There is no "silver bullet" for ending drunken driving.

In fairness to everyone, we all make stupid mistakes. But like a shot in the dark some of these mistakes are far worse than just stupid: They are tragic.

Driving under the influence is one such mistake. But the far greater and deadlier threat is repeat DUI offenders. They continue to drive drunk despite previous arrests.

By most estimates, repeat DUI offenders make up about a third of drunk driving arrests. And even though their licenses may be revoked, it is estimated that 50 percent to 75 percent of them still drive, even without a license. A repeat DUI offender's behavior is difficult to change. Many of them have severe alcohol problems.

Yet, our state's efforts to punish or rehabilitate them don't appear to be working. Repeat DUI offenses are commonplace in our state. Unfortunately, many also end in tragedy for the offender or an innocent victim. Recently, one such case in Morgantown has led to calls for a new law and repeal of an old law.

Appropriately enough, the Evans-Perry Bill is named for the victims of a drunk driving crash caused by an at least six-time repeat offender that claimed the lives of five people from two families in July 2007.

The bill is designed to help reduce DUI recidivism by mandating interlock devices for all offenders, introducing staggered sentencing and repeals an expungement provision for offenders under 21 in order to promote accurate record keeping of DUIs.

In the other effort, some prosecutors are correctly calling for repeal of an old law that only allows DUIs recorded in the past 10 years to be applied toward future charges and sentencing.

We agree with these county prosecutors. Expunging these offenses only serves to enable or even encourage repeat offenders to continue driving drunk by reducing their sentences for future DUI offenses.

There are good arguments for expunging conviction of first-offense DUIs after 10 years, but if any further DUIs are accumulated at any time in the future the repeat offender's prior cases should be restored to his record and used to extend revocation of licenses or jail time.

Other ideas are also worth debating to get repeat DUI offenders off the road. For example, lowering the blood-alcohol content limit for convicted DUI offenders or creating a state Web site that lists the names, addresses, photos, descriptions of offenders' crimes, etc.

We call upon our courts and our lawmakers to make repeat DUI offenders an issue now. New solutions, mandatory sentencing and innovative enforcement are what's needed. But whatever the cost, repeat DUI offenders must pay a higher price in treatment or time in jail before someone else does.