Slashdot Mirror
Drunk Drivers in California May Get Mandated Interlock Devices
Convicted drunk drivers all over California may soon be required to install and pay for the use of ignition interlock devices, at a cost of $50-100 per month, plus installation. Says the article: "State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, wants to expand a program already in place in four California counties, including Alameda, and 24 other states. Under the proposed state law Hill will introduce Monday, anyone convicted of driving under the influence would be required to install an ignition interlock device in their car for six months on a first offense and a year on a second conviction." Though interlock devices could be fitted to check for other conditions as well, the usual case (as described on this Wikipedia page) is that they base the ability to operate a car on blood alcohol content. Already in California, interlock devices are mandatory for those re-arrested for DUI while "driving on a suspended license due to a DUI conviction."
I really don't think that'll help, mainly because those that are already intoxicated are already not of sound-mind and are not thinking about penalties. Adding penalties isn't going to solve the problem.
Unfortunately the only thing that I can think of that might make a dent would be to penalize establishments that serve patrons until they're legally drunk (as there are a lot of places with laws that should make establishments cut-off those that are drunk from continuing to be served) but given that drunks continuing to buy more drinks is what keeps the drinking establishments open, I don't think such penalties will ever be enacted.
Remember, it's those 10-20% of consumers of a product that consume it to excess that make the product profitable. Casual drinkers aren't where the profit is, binge or excessive drinkers are.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
You do not ruin a life by driving drunk. Drunk drivers only ruin someone else life when they have accidents which they are more prone to do. But simply driving over the legal limit often has no impact whatsoever at all on others or the drunken driver.
Except that these are the current punishments (up until the third time, where I believe the punishment is rather harsher) in most places. They really don't work very well.
The drink drivers simply ignore the bans.
Personally, I'd be fully in favour of "you're never allowed to drive without taking a breathalyser test for the rest of your life - you clearly can't be trusted to make that decision yourself". I can see your argument that the fees are somewhat government gold digging, but I don't see any reasonable way to do this, and cover the costs of hardware, and checking that it works, without charging the people who commit the crime a fee.
Here in Alaska we have laws for repeat DUI offenders. You forfeit the car you are driving. If you borrowed a car from a friend,
too bad for him. The judges sometimes have leniency on rental cars. Pretty soon, DUI, losing the car while making payments
does not look too attractive anymore.
I think placing a red background on your Driver License picture meaning at least one DUI within 5 years, would help. So if you
want to borrow Joe's car, he can look at the license and say "not a good idea, Sam."
Actually, in a brave experiment, we've actually decriminalized DUIs - because finding DUI requires getting a felony conviction including all the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt rules and all that. It's a complex enough conviction that DUI convictions are low.
Instead, what happens is there's a system of fines which are civil in nature, and beyond the first you get your car impounded instantly for a day, then a week, and a month. And all you have to do is blow 0.05.
Far lower requirements to lock someone up for a day and it apparently has an effect. Getting a criminal conviction takes time and courts, giving people fines and raising their insurance and impounding their cars is more of a bylaw style offense and can be instantly implemented.
DO it enough times and the insurance company mandates interlocks, which for some is a death sentence because their license is marked as having to drive an interlocked vehicle. Which means they are no longer able to drive a company vehicle (because no company wants to pay for an interlock installation), be it a car, truck, bus, whatever.
And we're not talking about cheap fines - $400 is cheap, but impound, towing and other fees bring that up to $1000 or so.
That may be the way to do it - then add get your license suspended enough times and you lose it. Go through Driver's Ed and take the tests all over again. (We have graduated licensing, so that's another year of having to be supervised followed by a couple of years of solo but under heavy restrictions including zero tolerance for impaired driving and only a single passenger, etc).
Getting convictions is hard, cycling through people is a lot easier. And having to get to work without a car gets the message across. And having your insurance rates go up because they're told of the incident to which they can apply their own actuarial tables and jack up your rates. That also means a checkpoint can easily detain 10+ people in one night with little to no paperwork since no formal charges will be laid.
How about involuntary DUIer's?
I took the sleeping aid Lunesta (Ambien(eszopiclone)), I remember just about to hit the pillow and "came to" in a police station for DUI. Not only that, but I sideswiped one parked car and destroyed another within 500 feet of my place, with no memory of it.
