When the national group Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) announced in 2006 its initiative to eliminate drunk driving completely in every state in the country, only one state required persons convicted of a DUI offense to install ignition interlocks in their vehicles.
That state was New Mexico, and it mandated installation for even first-time offenders. No other state in the country had any interlock requirement at all, even for drivers with multiple convictions or inordinately high blood-alcohol levels.
Things have certainly changed in a few short years, with MADD officials now saying that their hope for a nationwide interlock requirement in all states for a first offense is gaining traction and will ultimately be realized.
Fifteen states now provide that first offenders must install the device. Georgia is not among them, although the state does have an ignition interlock law that mandates installation following a second DUI conviction. Twenty-four other states have a similar requirement, either for second offenders or motorists who blow a .15 or higher.
Proponents of mandatory and nationwide installation say that the device is the best proven method to deter drunk driving.
A number of people, though, think that the push is over the top, and that judges in each state should have discretion to step in and make evaluations in such a matter.
"There is a distinction between somebody who is one sip over the legal limit and the type of person who has 10 drinks," says Sarah Longwell, the managing director of the American Beverage Institute.
"The judicial system should be involved in those cases," she adds.
Source: MSNBC, "Curbing drunken drivers: Should ignition interlock be required on every car?" Jim Gold, Jan. 5, 2012
