Posted on 07/02/2009 10:51:56 AM PDT by Huntress
SPRINGFIELD -- You might expect to see a Breathalyzer in a police officer's car. You might not expect to see one in your neighbor's vehicle. That may soon be a reality that more Missourians must face because of a newly effective law that affects people convicted of drunken driving.
In 2001, a new law let judges require individuals convicted of two or more alcohol-related driving offenses to pass a Breathalyzer test before starting their cars. Because few judges used that punishment, the Legislature and Gov. Matt Blunt approved a tougher law last year but it didn't go into effect until July 1, 2009. Now judges must impose that sentence.
For Danny White, starting the car requires more than a turn of the key. He's performed the extra step of blowing into a Breathlyzer every time he's gotten behind the wheel for the last two years.
“For me, it was DWIs,” said White.
After two offenses, a judge ordered White to get the device. Now the Missouri Department of Revenue, which issues drivers licenses, will require all individuals with alcohol-related offenses to have an ignition interlock installed on their vehicles.
"We're expecting 110,000 drivers will be affected in Missouri,” said Steve Polston of Evergreen Ignition Interlock.
Polston is among those preparing for business to pick up.
“We expect by September or October to have a noticeable increase in traffic,” he said.
Each and every client will face the same standard: a .02 percent blood-alcohol limit for the ignition to turn. The legal blood-alcohol limit for drivers in Missouri and most other states is .08 percent.
"The machine is going to prohibit any drinking and driving,” said Polston.
The limit holds -- both to turn the car on and to keep it running. Every few minutes, the machine requires a running retest. If the driver passes, there’s no problem. If he or she fails, however, everyone nearby will know it. The vehicle’s horn will sound off.
"We can see every engine startup, every test taken. It's pretty thorough,” said Polston.
The thorough reports go to the courts every month.
As for White, he says every one of his scans came back clean.
“I’ve learned my lesson,” he said.
Now he gets his reward; while Polston prepares to add new customers, he can cross White off his list.
The cost for the device installation varies. Monitoring runs upwards of $40 a month. Offenders are responsible for those expenses.
If the legal limit is .08, that would suggest that it is not illegal to drive at .02. So is the state effectively prohibiting otherwise lawful conduct here?
“If the legal limit is .08, that would suggest that it is not illegal to drive at .02. So is the state effectively prohibiting otherwise lawful conduct here?”
Well this only comes into play AFTER you’ve blown it (pardon the pun) enough to warrant having this device in the first place.
Driving is a privilege, not a right.
For convicts, yes. The bigger question is whether it is ex post facto.
And the bigger concern is whether requiring 'on the roll' retests is going to create a safety hazard. I don't do plaintiff's work, but I can see looking for some deep pockets if someone caused a wreck while trying to blow into the device while driving 70mph down the interstate.
Has not it been proposed to install such devices in all automobiles? I can’t find it at the moment but I recall reading such proposals before.
Jack
Good question. The state may have to change the law for the legal limit to operate a vehicle.
Overall, I think the state has every right, under the Constitution, to implement one of these for a person convicted of DWI or DUI.
Sounds good to me.
Maybe it will keep some of these offenders from getting a 3rd.
I’m surprised the state is going along with this, considering how much revenue DWI/DUI brings into the system.
My son made a horrible mistake in January and was arrested for DUI. He currently has Interlock on his truck, and it was his one and only DUI. Once the alarm goes off, you have 6 minutes to stop your vehicle and blow into the machine. I doubt most people actually stop their vehicles though. My first thought was that this device is going to CAUSE accidents.
I’d be very interested in seeing any stats on that.
My son is paying a very heavy price for his mistake, but I feel I can safely say that it will NEVER happen again. The hoops he’s having to jump through are insane and the MONEY involved is paid into a monopoly of MADD approved organizations....you have ASAP, Interlock, MONTHS of alcohol counselling that can only be done at ASAP/MADD approved counselors, 14 days in jail....I could go on and on.
I’m all for punishing drunk drivers, but the courts and certain organizations are getting rich off of this and I’m not sure that anyone is actually getting rehabilitated.
VirginiaMom
Coming soon to EVERY car.
’ ... I’m not sure that anyone is actually getting rehabilitated.”
Well, you felt you could safely say that your son will never again get a DUI. That’s rehabilitation of a sort, if true.
Additionally, I think some people need to pass a breathalyzer before they can log on to their computer. Lots of weird ones out there....
I guess I didn’t word that very well. All of the programs offenders are made to go through are supposed to deal with any alcohol problem the offender may have. I agree with that. What troubles me is that only a ONE program can be used and they control which counsellors, etc. that you can go to.
In other words....from what I’ve seen, it’s all about the Benjamins. Just a few organizations are making ALOT of money off of this. Offenders have to go to cousellors that are sanctioned by ASAP and the counsellors do the exact same thing ASAP does. And the counsellors are HIGH dollar and many, many weeks. It’s redundant and accomplishes nothing...except lining pockets.
I don’t mean to sound as though I’m in any way defending DUI’s. I just don’t agree with some of the punishments as they are useless.
VirginiaMom
not a bad idea in theory, but I’d start looking for all of the kickbacks coming from manufacturers of the interlock units
You made all valid points. I'm in the same boat as you, as far as getting a DWI
“...require all individuals with alcohol-related offenses to have an ignition interlock installed on their vehicles.”
Does that mean cars the convict OWNS?
Actually in other states, a driver is court ordered not to drive any vehicle without an interlock. Exceptions are made for company vehicles. Since the results are downloaded to a computer and reported to the offender’s probation officer, he can’t have one installed in a ‘73 Vega and never drive it.
The devices are difficult to bypass. They will function if someone besides the driver blows in it, but if the driver attempts to use a balloon of “clean” air, they won’t function.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.