If you live in Kentucky, Michigan or Wisconsin beware of pending legislation to implement hasher punishment for drunk drivers. Kentucky representative Dennis Keene has introduced a bill to mandate interlock installation for DUI offenders. In October 2012, the feds in their infinite wisdom enacted legislation for states to mandate interlocks or risk losing a portion of their funding (blackmail). This will help the bill pass, this time -
http://www.kypost.com/dpps/news/region_northern_kentucky/wilder/lawmaker-files-bill-to-toughen-ky-dui-laws_8240064

Michigan stands to lose $50 million in federal funding unless they vote to keep the BAC limit at .08. The original
legislation that lowered the limit to .08 will run out soon and raise the legal limit to .10 BAC. MADD and police officers that get paid overtime and receive awards for their DUI arrests are against letting the limit revert to .10. They claim that the data supports their position, but as we all know - their data is seriously flawed and holds no meaning. http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/Drunk-Driving-Laws-Could-Change--191118541.html

Wisconsin has introduced legislation that will make a third drunk driving offense a felony. The representative said that their laws were out of line with other states and needed to be stronger. They want to enforce mandatory minimum sentences and criminalize first offenders over .15 BAC which is not currently the law. You can read about it here
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/bills-would-toughen-wisconsins-drunkendriving-laws-qm8nt5o-190705021.html

The only way to stop the madness is to make your voices heard. Please write, call or visit your representatives if you live in any of these states and tell them this has gone too far.

 
It seems that the NHTSA has decided that just because there's a cell phone in the vehicle, they can no longer attribute the accident to distracted driving. This is curious since that's exactly what they do for alcohol related accidents, there merely has to be alcohol present or suspected to be present. Why is it that data collection for one form of automobile accidents is different from another? Shouldn't it all be the same for reporting purposes? The answer is yes it should, but MADD has a strong hold on the NHTSA and would not be happy with a change to drunk driving data collection. They award officers every year that have the highest drunk driving offender arrest rate. This action encourages many officers to use creative writing techniques and stretch the "reasonable cause" tactic in order to meet a quota and win a prize.
In the research community the data collection methods used and statistical information produced by the NHTSA is laughed at, but unfortunately that is a very small portion of the population. The general public listens to their nonsense; believes that they are unbiased and actually know what they're doing. They do know what they're doing, they are biased and creating an unecessary panic in our society to get the desired reaction. Data and statistical information can be used in many ways, it can also be calculated in numerous ways to show whatever you want to show if you have no ethics which is exactly what has happened in the NHTSA. Just take a look at the first link provided below, if they wanted to portray accurate information, why would they collect statistical data in the manner that they did/do in the first place?
http://news.onlineautoinsurance.com/consumer/nhtsa-distracted-driving-car-insurance-95776
NHTSA and MADD
MADD and NHTSA Continue To Deceive The U.S. Public
MADD Flunks the Truth Test
 
Lately I have been hearing a lot about problems with interlock ignition devices (IID). These devices are used across the country to prevent drunk driving. They are connected to the vehicle ignition and require the driver to provide a breath sample before they can start the vehicle. In addition, they require samples randomly while the vehicle is being driven. It sounds like a great idea, but is it?

These devices are sensitive to anything that contains acohol like perfume, hairspray, certain types of food, mouthwash and other products. A person that uses or ingests these products can have a false reading and fail a test which sets off a chain reaction. If they are trying to start the vehicle, the vehicle is locked out for a period of time before they allowed to retest. When the car is in motion and a test is failed the device makes a very loud noise, honks the horn and flashes the lights until the driver pulls over, turns the vehicle off and is able to restart. This goes on their record and is sent to the DMV, often resulting in a longer amount of time they are required to have it on their vehicle or revocation of their license.

Some people that I have talked with recently have said that the device was faulty. Not only did they have false readings, sometimes they couldn't even take the test. Many of these people had to have their vehicles towed to the company that installed the device for maintenance and/or repair. Many of them had bad experiences with the company and were treated poorly as if they had done something wrong.

I am curious if this technology is really ready for prime time. It seems as though they jumped the gun on this, just like they have on so many software programs that required numerous patches to fix all of the problems experienced once it was launched. Maybe these incidents should be reported to the Better Business Bureau (BBB), it's easy to do online at http://www.bbb.org/. At a minimum it will start a record that has to be addressed, other people can use and hold the companies accountable as well as the manufacturers.
 
The article at the link provided below makes a lot of sense. It discusses why drunk driving laws should be eliminated and the focus should be on driving ability instead. This would allow police officers to enforce traffic laws rather than arresting people for drunk driving when they've been stopped for a minor traffic offense, such as having a tail light out or expired tags, or when they are merely occupying a parked vehicle.