No related posts.

MADD’s crusade for a new prohibition accelerates.

Let me just say that I don’t drink and drive. I’ve seen too many lives neg­a­tively impacted from drink­ing and dri­ving, both from the vic­tims and the dri­vers side of things.

That being said though, I don’t think that I should have to have a manda­tory igni­tion inter­lock device in all my vehi­cles. It’s just another elec­tri­cal com­po­nent that would be prone to mal­func­tion, and pre­vent my car from being drivable.

Well the American Beverage Industry is fight­ing back against the lob­by­ing MADD is start­ing on their goal for manda­tory igni­tion inter­lock devices on all new vehi­cles, and a de-facto legal drink­ing limit to any amount of alco­hol that is “detectable”.

Press Release here.

Share

No related posts.

2 comments to MADD’s crusade for a new prohibition accelerates.

  • Chick

    .MADD does not want igni­tion inter­lock on every car only on cars of con­victed DRUNK DRIVERS. They, (MADD) would like to see in the future trans­par­ent tech­nol­ogy phased into new vehi­cles that would detect alco­hol present in the per­son oper­at­ing the car. Although some car com­pa­nies are work­ing on var­i­ous con­cepts there are many social and tech­no­log­i­cal prob­lems before MADD’s goal of stop­ping drunks, (0.80%BAC) and above from dri­v­el­ing comes to fruition. ABI has taken most of their infor­ma­tion out of con­text to mis­rep­re­sent most respon­si­ble orga­ni­za­tions; instead they resort to char­ac­ter assas­si­na­tion with­out tak­ing respon­si­bil­ity of ini­tially sell­ing the alco­hol to the person

  • I’ve read MADD’s “Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving”, and they do specif­i­cally say they want manda­tory igni­tion inter­locks on all con­victed drunk dri­vers. They go on to spell out that the goal of their cam­paign is to elim­i­nate all drunk dri­ving — and they claim they will suc­ceed. The “most promis­ing and poten­tially effec­tive” tool they plan to employ is a “vol­un­tary”, “non-regulatory” sys­tem that allows a vehi­cle to detect if the dri­ver has alco­hol on board, and then stop the dri­ver from dri­ving. They go on to list var­i­ous means of doing that — breath, trans­der­mal detec­tion, and eye move­ment (these are all inter­lock devices).

    But if their goal is the com­plete elim­i­na­tion of drunk dri­ving, the only way that can be accom­plished is the even­tual mandatory/regulatory require­ment for inter­lock devices on all cars.

    Sure it will be grad­ual. New tech­nolo­gies will be tested and paid for by con­victed offend­ers, then dif­fer­ent car com­pa­nies will start offer­ing things as “options”. Eventually the cam­paign focus will shift to point­ing out that vol­un­tary imple­men­ta­tion, and manda­tory imple­men­ta­tion on con­victed drunk dri­vers, has not been 100% effec­tive, so there­fore we have to have 100% imple­men­ta­tion on all vehicles.

    Eventually when you take you car in to get it smogged, your inter­lock device will also have to be tested.

    It’s not a ques­tion of if, it’s only a mat­ter of when this pol­icy shift will occur within MADD’s inner cir­cle. The rank and file are prob­a­bly not sup­port­ive of such a Orwellian mea­sure yet, but even­tu­ally they will come around.

You must be logged in to post a comment.