility of the Government of Mexico, through its diplomatic representation, to comment or speak on the matter,' the embassy statement said. Still, debate only continued on, with Elmer Palencia, a congressman for the VALOR party, created by the daughter of a former dictator, called the marriage, 'not an act of inclusion, but a provocation.' 'Out of respect for the host country, Mexico should refrain from that narrative. Guatemalan sovereignty and social institutions deserve that respect,' he said. Constitutional lawyer Edgar Ortíz contradicted the conservative politicians, saying the marriage doesn't violate Guatemala's sovereignty and complies with the Vienna Convention, which establishes that what happens on diplomatic premises 'are not subject to the host state's jurisdiction.' He noted that Guatemala's constitution establishes that the country will govern following international principles. 'In no way are Guatemala's laws being altered; the effects of this marriage will occur in Mexico, which does recognize same-sex marriage,' he said. 'Rather,' he added, 'it is the Guatemalan lawmakers who are violating sovereignty, by interfering in Mexico's affairs and trying to tell them what they can or cannot do. That seems far more discourteous.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
