TheAgitator.com
More “Most Asinine Neoprohibition Law” Candidates
Friday, June 18th, 2004People across the state are upset with House Bill 126, which would require ignition interlock devices be installed on all new cars sold in New Mexico by Jan. 1, 2008, regardless of the purchaser’s driving record……The interlock device uses a blow tube which activates sensors when one blows into the tube. If alcohol is detected, the sensors activate a mechanism which shuts down the vehicle’s ignition system and the car cannot be started. In addition, a new test is given about every 10 minutes while the car is in use. Interlock devices authorized for use in New Mexico record the driving record and the record is downloaded by companies such as Adobe Interlock. The driving record is then turned over to judges to see how the driver is doing.
Emphasis mine, as if you needed it. Incidentally, MADD’s New Mexico chapter president hasn’t taken a position on the law. Not because she doesn’t support the idea, but because she wants to make sure the devices aren’t too lenient. She told a Santa Fe newspaper that unless the machines refuse ignition at .02, “you’re giving people a false sense of security.”
Don’t think these people are happy with the .08 national standard.
Radical legislation proposed by New York Assemblyman Felix Ortiz (D-Brooklyn) would require every driver in New York to pass an alcohol breath test every time they start their car-anyplace, anytime and regardless of whether they drink responsibly or at all. The costly measure to install such devices has been estimated to be up to $1,000 per automobile, and would require New Yorkers to re-perform the test every 20 to 40 minutes while driving.
Ortiz’s bill would also require every driver in New York to report to a service center once a month, where breath test records would be downloaded from the car, and sent to state authorities for evaluation.
Two new laws go into effect today that make getting caught drinking and driving in Washington state a much more expensive and legally onerous experience.The first law…mandates that anyone who wants to drive after a DUI arrest, a DUI conviction or after opting for deferred prosecution must have an ignition-interlock device installed in his or her vehicle. The devices, which require a breath test before a car’s engine can be turned on, as well as subsequent tests while driving, were once reserved for chronic drunks, repeat DUI offenders and drivers who refused to give breath samples.
Note the word “arrest.” No conviction necessary. But Washington isn’t finished:
The second law, Substitute House Bill 3055, is aimed at curtailing the frequency with which breath-test results are tossed out of court. Juries â instead of judges â will now decide what weight to place upon a test result and are to view that evidence “in a light most favorable to the prosecution,” the law says.
Is anyone aware of a standard anywhere else in criminal law that instructs a jurty to consider evidence “in a light most favorable to the prosecution?”
Unbefarkingleivable. Note that unlike New York and New Mexico, these laws are already on the books.
4) Finally, MADD wants to pry its public policy agenda into family law, too. The organization is on record supporting laws for mandatory provisions in divorce settlements stating that if one parent is found drinking or driving with a minor in the vehicle (note: drinking and driving, not drunken driving), said parent can lose visitation rights, primary custody, or face complete termination of parental rights.
I’m hard pressed to declare a winner, here.
A winner? Easy. Teetotaling Lawyers.
Oh, I forgot: The big winner is the municipalities that will collect all kinds of fine $$ before they piss it away and need to find another stream of revenue to piss away again.
Now . . . where is this island everyone talks about again?
If you’re being forced to give a breathalyzer test every 10 minutes while driving, won’t that impair your ability to drive also?
Frank N and all other citizens for liberty, grab your bags. Monkey Butler Island here we come.
If MADD gets their way, I guess nobody can drive their families home after communion, then.
Ja, this is zee law! You vill blow your automobile every 30 minuten, oder zie vill be arrested!
Sieg Heil!
There is a revolution coming in this country, I can feel it. Gross over-taxation, loss of freedoms, bizarre legislation, Mayors that do not obey state laws, State Supreme Court judges that ignore judicial decisions, UN officials that blame Catepillar for bulldozers used to destroy terrorist hide-outs and a “free press” that cares more about the humiliation of a few terrorists than the decapitation of US citizens.
I could go on and on but I am sick. What an embarassment that these types of laws are even discussed. How humiliating that so much of our legislature, hell, our whole population does not understand the basic tenants of the constitution that have made the U.S. the longest lasting such democracy in history at a meager 228 years.
