Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Tuesday, April 23, 2024 73° Today's Paper


Top News

MADD: Car-locking systems stopped 1.77 million drunk drivers

1/1
Swipe or click to see more

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Andrew Wisniewski, an operations manager for Smart Start of Maryland, demonstrates how an ignition interlock device works on Wednesday, Feb. 10, 2016 in Annapolis, Maryland. The devices are put in cars to stop drunk drivers from operating their vehicles. Maryland lawmakers want to require the devices for first-time offenders, rather than just ones arrested with more than twice the legal limit of alcohol in their systems.

ANNAPOLIS, Md. >> Car-locking systems have stopped more than 1.77 million people from driving drunk since states first passed laws requiring offenders to install them in 1999, Mothers Against Drunk Driving said in a first-of-its-kind report on the devices nationwide.

The data come from the 11 major manufactures of the ignition interlock systems, and the report was released Wednesday. The devices, the size of a cellphone, are wired into vehicles. A convicted drunken driver must blow into the device to get a blood alcohol content reading before the vehicle will start. The system sends a signal back to its manufacturer with the reading.

Twenty-five states have laws that require ignition interlocks for all offenders following any drunken-driving offense. Every state has enacted some kind of ignition-interlock law, but some require the devices only for certain levels of offenses and blood alcohol levels, or give judges discretion. MADD is calling on those other states to tighten their laws.

“MADD knows ignition interlocks save lives, and they could save even more lives if every offender is required to use the device after the first arrest,” said Colleen Sheehey-Church, MADD’s national president.

The National Transportation Safety Board recommends states require mandatory ignition interlock devices for first-time offenders. NTSB vice chairman Bella Dinh-Zarr said the technology enables people to continue driving to make a living and get around, but it separates the person from his or her drinking and driving.

“Ignition interlock, although many people may think it’s an extreme measure for people who are first offenders, it prevents them from becoming a second offender or a third offender,” Dinh-Zarr said.

In Maryland, where the group released the report, lawmakers are pushing to require all drunken drivers with blood alcohol contents of 0.08 or greater to have the devices. State law now requires them for those with a BAC of 0.15, nearly twice the legal limit for driving.

The systems stop drivers with a BAC of .025 or higher. The report says more than 1.77 million people have been stopped from driving with a BAC of 0.08 or higher, but the figures are higher for those who blow at least 0.025: More than 12.72 million stopped.

Lawmakers sponsoring the Maryland bill noted they have been trying to tighten the law since 2009, but they have faced opposition from lobbyists for the alcohol industry.

“There is no gray area. Either you’re on the side of the angels or you’re with the liquor lobby,” said Del. Ben Kramer, a Democrat who is sponsoring the bill.

Sheehey-Church said residents and visitors in states such as Maryland, Florida, California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania “deserve the same protection offered in states with strong ignition interlock laws — such as Texas, Arizona, West Virginia and New Mexico.”

The group also is focusing on Maryland because of the December death of Officer Noah Leotta. He was killed while working on a driving-under-the-influence assignment. The Maryland measure is dubbed “Noah’s Law.” At a news conference, Noah’s father, Rich, tearfully described the pain of losing his son, who police say was hit by a drunk driver with two previous convictions.

“It’s a very simple thing, and it saves lives,” Leotta said. “It could have saved Noah’s life. He might be here today if this was in that person’s car.”

13 responses to “MADD: Car-locking systems stopped 1.77 million drunk drivers”

  1. justmyview371 says:

    So are they going to make systems to detect and abused items — sugar, cigarettes, GMOs, plastics etc.

  2. serfboy says:

    I read this article 4 times. It doesn’t mention how the device ensures that the person who is driving is the one blowing into the device.

    • st1d says:

      the device comes with a camera that photos anyone blowing into it, and the photos are audited by the court appointed authority.
      but, once the car is started there is no other device audit to ensure the blower in the photo doesn’t later swap off with the drunk who continues the drive.

      • cardoc says:

        The system requires the driver to re-blow while driving- something about an alert goes off and the driver has 2 minutes to re-blow or the vehicle will shut down.

    • cardoc says:

      I have seen them, there is a camera that shows who is blowing into the device

  3. yobo says:

    If you need a device to tell you that you’re not fit to drive – then you have a problem.

    I drink, get drunk, fall down, get up, no problem…….

    • cardoc says:

      texters have a device that requires 2 hands to spell- they continue to drive and text- but don’t realize they have a problem cuz hands on the phone- who got the wheel? oops what eyes are on the road? what road?

  4. cardoc says:

    I bet texting kills more people than booze. I seen texters swerving and doing all kinds of crazy things WHILE DRIVING. MADD should be rename Mothers against Dumb Doodoos and go after all these dumb drivers killing people on the road.

  5. Racoon says:

    I think people drive drunk because they have to get home to sleep. Are there taxi services what will drive you home for free everyday instead of only on New Year’s Eve? Can you think of all the reasons people drive drunk and figure out ways to get them to take better alternatives that are more attractive and safer. Might try subsidizing Lyft or Uber. They would certainly welcome an opportunity to show that they are wonderful businesses that serve a need to the public. they should not be banned by the selfish taxi lobby.

Leave a Reply