States change their laws so repeat drunk drivers have ignition interlocks installed

[Genestho]

Lautenberg Measure To Help Reduce Repeat Drunk Driving Crashes Becomes Law, USA
Main Category: Alcohol / Addiction / Illegal Drugs
Article Date: 25 Jun 2008 - 2:00 PDT


Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) announced a measure he wrote to reduce drunk driving crashes and make our nation's roads safer is now law. The measure will require states to change their laws so repeat drunk drivers will have ignition interlocks installed on their cars and trucks. These devices prevent a car or truck from starting if a tube connected to a sensor detects alcohol on the driver's breath.

"Drunk driving remains an epidemic, as the thousands of American families who lose a loved one every year in a fatal crash involving alcohol know first-hand. Armed with the latest technology, we are making our roads safer and saving American lives," Senator Frank R. Lautenberg said. "Our law will not affect social drinkers-it is aimed squarely at drivers who repeatedly demonstrate they are too drunk to drive."
The Lautenberg measure was included in legislation signed by President Bush on June 6, which made technical corrections to the 2005 "SAFETEA-LU" highway bill. Research shows that use of ignition interlocks are more likely to deter repeat drunk driving than simply suspending one's license.

"Interlocks work and would have prevented my son Courtney's death if mandated in 1988," said Glynn Birch, MADD national president. "They are up to 90 percent effective in reducing repeat offenses and eight states currently have interlocks mandated for all convicted drunk drivers-we are working with the other 42 to increase the interlock sanction and in a couple to advocate for an interlock law that doesn't even exist."

In the original 2005 SAFETEA-LU bill, Lautenberg authored provisions which allowed federal grants to states which pass tougher penalties for drivers with very high blood-alcohol levels-.15 percent, which is nearly twice the current legal limit. The Senator also wrote a measure to require a study about the fairness of laws which allow a drunk driver to avoid penalties by refusing to take a blood alcohol test, even for fatal crashes.

Lautenberg, chairman of the Surface Transportation Subcommittee on the Senate Commerce Committee and the Transportation Safety Subcommittee on the Environment and Public Works Committee, is one of the Senate's leaders on transportation safety initiatives, including:

- The law encouraging states to set the minimum drinking age at 21.

- Laws requiring states to set the maximum Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) levels to .08, preventing hundreds of drunk driving deaths per year.

- An amendment approved in 2003 by the Senate Commerce Committee on truck safety, which prompted the trucking industry to agree not to pursue using heavier, longer trucks on the nation's roads for the next six years.

- An amendment approved by the Senate to require the Federal Aviation Administration to bring airport runways up to safety standards, following incidents at New Jersey's Teterboro Airport and other airports nationwide.

- A bill that was unanimously approved by the Senate Commerce Committee to reauthorize the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The Senator's bill would improve railroad safety (hours of service, grade crossing safety and new safety technology) and authorize appropriations for FRA programs, research and development and grants for six years.

http://lautenberg.senate.gov/

[Tank]

It should be done after the first time - lets not give them a chance to be repeat offenders - and make it illegal for them to drive ANY other car without one installed.

AND make them pay for the (hopefully expensive) installation of the kit.

Consequences for actions.

[Genestho]

It should be done after the first time - lets not give them a chance to be repeat offenders - and make it illegal for them to drive ANY other car without one installed.

AND make them pay for the (hopefully expensive) installation of the kit.

Consequences for actions.

Agreed, totally.

In sweden all auto's are coming out factory fitted with IID's in all new autos by 2012, and alot of states in USA are looking at using these devices on first time offenders, in particular New Mexico who already, have been using these devices 10 years on recidivists, from 2009 they will be used on first time offenders.

The way it appears to work in Australia, and USA, is user pays installation, maintenance and circumvention.

The right to drive is earnt back, with appropriately monitored treatment completed and penalties attached to orginal offence, there are penalties for circumvention and driving without these devices installed...

One of the purposes of the section 65 review of Land Transport Act is to look at research and studies completed of IID's world wide and Australia and look at the implementation of them on recidivists...its a start..

[alanzs]

Great idea. Take drunk driving seriously, for all of our sakes.

[imdying]

A lot of effort for fuck all gain. Do it once, do it right... permanent ban, and apply it backwards to anyone who has ever been caught.

[scumdog]

Speaking of the '21 as the legal drinking age' thing, at college last week a very wise man explained WHY those under 21 are so badly affected by alcohol, made bloody sobering viewing I must say..

