Article: FF TD wants 'alcolocks' in all Irish cars

Seth Brundle

from http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/07/21/story212706.html

Fianna Fáil TD John Ellis has called for so-called "alcolocks" to be made mandatory in all cars in Ireland.

The device is a breathalyser fitted to the ignition which motorists must blow into if they want to start their car.

If the driver is above the alcohol limit, the "alcolock" will not allow the vehicle to start.

Mr Ellis, chairman of the Oireachtas Transport Committee, said today that the technology was already being used successfully in some Scandinavian countries.

He said he believed the public would support moves to make such devices obligatory due to growing intolerance of drink-driving in Ireland.

I wonder who will pay for this. As I don't drink and drive I personally am unwilling to purchase something like this!

Dades

Wonder if there're to be fitted to bicycles too.

seamus

No problem, so long as the Government foots the bill of fitting them to all cars, trucks, busses, motorcycles, and bicycles (oh wait, how would that work? :rolleyes: ).

This is a FF TD trying to shift the responsibility of detection. If this ever came in, almost instantly it would be possible to get small pumps that you fit over the mouthpiece and pump the air in. And then, once again, the responsibility of detection shifts back to the Gardai.

Moron.

Alun

If this ever came in, almost instantly it would be possible to get small pumps that you fit over the mouthpiece and pump the air in.

Or get someone else (who's sober) to breathe into it first?

MrPudding

Alun wrote:

Or get someone else (who's sober) to breathe into it first?

Cottage industry there. Young sober people hanging arround pubs at closing time blowing for middle aged men in beemers and mercs. €20 a blow.

MrP

Dades

Alun wrote:

Or get someone else (who's sober) to breathe into it first?

There can't be many people who would do that for someone.

I think the theory is great. I mean - whats the problem? If you're not over the limit you just drive away. If you are - well you shouldn't be driving anyway.

The problem is messing with people's pride and joy [i.e. their motor], and unpredictable technology. Obviously the cost might be an issue if you were expected to pay for it.

seamus

The Atheist wrote:

I think the theory is great. I mean - whats the problem? If you're not over the limit you just drive away. If you are - well you shouldn't be driving anyway.

The problem is as I've outlined above. Those who don't break the law will adopt it and use it happily. It may one or twice save early risers from driving while still too hungover.
However, those who already break the law will find a way around it, and nothing would change. A bit like attempting to put copy protection on CDs and DVDs.

Nuttzz

MrPudding wrote:

Cottage industry there. Young sober people hanging arround pubs at closing time blowing for middle aged men in beemers and mercs. €20 a blow.

MrP

doesnt that already happen in the phoenix park.......

Baz_

MrPudding wrote:

Cottage industry there. Young sober people hanging arround pubs at closing time blowing for middle aged men in beemers and mercs. €20 a blow.

MrP

erm...

anyway, thats an absolutely fantastic sig you've got there, nearly roffled me toffle at it...

franksm

Think they ought to start with cleaning their own house before starting anything wholescale. Jim McDaid's car would be a good one to pilot the system...

(Perhaps I have that wrong. Perhaps they were thinking of making us drive on the right, not the left, and McDaid was asked to pilot that scheme too)

Gegerty

seamus wrote:

The problem is as I've outlined above. Those who don't break the law will adopt it and use it happily. It may one or twice save early risers from driving while still too hungover.
However, those who already break the law will find a way around it, and nothing would change. A bit like attempting to put copy protection on CDs and DVDs.

obviously if they crash (drunk or otherwise) and they find its been disabled then they're in for a nasty prison sentence.

I think its a good idea. People who drink and drive and think they are under the limit will quickly put a stop to their habit after having to walk home or catch a taxi a few times.

You'll get the odd few who will blow into the pipe for them but its going to be a very small percentage that will ask and a very small percentage that will oblige.

Cond0r

Won't people get cheesed off having to blow into their ignition device every time they want to start their car?
I can't imagine how annoying that would get!

Apart from that I think the idea is completely crazy, as seamus said people will find a way around it in no time. Another waste of tax payers money as usual with this government.

Gegerty

Apparently they're only to be used on commercial vehicles and previous offenders.

seamus

Gegerty wrote:

obviously if they crash (drunk or otherwise) and they find its been disabled then they're in for a nasty prison sentence.

If they crash drunk, they're screwed. If they crash and this thing is disabled, then nothing will happen, because the Gardai couldn't be arsed. If they use a pumping device to put the air in it, and they crash, then there's no evidence that they *didn't* blow into the device to start the car.

For the sheer expense alone to the individual motorist, this would be the next big joke implemented by FF.

For commercial vehicles and previous drink-drivers, I think it's a great idea.

John R

seamus wrote:

For commercial vehicles and previous drink-drivers, I think it's a great idea.

Why are the reasons you outlined before not applicable to commercial vehicle drivers and previous offenders?

Also why should people who drive for a living have to accept this when car drivers don't? Do we have reason to believe more of them drink-drive? As far as I was aware statistically professional drivers are far less likely to be drunk at the wheel than private motorists although I cannot remember where I read it.

While we are at it should all vehicles on the road be fitted with speed limiters and measuring devices that can record speed in case of accidents. Commercial vehicles have had these for decades now.

seamus

John R wrote:

Why are the reasons you outlined before not applicable to commercial vehicle drivers and previous offenders?

They are. But then it's reasonable to inflict it on previous drink-driving offenders (for a limited amount of time). Commercial vehicles, I'm thinking delivery vehicles, haulage vehicles, etc, not taxi drivers and sales reps. For commercial purposes, it could be a tax deductable item, offsetting the cost issue. Mainly because deaths and crashes involving HGVs are at ridiculous levels, and I know guys in the business - many of these drivers are driving when they're in no fit state to be. Some of the beer delivery guys stop off for a pint in half of the pubs they deliver to, and end up with six pints on them, driving through busy city streets in a pretty large vehicle.

Sorry, I should state that while I would have no problem inflicting it on commercial vehicles and previous offenders, I still think it wouldn't make arse all difference there in the long run either. As Primetime showed, many, if not most commercial HGVs are driving outside the law undetected.

As we've said on this board time and time again, there is no point in legislating anymore. It's detection, detection, detection.

jlang

Cond0r wrote:

Won't people get cheesed off having to blow into their ignition device every time they want to start their car?
I can't imagine how annoying that would get!

And then there's a potential hygiene issue - if several people drive a vehicle, they need to use fresh blow-tubes each time. Imagine learner drivers, cutting out all the time, needing to remember to blow in to the tube as well as everything else!

Never going to happen, just a FF politico trying to generate interference for his local publicans.

kasintahan

Gegerty wrote:

Apparently they're only to be used on commercial vehicles and previous offenders.

That's pathetic.

Expecting people who have a history of breaking the law NOT to circumvent the device.

Everyday I lose a little more confidence in democracy.

commited

If it made my insurance cheaper I'm all for it