Post by Clipper on Jun 5, 2013 9:24:05 GMT -5
www.wktv.com/news/new-york-state/NYS-reports-crackdown-on-repeat-drunken-drivers-208314871.html
Cuomo has signed a new law requiring ignition interlocks for REPEAT drunk driving offenders. That is a step in the right direction, but here in Tennessee the governor just signed a bill that makes it a requirement for EVERY person convicted of a DUI, including those that are first offenders, to have the interlocks installed on their cars.
nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/gov-haslam-signs-ignition-interlock-bill-requiring-device-first-time-dui-offenders
It seems that there will be no restricted licensing, or restrictions on where the person may drive. They simply will not be able to start their car if they have been drinking. It is touted to significantly lower the accident rates involving drunk drivers in states where the interlocks are used.
It makes more sense to me to take action to lower the probability of the second offense, than to hope that the second offense doesn't result in the loss of innocent lives before getting tough and requiring the interlock device.
I am sure that some crafty drunks will find their way around the law, and will continue to offend. That is where the law needs some very strong penalties including mandatory 30 days in jail for driving a car WITHOUT the device if you are required to use it. It will be a restriction printed right on the license of those that are required to use the device, just as the corrective lens restriction.
It simply makes more sense to me to insure that a person has not been drinking before they can start the car, than to restrict or revoke their license. Many of those simply continue to drive without a license and continue to drink and drive, even after repeated arrests. Better to let them drive with the interlock.
The sad fact is that for many who are heavy drinkers, or that have an alcohol problem, a DUI conviction is not going to result in them giving up drinking. It is not going to keep them from repeatedly going out and driving drunk. The issue at such a point is to keep them out from behind the wheel. We can't prevent them from getting drunk, but we can attempt to prevent them from driving when they are under the influence.
Cuomo has signed a new law requiring ignition interlocks for REPEAT drunk driving offenders. That is a step in the right direction, but here in Tennessee the governor just signed a bill that makes it a requirement for EVERY person convicted of a DUI, including those that are first offenders, to have the interlocks installed on their cars.
nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/gov-haslam-signs-ignition-interlock-bill-requiring-device-first-time-dui-offenders
It seems that there will be no restricted licensing, or restrictions on where the person may drive. They simply will not be able to start their car if they have been drinking. It is touted to significantly lower the accident rates involving drunk drivers in states where the interlocks are used.
It makes more sense to me to take action to lower the probability of the second offense, than to hope that the second offense doesn't result in the loss of innocent lives before getting tough and requiring the interlock device.
I am sure that some crafty drunks will find their way around the law, and will continue to offend. That is where the law needs some very strong penalties including mandatory 30 days in jail for driving a car WITHOUT the device if you are required to use it. It will be a restriction printed right on the license of those that are required to use the device, just as the corrective lens restriction.
It simply makes more sense to me to insure that a person has not been drinking before they can start the car, than to restrict or revoke their license. Many of those simply continue to drive without a license and continue to drink and drive, even after repeated arrests. Better to let them drive with the interlock.
The sad fact is that for many who are heavy drinkers, or that have an alcohol problem, a DUI conviction is not going to result in them giving up drinking. It is not going to keep them from repeatedly going out and driving drunk. The issue at such a point is to keep them out from behind the wheel. We can't prevent them from getting drunk, but we can attempt to prevent them from driving when they are under the influence.
