Discussion
Just watching an episode of Traffic Cops on BBC1 and as usual, we've had the assortment of drink driving clips...
Why has the proposal of a breathalyser (sp?) based immobiliser never been actioned.
Admittedly it is flawed by the fact that a sober could blow for a drunk person, but if there is a sober person present, either they could drive (with license & insurance) or i'd hope they'd not be stupid enough to blow for someone else. (Severe fines/points to own license as punishment).
However, the statistic mentioned was that the majority of drink-drive accidents are while there is only a single occupant of the car. Surely a breath-test immobiliser could reduce some of these?
Why has the proposal of a breathalyser (sp?) based immobiliser never been actioned.
Admittedly it is flawed by the fact that a sober could blow for a drunk person, but if there is a sober person present, either they could drive (with license & insurance) or i'd hope they'd not be stupid enough to blow for someone else. (Severe fines/points to own license as punishment).
However, the statistic mentioned was that the majority of drink-drive accidents are while there is only a single occupant of the car. Surely a breath-test immobiliser could reduce some of these?
I believe that an electronic tag such as Lindsay Lohan was wearing would be the answer, but who will pay for it. The simple answer is just ban anybody who is a repeat offender from buying a car or insuring one. Then have legislation in place that all cars must display their current insurance details on the windscreen!!!
I think they were talking about introducing a breath test to cars driven by people who had previously been banned. But I doubt this is logistical - a lot of people change their cars all the time so it could never be properly governed. Especially with the amount of people with previous convictions.
People will always drink-drive unfortunately
People will always drink-drive unfortunately
v8will said:
Harsher penalties or zero tolerance, the only way forward if they want to eradicate it. I would disagree with either but it wouldn't bother me as i know not to get into the drivers seat if i'm pissed.
We already have very harsh penalties but people still drink driveZero tolerance would just mean more people caught
The only way to eradicate it completely would be shoot everyone in the UK that has a driving license and has drank alcohol at some point in their life
Evo said:
They could always stipulate a breath test immobiliser to be fitted to peoples cars that have had a previous drink drive conviction.
They do this in some parts of the US - wikipedia page.This article about New York state's new DD law explains how they're paid for:
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/ny-dwi-drivers-required-to-install-breathalyzers-22641.html said:
The breathalyzers will be leased at the driver's expense, for in between $70 and $110 a month, in addition to the installation charge which can go to as much as $100.
In New York, the devices will be calibrated to prevent the car from starting if the driver has at least 0.025 blood-alcohol content (the criminal limit is 0.08). The regulators even thought how to prevent the convicted driver from making a sober friend take the test: the device retests on its own within 5 to 15 minutes.
In New York, the devices will be calibrated to prevent the car from starting if the driver has at least 0.025 blood-alcohol content (the criminal limit is 0.08). The regulators even thought how to prevent the convicted driver from making a sober friend take the test: the device retests on its own within 5 to 15 minutes.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff