Slashdot Mirror
An Ignition Interlock In Every Car?
ryeguy-nm writes "Monday the New Mexico House of Representatives passed a bill that would require every car sold in the state to have an ignition interlock. This device is essentially a breath analyzer that prevents the car from being started if the driver is drunk. The bill would require that every new car sold be equipped with an ignition interlock by 2008 and every used car by 2009. Ignition interlocks require a breath test, which takes 30 seconds to complete, to start the car as well as random 'rolling retests' to discourage others from taking the test for you. These rolling retests require the driver to take the test as the car is moving. If the driver fails a retest, the horn sounds and the lights flash until the car is turned off. The bill's lead proponent is Dem. Ken Martinez who believes the bill is a quick fix for New Mexico's drunk driving problems. Opponents of the bill argue that it penalizes car dealerships and law abiding citizens who have never driven drunk. The bill makes no mention of who will have to pay for the device, but it will most likely be auto dealers and citizens who have to sell their cars. It seems to me that impinging upon the liberty of an entire state is a little bit too extreme. Perhaps tougher penalties and larger fines for people who actually drive drunk would be a better idea."
Ahh... the results of egalitarianism are starting to become all so clear.
The days of enlightenment liberalism are quickly coming to an end.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
If you were a reasonable person, you would understand this, and then agree to have this device installed simply becuase one does not know when one is drunk, and this device allows one to know and enforce the law. Thus cutting down the major source of auto accidents - drunk driving.
Incorrigibles who want to circumvent the device will just have to run the risk of getting caught.
That's all.
4) Disabled people get special parking lots etc. etc. You could start helping them by not abusing those instead of using their problems as an excuse for your own lazyness.
3) Sitting around doing nothing about drunken drivers is of course morally acceptable in your world, as opposed to some hypotethical 30-second delay that could prove fatal.
2) People that don't use public toilets and stay away from restaurants that use recycled plates (iich) will probably not want to use rental cars today anyway.
1) If this is a good argument for you I guess you could become a car-jacker instead of nagging so much.
It seems to me that impinging upon the liberty of an entire state is a little bit too extreme...
Wrong. First of all, its not the state, its people. Second, its not all people, its the people who actually drive, which IMO is probably about 50% of people. We must not forget the elderly, children, and people who use public transit and bikes. And as a member of this non-driving half of the population, I have a message for all you drivers: WAKE UP! I'm fed up with your drunk driving, reckless, cell phone chatting, falling-asleep-at-the-wheel, exhaust-fume-producing, stereo-blasting, drag-racing, ped-running-over-on-a-yellow bullshit!
I think a device that takes 30 seconds to remind a driver that safety is their #1 goal before every drive is a great idea. Lord knows y'all aren't thinking about it unaided.
Sounds like I've figured out your problem... if you drive drunk, you're a selfish fucking asshat. Give me one good reason others should have their risk of dying significantly increased just so you can have a drink or two. Yes, just one good reason. There isn't one.
You people need to realize that neither drinking nor driving is an actual necessity. Personally, I do both. If I drink at home, there's no problem. If I drink at a bar or restaurant, I can walk home, I can take a cab, or a friend can drive me home. What part of that is so damn tough for you people to understand?
Many thousands of people die every year because some monkey juggler such as yourself decided "I'm such a skilled vehicle operator that I can do it safely even while intoxicated. My reflexes are so god-like that I need not be subject to the same rules as the common man."
So as long as I've earned myself a -1, Flamebait, I'll leave you with this: may a random family member of yours die in the street like a mangy dog in the middle of the night. It's a little thing we like to call 'karma.'
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
The DNC does exactly the opposite. They just buy votes by promising their constituency they'll give money to them that they took at gunpoint from someone else (welfare, "universal" healthcare, etc).
You forgot "education." I really hate it when someone takes MY money to help SOMEONE ELSE become as smart as or smarter than me. I also hate it when other people are able to eat the same amount as I am. By far the worst is being surrounded by people who are just as healthy as I am.
You see, I deserve to be richer, smarter, better-looking, safer, better-fed, and healthier than anyone else. Me me me.
(BTW, please don't ask how we satisfy our fundamentalist Christian constituency while at the same time enacting laws that go against the most basic tenets of the Judeo-Christian ethic: the Golden Rule and the admonishment to help those less fortunate...we can't figure it out either!)
Careful, there. The proponents of such heavy-handed police-state tactics point to the fact that no-one in the U.S. has died from terrorism in the last two years as incontestible proof that the invasion of privacy, restrictions of rights, and nearly strip-searching large-breasted young adult women in public at the airport does, in fact WORK and protect us from evil terrorists.
-paul
Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.