[sidecar bob]

A lot of effort for fuck all gain. Do it once, do it right... permanent ban, and apply it backwards to anyone who has ever been caught.

Thats fine to say, & i agree with you fully, But how does it get enforced? by pulling up every car every day & checking them.
The interlock device is the equivalent of having Scumdog sitting alongside every repeat drunk driver that has been convicted & making them blow in the alcatec every time they drive.
Saves scummy a lot of time & makes these idiots think just a bit when they get behind the wheel.

[KiwiRat]

Speaking of the '21 as the legal drinking age' thing, at college last week a very wise man explained WHY those under 21 are so badly affected by alcohol, made bloody sobering viewing I must say..

Enlighten us if you could.

[scumdog]

Enlighten us if you could.

It is long-winded and complicated but it involves the still-developing brain and chemicals that involve developement of the young nervous system and how chemicals including alcohol affect this..

[awayatc]

good idea.....
And also penalties should hit where it hurts....
what about losing vehicle if pulled over second time over the limit..?
Losing permanently..not just impounding....

[Genestho]

A lot of effort for fuck all gain. Do it once, do it right... permanent ban, and apply it backwards to anyone who has ever been caught.

I can only speak for the situation which slammed into and killed my husband and two friends and himself, and traumatised three children for life, the driver was drunk, and had been caught four times previously, he was "Indefinately Disqualified" had been for 7 years..fancy speak for..... permanently banned.

The only way a permanent ban can work beyond a piece of paper, which is not available to us, is to grab this bunch, chuck em in jail, and promptly throw the key over the Harbour Bridge...

[Genestho]

It is long-winded and complicated but it involves the still-developing brain and chemicals that involve developement of the young nervous system and how chemicals including alcohol affect this..

Scary ay? Im just reading up about alcohol related harm stuff too, once you get into it all, such a huge umbrella, the harm its causing right accross the board is astounding..

[slimjim]

cool.......................... they fit airbags ,:msn-wink:

[imdying]

Thats fine to say, & i agree with you fully, But how does it get enforced? by pulling up every car every day & checking them.
The interlock device is the equivalent of having Scumdog sitting alongside every repeat drunk driver that has been convicted & making them blow in the alcatec every time they drive.
Saves scummy a lot of time & makes these idiots think just a bit when they get behind the wheel.

This stops them driving any one of a number of different cars how?

[Genestho]

These are very comprehensive devices and are far more advanced than they have ever been, with data logged and depending on how this is setup this is an immediate stop to a drunk driver.

If these devices are implemented the way the States and Australia do, then the penalties for driving a car without a device fitted - absolutely have to back the consequences, and reflect any circumvention attempts.

If studies of these devices show a reduction in recidivism ranging from 40-90% it seems a far better option than to do nothing at all, as we do currently...

[Genestho]

good idea.....
And also penalties should hit where it hurts....
what about losing vehicle if pulled over second time over the limit..?
Losing permanently..not just impounding....


Absolutely, I thinks its Queensland who last year implemented permanent impounding of vehicles..the car being the unintended weapon needs as much focus as the driver

[sidecar bob]

This stops them driving any one of a number of different cars how?

You tell me, Im interested in a solution to this problem, Not a whole bunch of negativity as to why not.
Perhaps if you lend your car to a recidivist driunk driver you should get your car confiscated & your arse kicked, That may help a bit.

[alanzs]

You tell me, Im interested in a solution to this problem, Not a whole bunch of negativity as to why not.
Perhaps if you lend your car to a recidivist driunk driver you should get your car confiscated & your arse kicked, That may help a bit.

Making drunk driving absolutely unacceptable would be a place to start. There is a cultural denial here that harms people. The second highest expenditure by NZ'ers of disposable income, after travel, is alcohol. It is almost impossible to find any books on alcoholism at the book stores. I know, I have tried. I have a relative who is obviously an alcoholic, but everyone just says he's fine. There are books on every other health issue available, but at the three Whitcoulls I went to, there was nothing.

Install alcohol measuring devices in all pubs/bars, etc. Make it a part of getting a license to sell alcohol.

The car the drunk is driving at the time of arrest, regardless of ownership, is sold at auction and all proceeds go to victims assistance of those injured by drunk drivers. First offense.

Make alcohol abuse awareness a priority in the healthcare sector. Get rid of those stupid "It's not what you drink, it's how you drink" ads. They are deceptive; it is what you drink, not just how you drink it. You don't usually ruin your life drinking water. This relative of mine even asked his doctor if the doctor thought he may have an alcohol problem. The doctor told him to switch from the normal 3-5 G&T's a night (which he has been drinking for the last 40 years) to red wine. Amazing!

