Comments on: What Should Be Done About Drunk Driving ?

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:11:03 +0000

There you go thinking again Rich.

By: Rich

Rich — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 15:25:11 +0000

If the MADDERS ever succeded at pushing legislation requiring interlock ignition devices in every new car I would never buy a new vehicle again, ever! The auto industry is in shambles right now any way. People will get fed up with the nonsense.

I thought the USA was a free country!

By: Jeanne Pruett

Jeanne Pruett — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:53:17 +0000

The problem, Mr. Shadow, is that your numbers are incorrect. Our organization offers $20,000 to anyone who can PROVE that 13,500 people are actually killed by drunk drivers. Why? Because we’ve downloaded the data and looked at it ourselves and found the number to be closer to about 1000.

Now why would our government lie to us and tell us it’s so much more? Control and money. MADD, insurance companies, municipalities all make money off of DUI laws. And now we have a new player, the maker of the ignition interlock, wanting to get their share of the pie.

DUI is a big industry Mr. Shadow and the road to profits comes from our wallets.

By: mike

mike — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:02:50 +0000

The best analogy I’ve heard (from someone on this site, if I’m not mistaken) is that speeding/reckless driving kills a sizeable number of people every year as well. So why not require engine governors to limit the speed of cars to the speed limit? After all, it would force us to obey the law and it would save lives.

People tend to see things a little different when the government wants to control YOU, rather than “the lawbreakers.”

By: Adam Selene

Adam Selene — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:57:51 +0000

Oh, Mr. Shadow made clear that he wants the same thing, that he views interlocks as equivalent to seat belts. Interestingly, I do too. And I consider seatbelt laws an intrusion on my personal liberty that the government has no power to make.

By: Doug Mataconis

Doug Mataconis — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:54:32 +0000

Mr Shadow,

The use of ignition interlock devices as a punishment for someone convicted of DUI is one thing, what MADD and its allies really want, as the article I linked to makes clear is to have EVERY CAR sold in the United States come with such a device. At the very least, its a presumption of guilt (you will drive drunk, therefore we intend to stop you from doing so).

By: Adam Selene

Adam Selene — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:46:32 +0000

And who decided that you should save my life? If I don’t want to wear a helmet on my motorcycle or a seat belt in my car, why is it anyone’s business but my own? It’s this sort of thinking that led to the first revolution. Government that thinks it knows better for me than I know for myself. How about if I start regulating your life Mr. DA?

By: Mr.Shad0w

Mr.Shad0w — Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:36:07 +0000

The State of Washington already requires Ignition Interlock Devices for anyone convicted of Driving Under the Influence. This includes first time offenders as well.

As a former prosecuting attorney and former DUI defense attorney I fully endorse Interlocks as standard automobile equipment. There are 47,000 DUI arrests on average in the State of Washington yearly. Across the United States each year an average of 13,500 people die from a driver operating his vehicle under the influence.

That is too many arrests and too many deaths to oppose Interlocks for every vehicle. Think of them as a seat belt. Both save lives on the roadways. For a more detailed reasongin check out http://www.seattle-duiattorney.com/blog.html .