The way this story is being reported is that MADD wants alcohol detection devices to be mandatory on any car used by any person convicted of any drunk driving offense. But sprinkled throughout these reports is something a little more sinister…

Boston Channel – November 20, 2006:

As the holiday season gets under way, there is a major effort to wipe out drunken driving in this country.

A new campaign calls for alcohol detection devices in every vehicle.

CBS News – 11/20/06:

You have a few drinks, climb behind the wheel of your car, turn the key and — nothing. The engine doesn’t turn over, the car doesn’t move.

If Mothers Against Drunk Driving has its way, a device that checks a driver’s alcohol levels will be mandatory in cars owned by anyone ever convicted of drunk driving, and, eventually, every automobile.

The Age – 11/21/06:

ALCOHOL detectors may be fitted to all vehicles in the US after private and government experts agreed that the deterrence tactic used against drink-drivers for the past 20 years was no longer working.



  1. xfir1 says:

    Assuming the snowball lives, how long will it be before someone finds a way to crack the device so as to never give a positive reading?

  2. Raff says:

    I say we start a counter-organization now.

    D.A.M.M.

    Drunks against Mad Mothers…

    Whos with Me…

    WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

  3. Mike says:

    Lot’s of sensationalist (and poor) reporting. This is the real story:
    “The organization’s plan includes working with state officials to require breath-test interlock devices in vehicles for all those who have been convicted of drunken driving – even first offenders.”

    Still pretty strict, but not “every vehicle”!

    I’d be happy if (in MA, at least) the courts got serious. I am tired of hearing about drunk driving accidents caused by multiple offenders (4, 5, 6 convictions…!)

  4. Like this will work. “Hey pal (hic) can you blow into my tube for me, so I can go hooome.?”

  5. SN says:

    #3. “Lot’s of sensationalist (and poor) reporting. This is the real story…”

    Did you even read what I wrote?

    The way this story is being reported is that MADD wants alcohol detection devices to be mandatory on any car used by any person convicted of any drunk driving offense. But sprinkled throughout these reports is something a little more sinister…

    I then included three quotes from three different articles that are calling for devices in every/all vehicles!

    The least you could do is read the posting before commenting and making an idiot of yourself.

  6. DeeCee says:

    When the bar closes, giving a bj will have another meaning.

  7. Mike says:

    #5
    My, aren’t we sensitive. I was referring the reports you cited, not your reporting. Perhaps you ought to read my post with your glasses on before making an idiot out of yourself…

  8. Improbus says:

    I am not as think as you drunk I am.

  9. DeLeMa says:

    All right kids..both of you to your corners…better yet, let’s have a drink and talk about being idiots rationally…
    I’d be all for the MADD proposal but, I still got the mind think that if you give those bastards an inch, they’ll blow you a mile !!
    I know, let’s continue to shift responsibility towards the tavern owners!
    Hey..it worked for smokers in my state..we gonna tax them into quitting…yepper..makes me wonder why we didn’t get to include the stoners though..woulda been nice to get some taxes outta them bums !! …..gosh !! am I HUNGRY or WHAT !!

  10. Bob says:

    Well we let them tie us up with seat belts. So before long you’ll be wearing a helmet and a fire retardant suit. It’s a short step from there to a device that you constantly breathe into no breath or a .08 and the car quits.

  11. SN says:

    #7. “My, aren’t we sensitive.”

    Sorry about that Mike. I made an ass out of myself!

    Anyway, I agree about the bad reporting. My first guess is that some reporter simply added the “every” to the story to make it more interesting. Because there are no quotes linking it to MADD. But once that reporter did it, everyone else included it to make their stories more interesting.

    My second guess is that the MADD spokesperson said something off the record about wanting the devices on all cars. And then the unscrupulous reporter put it in unattributed.

  12. Improbus says:

    I guess everyone will have to swtich to weed to get around the alcohol detection devices. This is sort of like trying to outlaw stupidity.

  13. spsffan says:

    To do my usual job playing devil’s advocate…..

    What’s wrong with drunk driving? Millions of people do it safely every night, some of them every night for years on end. Heck, some of them in the middle of the day.

    The problem is causing a collision. Doing so sober is one thing. Doing so drunk is well, let’s say premeditated. (or premedicated, heh)

    How’s about a manditory prision sentance for causing a collision while intoxicated? No ifs, ands or buts. A year in the penn for first offenders seems about right. Life for the second.

    DAve

  14. Sundog says:

    Can we return to freedom and common sense in this country. Can we stop being afraid of every little danger out there? People die, there are accidents, if you eat too much fast food, you die. If you smoke too much you die, you could be endangering others with second hand smoke. I am required to where my seat belt when driving a car thats required to have an air bag, in the meantime I can ride my Harley in Colorado, and guess what? I dont even have to wear a fucking helmet! For Crying Out Lloud.

