Can the ignition interlock device cause car problems?

[theveryedge]

Brand new semi literate hearie, responding to a dead thread....


How annoying. Plus all the people you are yelling at, have mostly died or quit.

And that was for genuine Deaf disliking deaf.

Aren't there some nice car forums for your ilk??

No, we will speak because we can. Ignorance does not cure itself

 

[Reba]

I thinks it's bit hypocritical to say such a thing.. if you consume alcohol or used to ever, most likely you have driven a vehicle.

I've never driven a vehicle after drinking. I don't drink alcohol. There is no hypocrisy in my previous statement.

Most people who get DUI's don't hit or kill people.

So, do you want to give them more opportunities to get into wrecks?

Last year 10,000 people were killed in drunk driving accidents, and 38,000 people were killed in non-alcohol related accidents, 400,000 people died from smoking. In comparison the death toll from alcohol related deaths is minuscule.

I don't think the family members and friends of those 10,000 victims consider that "minuscule."

The whole DUI thing is all about MONEY; probation fee's, court costs, ignition interlock devices, alcohol classes, lawyers, ect (usually 7,000-10,000$).

There is a cost to driving drunk but there's a solution that costs nothing. Don't drink and drive.

Police park outside of clubs and bars waiting to pull people over at night.

Well, if that's where the drunk drivers are to be found and prevented from hitting the road that makes sense.

The point i'm trying to make is that giving DUI's is a business, it gives people huge fines that the state receives, effects peoples ability to get jobs, and honestly the amount of DUI's given really effects the middle class. Some people get stuck in the court system for simply not having the money to pay all of the fees and survive simultaneously, getting a better job is very hard because now they have a criminal record with the DUI.

How to avoid all those fines and fees? Don't drink and drive. Simple.

If we don't want people driving intoxicated, then don't let bars or clubs have parking lots, it's that simple; but that will never happen because these businesses pay taxes and provide jobs.

Not all bars or clubs have parking lots, especially ones that are in downtown areas. Other than that, the bar patrons can use designated drivers.

On top of everything, a lot of judges have been pulled over drunk but are never charged with DUI's (google Nora Longoria).

They should be treated the same but this doesn't excuse other people from driving drunk.

This is a just another way to put people in jail, so counties receive more tax dollars and fine dollars. You or a family member has driven with alcohol in their system, do you think they really should not be able to drive... ever?

Not if they're still drinking.

If so, then bad drivers who kill people sober, shouldn't be able to drive, and they outnumber the drunks.

If the fatality was the result of reckless driving, then they get their licenses revoked, too. DUI's aren't the only bad drivers who get punished.

The DUI business is Just a way to take money and hype the population with BS propaganda, so they believe it's right.. Our justice system is not right, the USA has the most prisoners incarcerated out of any country in the world, and the private prison slave-camps are allowed to exist because of lobbyists.

How is it propaganda? Do drunk drivers kill people or not? Is it an avoidable crime or not?

 

[Reba]

As for the mechanical issues, this probably isn't the best forum to get technical help. I don't know if we have any professional auto mechanics still posting here.

 

[theveryedge]

I've never driven a vehicle after drinking. I don't drink alcohol. There is no hypocrisy in my previous statement.


So, do you want to give them more opportunities to get into wrecks?

You say "them" as though they are a subclass of humans, a person who gets a DUI is a person who made a mistake and it usually only happens once, you are using a tense as if these people have a disease and they do it always. This is where the propaganda comes into play.


I don't think the family members and friends of those 10,000 victims consider that "minuscule."

I would agree with you, but statistically speaking, it is a minuscule amount of deaths IN COMPARISON to the other deaths of people in this country. Also, in the circumstance where the drunk driver is not at fault; the drunk driver is at fault in the eyes of the law regardless of the evidence.


There is a cost to driving drunk but there's a solution that costs nothing. Don't drink and drive.

That is a good point however, it is most likely going to happen, the fact of the matter is it is not illegal to drive with alcohol in your system, but it is illegal to drive heavily intoxicated. Simply don't drink and drive is a bit of a narrow minded answer, especially when it is not even illegal.


Well, if that's where the drunk drivers are to be found and prevented from hitting the road that makes sense.

That sounds like entrapment.. that would be similar to saying marijuana is illegal for people to posses but it can be sold in stores, creating an environment where the individual can be penalized where the facility pushing the stuff has no penalty.

How to avoid all those fines and fees? Don't drink and drive. Simple.

Once again drinking and driving is not illegal, driving too intoxicated is... simple.

Not all bars or clubs have parking lots, especially ones that are in downtown areas. Other than that, the bar patrons can use designated drivers.

Most bars do have parking lots of some sort, even in downtown areas, for someone who doesn't drink you seem to know a lot about bars. A designated driver is a good idea, but once again it is usually a one time mistake people make, when it is legal to drink and drive but illegal to drink too much and drink it creates a big grey area that favors the law.

They should be treated the same but this doesn't excuse other people from driving drunk.

They should be penalized harsher, since they should know better than the average person. But that doesn't happen, so obviously there is something wrong with the justice system.

Not if they're still drinking.

Once again it is not a disease it is a mistake, and once again it is not illegal to drink and drive.

If the fatality was the result of reckless driving, then they get their licenses revoked, too. DUI's aren't the only bad drivers who get punished.

Simply put, accidents do happen; that is why they are called accidents. However a sober person who kills another person in an accident pays very little in fees in comparison to a person who doesn't hurt anyone and gets a DUI. The fact that there are almost 4 times more deaths from sober bad drivers is the point; accidents happen regardless of alcohol or not.


How is it propaganda? Do drunk drivers kill people or not? Is it an avoidable crime or not?

The propaganda is the pushing of public support for harsher fines and penalties through various media sources. People have been drinking for a long time in this country, but it wasn't until recently that we have seen ridiculous fines and penalties being thrown at people. Also in an scenario where a drunk person is killed by a person who is sober and driving reckless.. The drunk person is at fault no matter what the evidence, this manipulates the figures.


You will believe what you want, all i'm saying is it is not as black and white as you would like to make it seem. Unfortunately today, laws are not like they used to be, police are very strict to younger people; and you simply wouldn't understand because you are from a different time and don't have to experience the oppressive nature of todays justice system the way younger Americans do.[/QUOTE]

 

[Mieke]

@theveryedge Small question, why did you actually join this forum? This is a topic that dates back to 2011, like 5 years ago and has had like 5 post over the last 2-3 years...
Did you really just log on here, to come make a fuzz about an old thread?

And as a Belgian, drinking and driving here still is kind of common, but I support Reba actually on this, if you want to complain about fines and risks, then dont drink and drive.
It's that simple.

Not saying I'm not guilty of doing it, I have and probably will still, although I do know my limits and when I was pulled over by the cops after going out a night and still having some drinks, I was still below the legal limit.
In Belgium, you can have like 1 or 2 beers and still be allowed to drive. But most often when I'm driving, I will just not drink. You may always think you can still drive and even though you may consider these fines etc outrageous, but consider even just for a second what it does for the victim's life and the driver's life. