DUI Bond law article misstates law

Two sessions ago the General Assembly passed a law that required a court to determine if a multiple offender was a danger to the community when setting bond. If a danger, certain restrictions on the bond were available. Another law stated if a person on bond committed another, the Court was to presume danger. Nothing stopped a court from setting a bond, but the court was required to make some determination before doing so.
This year the law was amended, so the court did not have to make a determination of danger. The court is required to determine if the offender needs to be restricted, while on bond.
An article in the Chattanooga Times Free Press claims that the law has been fixed, citing a defense lawyer who claims the origional law was unconstitutional.
The only "fix" to the law is that the court no longer has to determine if the offender is dangerous. The court still determines if the driver needs to be restrained by conditions on his bond. Let's hope that courts don't decide to abrogate their duties and ignore the need for bond conditions for multiple offenders. This article makes it sound like the law went away! It did not. Multiple offenders are still dangerous. They make up less than 1% of the population and are involved in 44% of the traffic fatalities (NTSB). Bond conditions are still neccessary for many, if not all of them. Read the article that misses those points at:
http://timesfreepress.com/news/2011/jul/09/law-fixes-dui-bond-problem/