    US Govt. LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE!!!!!!!!!!

  15. Gonster says:

    I wonder what the rate of re-offenders really is. I also wonder how many cars they might have access to. How could you know? What choice would you have but to put the interlocks into all of them?

    I’d be all for increasing the taxes on bars to fund an insurance pool for covering the damamges drunks cause. Liquor at home would be taxed less. The loss of the neighborhood bar that you could stagger home from without driving left us with the sprawlification of America.

    We could fund all kinds of things if we were to tax weed the same way we tax alcohol and tobacco.

  16. Canucklehead says:

    The problem is drinking and DRIVING. If we had neighbourhood pubs, and better public transit, and less cookie-cutter subdivisions, then the problem would disappear.

  17. Raff says:

    Why don’t we just make rides free for drunk people.. make that part of the taxes we pay when we buy alcohol.. gotta be cheaper than installing devices in every flippen car in america..

  18. tallwookie says:

    I agree w/ #13

    Ive done a lot of drinking and driving and have NEVER been pulled over for it – its all about how much you practice…

    and madd can go suck it

  19. Tom says:

    RE: #13…

    I don’t think we should be applauding pure dumb luck…

  20. Eddie says:

    I was nearly killed last summer by a head on collision with a drunken uninsured motorist on his 18th birthday. I was an avid jogger, now I walk with a limp. He got 1 month in jail (not prison), and since he has no money, hasn’t even paid my deductible. He has to use a in car breathalizer for 1 year. I commend MADD for pushing the issue. He should have to use an in car breathalyzer for as long as I’m handicapped (forever). That said, the rest of us responsible drivers don’t need nanny state devices.

  21. Angel H. Wong says:

    I can’t drink booze.. I’m allergic to alcohol 🙁

  22. Mike says:

    #11 (SN)
    No harm, no foul. Keep up the good posts.

  23. RBG says:

    How completely, completely weird that while reading this item I should receive a call from a fellow who happens to be a spokesperson for MADD (and once was injured beyond comprehension by a drunk driver).

    So I was able to ask him directly about the blow device. He mentioned that the system is designed to have a thumb recognition device positioned exactly where it needs to be when the head is in position for the blow. But he admitted, it ain’t fool-proof. I began wondering why a driver over the limit couldn’t just use a can of compressed air or rubber bulb or plastic bag or a ready balloon of old air, etc. to foil the system. Maybe just the hassle.

    But I think MADD is going to have to change its name to MAZOTUD – Mothers Against Zonked Out, Toked Up Drivers – eventually. Especially with countries like Canada considering legalization of marywana. And you’re all upset about deaths in Iraq? C’mon…

    RBG

  24. John Henri Allyn says:

    I’m too lazy to read this one, is it M.A.D.D like Dr. Claw?

    Dr. Claw “I’ll get you next time Gadget! My new Dr. Claw Seatbelts will take care of you!”

    Mad Cat ” Ke Ke Ke Ke”

  25. Mr. Fusion says:

    As a disclaimer, I very seldom drink and am almost always the Designated driver.

    #14, How sad. If you want to eat yourself to death or smoke until the cancer kills you then feel free. It’s your health. But when you sit behind the wheel of a car drunk then it is ALL of our business. I have lost three friends to drunk driving over the years and know several others that have been severely injured. Your right to being an asshole does not extend to hurting others.

    Jail should be mandatory for drunk driving. License suspensions should be at least a minimum of 1 year for the first offense, 5 years for the second, and 10 years for a third. I’ll leave it up to Colorado or the Virgin Islands whether being an asshole should be punished as a felony or a misdemeanor.

    This is an attempt to limit drunk driving and I’m all for it.

  26. James says:

    MADD has lost there credibility with me. If they pursued these issues w/the habitual, and completely tanked up drunks who truly are a menace to us all I’d agree with them…… but if those zealots had there way you wouldn’t be allowed to drink at all.

    My guess is, one DUI and they’d never let you drive again if they had there way. And, no, I have never had one. I drink, I drive,…. I use my brain to know when I can and when I cannot.

    There’s has to be a middle ground people between responsible consumption and wacked out craziness. When they get to a place where they are pursuing the latter and NOT the former I’ll support them.

    Until then, they are just a bunch of crazies themselves. Like most of the right-wing bible-thumpers.

  27. James says:

    *their credibility….. and I forgot a good hyperlink:

    http://www.getmadd.com/

  28. catbeller says:

    Definition of a police state:

    The police stop acting as your protectors and start acting like your prison guards.

    Not one more inch. Stop this insanity now.

  29. catbeller says:

    You know, I’ ve never heard of a fatal car accident caused by marijuana?

  30. AB CD says:

    I take it you also support checkpoints for sobriety checks? And also searching cars for drugs and illegal cigarettes?


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 11596 access attempts in the last 7 days.