DUI, Thought this was interesting - Page 2

blondboinsd · #11 07-10-2006, 12:44 AM

Most bars offer such services, since I never drink and drive I have never needed those services but at least here in Cali there seems to be plenty of programs but the kind of people who drink and drive prolly don't have the brain power to comprehend such smart actions.

Sponsored Links

ekaz · #12 07-10-2006, 12:49 AM

I know the services exist in some areas, but how many intoxicated people are going to admit it? If I was a bartender or manager or employee or whatever at the establishment, why not do something about it instead of offering, them declining and then letting them leave? Offer them something to get them to stay and then do something about it? But no, that would mean that we give a damn about someone we don't know that probably wouldn't impact my life anyway. BUT what if that person, the same one we could've stopped, left and injured someone that we did know?

SANguru · #13 07-10-2006, 12:50 AM

you still miss the point. If you paid attention in your quants class and also paid attention to the class of population in NM, they could be considered statiscally an outlier but of course, you fail to the have the intelligence to grasp that either.

Obviously I am so immature that I don't get how excess population with a IQ of shrimp like you manages to survive. Oh wait I know, let me continue to ask my mommy the prescription drug addict but is a minister who also currently owns 9 different cars to borrow money that she stole from church offering. It's too bad the drunk driver didn't do his job in knocking yet another idiot off the face of the earth. You are so full of shit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blondboinsd

Actually since your obviously mis informed as usual you can look up the New Mexico website and find that it has reduced SIGNIFICANTLY their repeat DUI arrests as well as fatalities...It seems you always resort to personally attacking me which is immature, stay on topic and don't insult me simply because my opinion differs from yours.

blondboinsd · #14 07-10-2006, 12:52 AM

You have a bad attitude, I'd LOVE to see you get hit by a drunk driver and see how you feel, you know nothing about me so don't even act like you do, its just a good thing I can't stand you and couldn't care less about anything that comes out of your shallow minded mouth. You know nothing of my family so don't talk like you do!

blondboinsd · #15 07-10-2006, 01:01 AM

Since this thread has been hijacked. It would be nice of them to try and do this but it would be very hard for them to police it like that, nice idea but i'm not sure how it would be done?

ekaz · #16 07-10-2006, 01:08 AM

OK peoples, we need to stop the personal attacks here. I don't want to do anything with this thread, but keep this up and it will be closed and maybe deleted. This was an honest thread about the thoughts/feasibility of a "blow-test" before driving, not the mentallity of someone or the bad wishes of one memeber to another.

Warning 1 has been issued.

Thank you.

blondboinsd · #17 07-10-2006, 01:10 AM

Thank you, all this thread was SUPPOSED to be about was something I found interesting and think could potentially save lives. I guess noone can understand until it has happened to them or someone they love?

PersonaNonGrata · #18 07-10-2006, 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blondboinsd

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...zer-usat_x.htm

I believe I've mentioned it before but I find DUI laws very interesting ever since I was hit in my 2005 X5 at between 55-65 mph by a drunk driver in a Nissan Titan, as stated I feel my BMW saved my life and allowed me to escape with only minor injuries.

I applaud New Mexico's Breathalyzer interlock that forces any Drunk Driver to blow into before starting their car, I really wish It was a law in California.

I think it would be great for all vehicles to have an in-car breathilizer.

It is the law in CA that after your second DUI you must get an ignition interlock device at your own expense. Are there ways around it? Of course but it is the law FWIW.

As long as there are people, alcohol, and motor vehicles there will be DUI's. I think that people who drive while under the influence of alcohol, drugs, and medications that affect driving ability are extremely dangerous but unfortunately there is no stopping irresponsible and stupid people.

Quicksilver · #19 07-10-2006, 03:55 AM

Wow that's news to me. Have you got a link to that information?

Quote:

Originally Posted by PersonaNonGrata

It is the law in CA that after your second DUI you must get an ignition interlock device at your own expense.

PersonaNonGrata · #20 07-10-2006, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

Wow that's news to me. Have you got a link to that information?

All you ever wanted to know about ignition interlock devices in CA. The specifics of what is imposed tends to vary from county to county and even from judge to judge. Some courts never impose the interlock order on a first time DUI but will on a second. The fines and other terms are equally variable within what the law sets forth. Enjoy.