I don’t see America lasting another 200 years folks, and it will probably be something the “masses”, her own people, voted on that eventually brings her down, because they were too stupid to understand.
Sorry for the rant, but this type of BS is now the norm, not the exception. It is depressing, and I fear for the America my eight year will live in when he reaches adulthood. I fear it will at best be a full blown “nanny” state, and in fact will probably be an all out socialist republic.
God bless America, for however long it makes it.
A truly sickening display. I think the used car market will be thriving there.
I’m curious to know if people think the fundamental concept is sound. i.e. if the law was for higher than .2 and there was no cost to implement it, isn’t it the same as a speed limit? The problem with labeling MADD as simply a group that is trying to restrict our liberties is an attack that doesn’t undermine the soundness of the fundamental goal. I think Radley’s Cato paper does an excellent job attacking them from numerous angles beyond the right to be left alone. I just think it’s an important point to remember if you ever have to deal with a MADDie face-to-face.
There’s no place like home…
There’s no place like home…
There’s no place like home…
At least in the Washington State law, you have to be in some way linked to drunk driving before the breathalizer is installed. Whereas in New Mexico and New York, they’re assuming everyone is guilty (or would be without the breathalizer).
So how’s that going to be, you’re driving down the road in very heavy stop-n-go traffic, and the car in front of you is driving erratically, and you’re trying very hard to concentrate. Suddenly, a light blinks, and the breath tube drops. You’re forced to choose between a high risk of rear ending the car in front of you, or having your car automatically shut itself off and stop in the middle of the freeway causing the car behind you to rear end you.
And this choice presents itself to you every 10 minutes.
Nice.
Along the lines of nannyism, this topic is semi-related.
Concerning doctors dropping unaffordable malpractice insurance (it’s called going “bare”) and placing their assets in spouses’ names and such, one trial lawyer in Florida states, “You can’t hide all of your assets and you can’t hide all of your wages forever. One way or another, we’ll find a way to represent these medical malpractice victims because they deserve it,” (Alexander Clem, president of the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers.) Yeah, those lawyers will find a way to get your money. Pretty soon, it will be illegal for doctors to not carry malpractice insurance, just like not carrying auto insurance in Texas is illegal.
This idea seems silly to me. What is not silly is an idea I had a while back. If you go to the bar and have more than one drink you must surrender your keys. When you are ready to go home you will pay a driver to drive you home in YOUR car and then he will be picked up by another driver. I got this idea one night watching all the pizza trucks and cars go by. It seems it would solve the age old problem of not wanting to leave your car at the bar. You would have to pay the drivers. But I figure if they will deliver your pizza why not drive you home in your own car? Even if it cost as much as the taxi most people would take advantage of it.
Harry, the insurance on that would be incredibly high!
I haven’t looked, but I’m sure that there is already a crack, hack, spoof, or work-around, for these things. I mean how hard could it be. It took about 20 sec for hackers to figure out how to hack a TiVo, and these things have to be waaaaay simpler than a TiVo.
Harry - Here is L.A. they have something like that now. You’re at a bar and you need a ride home, you call this great new company. The driver pulls up on a scooter which folds up and can be placed in the trunk of your car. They drive you home and then take off on their scooter again. It’s safe and the scooters seem pretty cool.
Anyone have a problem with taking kids out of custody of parents who drive drunk with them? I don’t.
(I realize the original law/post said drinking, not drunken, as emphasized)
G
BTW I think the winner is the NM one that says you have to breathe into the tube every 10 minutes. That sounds EXTRA safe to do while driving! Can’t they just suggest a tube inserted in my ass — it’s hands-free! I think it could be like the South Park episode making fun of Segways…
Maybe I’d gargle with extra listerine, just to test it out for fun.
People really resent being told what they can and can’t do by machines. Pretty soon, that resentment’s going to start boiling over, and you’re going to see people willing to shoot it out with the police rather than pull over for a traffic stop. After all, if getting arrested for blowing a .02 means you can’t see your kids again, why should Johnny Law get to see his kids again?
Assemblyman Ortiz’s bill only applies to people convicted of drunk driving:
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A10498&sh=t
This is why I support public transportation now.