The report claimed my pants unzipped, belt unbuckled and generally unkeep, hell I was lucky to of been dressed at all. I blew a 0 three times on a breathalyser which takes 45 minutes to recalibrate after each test (I have to take their word for any of that); it was the blood test that took me down, apparently I Ok'd it; a breathalyser is all I'm required by law and I knew that.
I had an ignition interlock installed that I had to blow into before the car would start, it was nothing but problems, from it's aluminum wire interface to the copper of the cars main power line to getting the blow down, I've sat many times trying to get the interlock to accept the "blow".
When I had it removed (a year later) they acted like it was the first time one was ever removed, it took my new drivers license as proof and even then they weren't that sure. As soon as I drove home I checked the splice and sure enough a 28 gauge wire was used to join a 10 gauge wire, and by it's connections I figure this persons first electrical experience.
$100 a month it cost to drive down and have the interlock read. Now they've gone to "ankle bracelets" that monitor a person 24/7 at $100 a week to be read.
I post this in my attempt to warn others of the side effect of "sleep walking" when taking Ambien/Lunesta or the like, If I hadn't driven (and where to?) I might of never known. I'll never take it again and do advise others to avoid them.
Patient counseling info for such drugs almost without exception specifically and explicitly mention the possibility of this very side effect, and the doctor or pharmacist, or both, tells you to NEVER combine it with alcohol, and suggests having someone hide your car keys and/or keep close watch on you, especially when you first start the medication (though it can still happen during future doses the risk is generally lower, unless combined with alcohol). If you weren't strongly warned of such possibilities someone was negligent. They knew about it before the drug was even FDA approved.
It's still a valid warning that bears repeating. Sedative-hypnotic CNS depressants are kind of scary stuff and also tend to be more of a band-aid that doesn't really address the underlying cause of the sleep problem anyway. Certainly no reason to change penalties for drunk driving though.
Two things, compared to the cost of a DUI, a cab fare is a total bargain.
Secondly, if cabs are generally perceived as too expensive, then there is a market for some kind of private van service that makes runs from the area with the bars. Load 10 drunks into a passenger van, get their addresses, let a computer pick the most efficient route, and charge each of them half the cab fare. If the usual cab fare was $30, that would be $150 and if you can make the round trip in an hour, and do a couple trips per Fri/Sat. night, it could be a decent sort of mid-low-income job. Better than McDs at least. There are plenty of people for whom $6-800/wk would be a good income.
Anyway, part of the problem with DUI in America, is that (aside from some very few exceptions) there is no other way to get home except by private vehicle. Even towns with busses usually shut those down before the bars let out.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
So what you're suggesting is get a DUI, and we'll ruin your life. I mean, I hate people drink driving, but ruining their life is not a good way of turning them into a functioning member of society, it's a good way of turning them into an alcoholic criminal.
The thought is that if they knew getting caught would ruin their lives, they might stop. Today, there's no reason to not drive drunk. The expected cost of driving drunk is less than the cost of a cab. So it's rational to drive drunk. So long as the cheapest/easiest option is driving drunk, people will still do it.
Learn to love Alaska
BACtrack S80 Pro Breathalyzer Portable Breath Alcohol Tester. -- $120 on Amazon
It's not going to solve the problem for people with terrible judgement, but it can help. I have one I carry in my laptop bag, which I have to have with me just about at all times for work. If I'm at a party and somebody shouldn't be driving I'll offer it up. And really it's hard for them to say no. Really? No? You're "good"? Come on man, it's fun. And it is fun (in a nerdy way). So far it's saved one friend, you know sort has had a little too much, but boy.. had a lot to eat and it's been hours since his last beer, but it's pretty late, but he did just drink a few coffees. one of those situations where you know he shouldn't drive, and he sort of knows, but his wife is going to kill him if he stays over....
So he blew over and that was it. Right there, over the limit. No question, no "I'm OK, it's not far" or "I'm just tired I'll be fine." Nope, we all just saw that, you are over, nobody is letting you leave. This is the smart thing to do.
Anyways sort of a tangent but this thing is money well spent. Hope it helps somebody else.
Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise - William Shakespeare
For the same reason we don't hold automotible makers and sellers responsible - in short, because blaming people other than the perpetrator for a crime is fucking idiotic fascism.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese