California was the first state to have legislation authorizing the use of the Breathalyzer interlock device for repeat DUI offenders. Since then 41 states + D.C. have followed suit. Imposing limits on repeat offenders has its merits. Putting a Breathalyzer in every vehicle is a waste.

I think you're the one with the attitude problem. You are the only one going around this thread wishing people to get hit by a drunk driver; you did it as early as post #7 in this thread wishing me to get hit by a car when I didn't say anything to attack you personally; I just said this idea wasn't the way to fight drunk driving. So, you started personal attacks in this thread, you high jacked your own thread, and now you're bitching about other people's attitudes? What did you expect? A pat on the back? Go tell your sugar daddy that you want him to get hit by a car and see what he does. And have them inject some of that fat they lipoed from your ass back into your brain - maybe your IQ will go above the room temperature for a change.

And I apologize to the Mods for this, but I think this thread has outlived itself and needs to "get hit by a car" (or pruned at least).

I had a friend of mine that had to have one of these put on his car... While it didn't 100% cut down on his "drunk" driving, it helped tremendously. As others have said before it isn't a fail proof way, but at least in our circle of friends, He had a REALLY hard time getting anyone to blow in it for him... and quickly learned that it would just be better off to adhere to why it was in his car.

And as Kevin said... as long as there is alcohol and driving... this is going to happen, but tools such as this do help drop the DUI rates in most states.

my 2 cents. :)

To call this solution a liberal solution to a problem is comical.

Forget the cost and the other good points made regarding the technology. Whether this is the solution is not the issue here, imho. To prevent DUI and similar infractions, the punishment needs to fit the crime. And I believe this is a horribly reckless crime. So either throw people in jail or make them work in an ER every weekend for 2 years (or a similar community service project) and FINE THEM SOME SERIOUS SCRATCH, and then watch and smile as the number of DUI's drops like a stone. The death penalty is supposed to be a deterrent to murder--deter people from driving drunk and it might work.

Oh, and add a biometric fingerprint reader to the blower, and you might get past the worry of having a passenger blow a legal breath.

You are my hero!!!

I am all for the "eye for an eye" mentality... most just look at me crazy when I discuss these things...

I absolutely agree! DL suspension for 3-5 years on the first offence, plus ridiculously high fines and community work. Second offense - permanent suspension for life because you're obviously too stupid to be granted the privilege of driving.

Why not something to take a blood sample like they do for diabetics except look for the BAC instead. You can then use one when the device is installed as a reference. You can also do a quick blood typing or something to make sure it's a registered driver of the car.

Technicallly too advanced to work either rapidly or inexpensively.

As far as the "blow into the tube" device is concerned, that is very easy to fool, as well. I know a surgeon who had one installed under court order several years ago. He then took an Ambu bag (the thing you squeeze to blow air into someone's lungs when they aren't breathing) and used it to blow into the breathalyzer when he was drunk.

I know CA had it for repeat but I think it should be mandated for first time, to prevent repeat offenders. I think everyone will agree that one life saved is money well spent. Although they may be easy to fool it is still a deterrent and I feel any deterrent against drunk driving is a good way to go. As for the license suspension, that is a great idea however whats going to stop them from simply driving without a license? I was watching Dateline last night and they were doing a series on drunk driving and they were telling a story of a man who repeatedly drove drunk and killed a women, his license had been suspended for over 2 years but he still drove, some people just do not care. As for wishing harm on someone else, I would never wish any harm on someone else, I simply was attempting to make a point by saying that should this have happened to you or someone you love, your opinion would most likely change. I say that from personal experience not spite.