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.
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