California Vehicle Code

23575. (a) (1) In addition to any other provisions of law, the
court may require that a person convicted of a first offense
violation of Section 23152 or 23153 to install a certified ignition
interlock device on any vehicle that the person owns or operates and
prohibit that person from operating a motor vehicle unless that
vehicle is equipped with a functioning, certified ignition interlock
device. The court shall give heightened consideration to applying
this sanction to a first offense violator with 0.20 percent or more,
by weight, of alcohol in his or her blood at arrest, or with two or
more prior moving traffic violations, or to persons who refused the
chemical tests at arrest. If the court orders the ignition interlock
device restriction, the term shall be determined by the court for a
period not to exceed three years from the date of conviction. The
court shall notify the Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified in
subdivision (a) of Section 1803, of the terms of the restrictions in
accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 1804. The Department of
Motor Vehicles shall place the restriction in the person's records in
the Department of Motor Vehicles.
(2) The court shall require a person convicted of a violation of
Section 14601.2 to install an ignition interlock device on any
vehicle that the person owns or operates and prohibit the person from
operating a motor vehicle unless the vehicle is equipped with a
functioning, certified ignition interlock device. The term of the
restriction shall be determined by the court for a period not to
exceed three years from the date of conviction. The court shall
notify the Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified in subdivision
(a) of Section 1803, of the terms of the restrictions in accordance
with subdivision (a) of Section 1804. The Department of Motor
Vehicles shall place the restriction in the person's records in the
Department of Motor Vehicles.
(b) The court shall include on the abstract of conviction or
violation submitted to the Department of Motor Vehicles under Section
1803 or 1816, the requirement and term for the use of a certified
ignition interlock device. The records of the department shall
reflect mandatory use of the device for the term ordered by the
court.
(c) The court shall advise the person that installation of an
ignition interlock device on a vehicle does not allow the person to
drive without a valid driver's license.
(d) A person whose driving privilege is restricted by the court
pursuant to this section shall arrange for each vehicle with an
ignition interlock device to be serviced by the installer at least
once every 60 days in order for the installer to recalibrate and
monitor the operation of the device. The installer shall notify the
court if the device is removed or indicates that the person has
attempted to remove, bypass, or tamper with the device, or if the
person fails three or more times to comply with any requirement for
the maintenance or calibration of the ignition interlock device.
There is no obligation for the installer to notify the court if the
person has complied with all of the requirements of this article.
(e) The court shall monitor the installation and maintenance of
any ignition interlock device restriction ordered pursuant to
subdivision (a) or (l). If a person fails to comply with the court
order, the court shall give notice of the fact to the department
pursuant to Section 40509.1.
(f) (1) Pursuant to Section 13352, if a person is convicted of a
violation of Section 23152 or 23153, and the offense occurred within
10 years of one or more separate violations of Section 23152 or 23153
that resulted in a conviction, the person may apply to the
Department of Motor Vehicles for a restricted driver's license
pursuant to Section 13352 that prohibits the person from operating a
motor vehicle unless that vehicle is equipped with a functioning
ignition interlock device, certified pursuant to Section 13386. The
restriction shall remain in effect for at least the remaining period
of the original suspension or revocation and until all reinstatement
requirements in Section 13352 are met.
(2) Pursuant to subdivision (g), the Department of Motor Vehicles
shall immediately terminate the restriction issued pursuant to
Section 13352 and shall immediately suspend or revoke the privilege
to operate a motor vehicle of a person who attempts to remove,
bypass, or tamper with the device, who has the device removed prior
to the termination date of the restriction, or who fails three or
more times to comply with any requirement for the maintenance or
calibration of the ignition interlock device ordered pursuant to
Section 13352. The privilege shall remain suspended or revoked for
the remaining period of the originating suspension or revocation and
until all reinstatement requirements in Section 13352 are met.
(g) A person whose driving privilege is restricted by the
Department of Motor Vehicles pursuant to Section 13352 shall arrange
for each vehicle with an ignition interlock device to be serviced by
the installer at least once every 60 days in order for the installer
to recalibrate the device and monitor the operation of the device.
The installer shall notify the Department of Motor Vehicles if the
device is removed or indicates that the person has attempted to
remove, bypass, or tamper with the device, or if the person fails
three or more times to comply with any requirement for the
maintenance or calibration of the ignition interlock device. There is
no obligation on the part of the installer to notify the department
or the court if the person has complied with all of the requirements
of this section.
(h) Nothing in this section permits a person to drive without a
valid driver's license.
(i) The Department of Motor Vehicles shall include information
along with the order of suspension or revocation for repeat offenders
informing them that after a specified period of suspension or
revocation has been completed, the person may either install an
ignition interlock device on any vehicle that the person owns or
operates or remain with a suspended or revoked driver's license.
(j) Pursuant to this section, an out-of-state resident who
otherwise would qualify for an ignition interlock device restricted
license in California shall be prohibited from operating a motor
vehicle in California unless that vehicle is equipped with a
functioning ignition interlock device. An ignition interlock device
is not required to be installed on any vehicle owned by the defendant
that is not driven in California.
(k) If a person has a medical problem that does not permit the
person to breathe with sufficient strength to activate the device,
then that person shall only have the suspension option.
(l) This section does not restrict a court from requiring
installation of an ignition interlock device and prohibiting
operation of a motor vehicle unless that vehicle is equipped with a
functioning, certified ignition interlock device for a person to whom
subdivision (a) or (b) does not apply. The term of the restriction
shall be determined by the court for a period not to exceed three
years from the date of conviction. The court shall notify the
Department of Motor Vehicles, as specified in subdivision (a) of
Section 1803, of the terms of the restrictions in accordance with
subdivision (a) of Section 1804. The Department of Motor Vehicles
shall place the restriction in the person's records in the Department
of Motor Vehicles.
(m) For the purposes of this section, "vehicle" does not include a
motorcycle until the state certifies an ignition interlock device
that can be installed on a motorcycle. Any person subject to an
ignition interlock device restriction shall not operate a motorcycle
for the duration of the ignition interlock device restriction period.

(n) For the purposes of this section, "owned" means solely owned
or owned in conjunction with another person or legal entity. For
purposes of this section, "operates" includes operating vehicles that
are not owned by the person subject to this section.
(o) For the purposes of this section, "bypass" includes, but is
not limited to, either of the following:
(1) Any combination of failing or not taking the ignition
interlock device rolling retest three consecutive times.
(2) Any incidence of failing or not taking the ignition interlock
device rolling retest, when not followed by an incidence of passing
the ignition interlock rolling retest prior to turning off the
vehicle's engine.

Sponsored Links