Posted on 01/14/2019 11:08:57 AM PST by Lazamataz
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) is planning to introduce a bill next week that would require all new vehicles sold in the U.S. to come equipped with an interlocking breathalyzer device.
The breathalyzer device would force drivers to test their blood-alcohol content (BAC) levels before being able to start the car.
The devices are typically attached to a car's ignition. If a driver's BAC is above the legal limit, the car will not start.
The legislation was prompted by the deaths of Northville, Mich., residents, Issam Abbas and Rima Abbas and their three children, who were killed by a drunken driver on their way home from vacation, MLive.com reported.
“Their loss has devastated our community in ways you cannot imagine,” Dingell said. “In every sense of the word, they were a community. Their absence stunned this community and is felt deeply and emotionally.”
The Abbas family lived in Dingell's district.
“If we can keep one person from dying on the roads and make people think twice before getting behind the wheel when they shouldn’t — even when they’re buzzed and think they are OK — can’t we say we’ve been successful?” Dingell said Thursday during a speech on the House floor.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
You can ban everything using that argument.
How about a needle that jabs the driver in the ass and samples the blood for marijuana impairment?
Offset by the number of people who die in their car in blizzards when the friggen thing malfunctions and you can’t get it started.
Do-gooderism at it’s finest!
For the 99% that do not drink and drive, how is this even relevant?
I understand the ‘Rats will eek out a special proviso that for 0bama, the device will be an inhalator.
You can ban everything using that argument.
Think she’ll answer in the affirmative if “it saves one life” is used as a reason for building a wall on the southern border?
My nephew had one ordered by the court. His kids blew in for him to start it.
.”Ah, the old “If it saves ONE LIFE” argument.” doesn’t work to well with the liberal. abortion thought process though.
.”Ah, the old “If it saves ONE LIFE” argument.” doesn’t work to well with the liberal.. abortion thought process though.
I think every “lawmaker” should have a breathalyzer hung around his neck. If people shouldn’t drive around while under the influence, lawmakers shouldn’t be able to propose any changes to the law while under the influence.
Build a better mouse trap and the world will make a better mouse.
I think breathalyzers should be required of congressmen three times a day, and weekly urinalysis screening for drugs.
Ouch. That sounds like a painful step........
But people still get to text and drive?
The auto manufacturers will kill off this idea. No way do they want the hassle of engineering and warranting breathalyzers. None of this sort of technology is ever fool-proof and equipment malfunctions can and will occur. Can you imagine all the headaches and disgruntled customers this would create for the auto companies? “I wasn’t anywhere near drunk but my @#$! car still wouldn’t start!
Debbie Dingell........................apropos name....................
[Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.)]
Well, at least she has the right name.
We’ll eventually reach “The Island” where your bodily excretions are measured for too much bacon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.