To much freedom is taken away by controlling my “privilege” to drive.
I see a great opportunity to make millions with these laws. I’m going to invent artificial human breath and package it. I think I’ll call it “Blow Me” and package it in a can. The can will look much like that fix-a-flat stuff you get for flat tires.
I will sell it wherever alcohol is sold. If you are buying a twelver at 7-11 there will be a display of “Blow-Me” right there next to the chips.
Breathalizers in cars, no problem, just use “Blow-Me.”
Tod, Let me know when you need investors for you new company.
I’m from New Mexico and fortunately the law failed (see site below). Unfortunately the jack-booted state legislator behind it, Ken Martinez, is still trying. Anecdotally, I heard Governor Richardson said he’d veto such a law, which actually fits his profile. However, the local news reported he established a task force on the issue in March. Guess who the chairman of it is? Ken Martinez. Save us!
http://www.thenewmexicochannel.com/news/2994638/detail.html
I’m hard pressed to declare a winner, here.
Yes, however I find it rather easy to declare the losers.
Neoprohibitionists on Parade
Radley Balko is keeping an eye on the state-level activities of the increasingly prohibitionist (and increasingly misnamed) MADD and their pet state legislators. It’s not a very pretty picture.
Haven’t these people heard of the 4th and 5th amendments? or the emenations and penumbras of the right to privacy?
The liberals who push for this kind of crap are the same people who want drugs legalized because prohibition doesn’t work. D’oh.
More Nutty Neo-Prohibitionism
I’ve found more neo-prohibitionism nuggets to add to my stack. Here & here. Read and be ready to bang your…
These devices are already in use in Colorado. I work as a Paramedic here and have run 2 bad crashes where the Drunk driver had their wife in one case and their 15 y/o son in the other blow into the tube in order to start the car. The drivers both had BAC levels above 2.0
Luckily nobody died in either case.
I just read a news report about a service in Moscow that will come to wherever you are drinking with a tow truck, and tow your car (with you in it) home for a certain fee. They even give you a bottle of champaigne for the ride home! It costs about 50 bucks if I remember correctly.
James - Apparently here in Cali we must ALL be drunks. In my town, certain tow companies will tow you up to 10 miles for free if you’ve been drinking. I’ll do business w/ them just for being so nice.
Harry Koch - there’s this service where I live that’s really cool. It works like this: you go to the bar, have a few drinks and then one of the bar staff phones this guy, and he comes to the bar with his car, and then he drives you home for a fee. It’s called, oh what was it again? A taxi, yeah that’s it, a taxi.
I like the folding scooter idea! There is capitalism in action, find a niche and make some money.
Not such a bad idea. If your kid had been killed by a drunk driver, you’d want this stuff to happen.
Yes, of course you’d want it if your kid had been killed by a drunk driver. This is why, thank god, we don’t in general allow ridiculous mawkish crap like that have any influence on law-making. ‘It’s for the children,’ said the politician, as he casually reached into my wallet and pocketed the contents.
I used to be adamently opposed to this kind of spurious and invasive drug testing, but since reading these articles I’m starting to come around in a small way.
I think in order to help stem these ridiculous ideas lawmakers should be obliged to blow into a small tube before they are admitted into any congressional meetings. If they turn out not to be drunk, they should be allowed to make laws as soon as they’ve passed a drug test and agree’d in writing not to smoke anywhere within 500 metres of any other government employee.
With any luck, that will stem the flow of unconstitutional stupidity, at least for a short while.
dave id said: This is why I support public transportation now.
To much freedom is taken away by controlling my “privilege” to drive.
Dave Id, you’ve already succumbed to their evil plan, that of having you stand around like a passive sap and wait for them to send a bus at their convenience. Ah, the joys of public transportation!
Along the line of Bernard’s idea, I’d like to suggest that all chairs be removed from anywhere business is done by legislatures.
http://springs.anotheruniversesucks.org/print/ grudgepartsreligious
http://cialis-using.pills4order.com/cialis/ boardsooneststyle
http://credit-card-debt.finances-inco.com discreetlypeerstreaked
http://california.acfair.org angrymentholreflected