:gob:

[ManDownUnder]

Great idea. It's like airbags - expensive to start with but as soon as they become accepted/standard practice, they're everywhere, the price drops and the car makes get a bit of good PR out of it ("helping keep the nation safe by avoiding drunk drive crashes" yada yada spin doctory stuff).

[imdying]

You tell me, Im interested in a solution to this problem, Not a whole bunch of negativity as to why not.
Perhaps if you lend your car to a recidivist driunk driver you should get your car confiscated & your arse kicked, That may help a bit.Could start by removing the problem at the source... NZ needs booze why?

[slimjim]

Could start by removing the problem at the source... NZ needs booze why?




nooooooo :weep: cause i like a handle on a poker run.... :weep:

[sidecar bob]

Could start by removing the problem at the source... NZ needs booze why?

Oh dear, somebody always goes a bit too far, hehe.
Im not anti booze, neither i believe is the starter of this thread, it just needs to be severely divorced from driving.

[Indoo]

Making drunk driving absolutely unacceptable would be a place to start. :

And the courts should be leading from the front, not dismissing charges on ridiculous technicalities or loop holes in the law. A few drink drivers now have even escaped conviction based on the argument that the consequences of the conviction outweigh the severity of the offense, what sort of message is that sending?

I think allowing people one chance before nailing them is reasonable, but thats all anyone should ever get - one single chance, the consequences are too high to give them anymore.

[imdying]

Oh dear, somebody always goes a bit too far, hehe.
Im not anti booze, neither i believe is the starter of this thread, it just needs to be severely divorced from driving.Yeah, I'm not either... I have a wonderful collection of all sorts of goodness :D

However, the courts refuse to do anything worthwhile if you're caught, it appears that few enough people actually care that it makes the governments efforts to make it socially unacceptable worthless, and that doesn't leave a lot of options.

[scumdog]

This stops them driving any one of a number of different cars how?

Oh, it won't stop them doing that I guess.
But I believe the penalty for doing so in the countries that have interlocks is instant jail for those caught driving a car without one when they have been ordered by the Court to drive only those fitted with interlocks.

And the car is impounded so I believe.

[imdying]

Good on those countries then... :lol: Would probably be nice to live in a country where the courts have teeth.

[Genestho]

Making drunk driving absolutely unacceptable would be a place to start. There is a cultural denial here that harms people. The second highest expenditure by NZ'ers of disposable income, after travel, is alcohol. It is almost impossible to find any books on alcoholism at the book stores. I know, I have tried. I have a relative who is obviously an alcoholic, but everyone just says he's fine. There are books on every other health issue available, but at the three Whitcoulls I went to, there was nothing.

Install alcohol measuring devices in all pubs/bars, etc. Make it a part of getting a license to sell alcohol.

The car the drunk is driving at the time of arrest, regardless of ownership, is sold at auction and all proceeds go to victims assistance of those injured by drunk drivers. First offense.

Make alcohol abuse awareness a priority in the healthcare sector. Get rid of those stupid "It's not what you drink, it's how you drink" ads. They are deceptive; it is what you drink, not just how you drink it. You don't usually ruin your life drinking water. This relative of mine even asked his doctor if the doctor thought he may have an alcohol problem. The doctor told him to switch from the normal 3-5 G&T's a night (which he has been drinking for the last 40 years) to red wine. Amazing!

:gob:

Heh, I see you've been reading my website, I have a couple of articles in regards to the Host reponsibility ideas, and that car needs to go to a worthy cause...it all makes sense to the little people ay....perhaps the Doctor thought the old "A Red Wine a Day keeps the heart disease away" might have been of some help?

There is going to be a very important National Alcohol Plan

http://www.ndp.govt.nz/moh.nsf/indexcm/ndp-ndp-action-plan-consultation
(not for the faint hearted), that addresses the alcohol related harm issues from the family/community outwards (Police, NGO's, Courts, MOJ, MOH, Drug and alcohol providers, education providers, Maori and Pacific reps, Whanau/Family and even individuals)

With submissions invited from almost all sectors of society, implementation is over a period of five years...this could be a crtitical turning point in the way alcohol is regulated, alcohol abuse prevention, educated and treated, information co-alated to make best practise decisions..

I have started writing my submissions on behalf of badd in regards to quite a few of the factors addressed in the plan, I have made a few suggestions in the Host Reponsibility Area (Alco testers and mandatory transport options as part of Host responsibilty and licensing requirements), Transport options, Recidivist drink driving, and Marketing Drink Driving Advertising..Education, and Treatment programs, my theory is we have to prevent and educate and share information, start shared databases of information for all sectors in the alcohol related community..

This is such a huge topic, and covers so many sectors, but I recon its goals are very fair and seem to target the right places..

Bout bloody time..

Im not anti alcohol myself but I can see its affects and harm it causes our families, and the wider scope.
I can see where its not being addressed, but Im just one of thousands of submitters, of that I have no doubt...

[Genestho]

Good on those countries then... :lol: Would probably be nice to live in a country where the courts have teeth.

They wont have teeth if the issue is not highlighted, probed and annoyed about...which it is, and I think you'd be surprised the amount of people that care enough to help change our "she'll be right" lets get falling over pissed (it aint pretty) and drive (fucken ugly) culture.

Glad your not on my team bro, we'd get nothing done.....heh:chase:

[Forest]

The car the drunk is driving at the time of arrest, regardless of ownership, is sold at auction and all proceeds go to victims assistance of those injured by drunk drivers. First offense.


I provide some of my employees with company cars. So I'd be very hesitant to support a system of compulsory confiscation.

[sidecar bob]

I provide some of my employees with company cars. So I'd be very hesitant to support a system of compulsory confiscation.

Id be very hesitant to employ people that would lend their company car to a repeat drunk driver.
Maybe you need to P.M the thread starter & enquire about raising two wee boys without their dad & the man of her life, im quite sure she would be happy to share.
I get the impression its a tad more inconvienent than having a car confiscated.
You sound kind of selfish not wanting to support a system that may possibly affect you if one of your staff was irresponsible.

[imdying]

They wont have teeth if the issue is not highlighted, probed and annoyed about...Rubbish, you might remember a certain referendum on violent crime?

[Genestho]

Yes dear I do..and back then there was not the "gathering" together of "victims" that there is now, and it happens weekly.

Then and Now are two different places in NZ, as are the start of intiatives and changes that have been and are bought about by victims standing up against the bs thats been dumped on us all. And it does not change anything for these us but helps the people that will come behind us for the battles yet to come. Thats another story anyway..

You obviously have not read the NAAP? This is not the same as a referendum (which I know- wasted millions of tax payers dollers on a 90 something percent vote, and didnt follow through - and the answer for that is? I dont know)

Its a waste of time being negative, and all I do in my role is to assist in pushing for sensible solutions towards reduction of recidivist drink driving.

I wouldnt wish my worst enemy to go through what our three families are, and I hope you never have to face the unthinkable...oh thats right..."It wont happen to you" Right?:sunny:

[imdying]

Indeed....

[Forest]

Id be very hesitant to employ people that would lend their company car to a repeat drunk driver.
Maybe you need to P.M the thread starter & enquire about raising two wee boys without their dad & the man of her life, im quite sure she would be happy to share.
I get the impression its a tad more inconvienent than having a car confiscated.
You sound kind of selfish not wanting to support a system that may possibly affect you if one of your staff was irresponsible.

The person I replied to suggested that cars be compulsorily confiscated and sold regardless of who the car belongs to.

How is it fair to confiscate a company car? Why should the company owner be punished?

[sidecar bob]

The person I replied to suggested that cars be compulsorily confiscated and sold regardless of who the car belongs to.

How is it fair to confiscate a company car? Why should the company owner be punished?

If you lent a firearm to an individual & they shot someone you would be in the shit, Hows this any different?

[awayatc]

Up to company to draw up proper agreement with employee....We are talking about second offence....
So would you give a company car to somebody who already been done once....?

Hire a convicted peadophile to babysit your kids?

"I am looking for a job, coz my last boss waz pizd ov wif me for lozin da worktruk....."

:scooter:

[Genestho]

The person I replied to suggested that cars be compulsorily confiscated and sold regardless of who the car belongs to.

How is it fair to confiscate a company car? Why should the company owner be punished?




How is it fair?
Its not...but how is it fair to other innocent road users to have to share the roads with jokers who have been sentenced and disqualified for fair reason, hooning around drunk because theyve been lent or provided a car?

The point you raise begs the questions: What Role does the Workplace have in its share of responsibilitiesfor drink driving?

If you have someone disqualified, driving your car drunk and dangerously, how does this reflect on "your" company?

Its a second offence scenario, and so there would have to be a contract signed on offering of the car as part of the position.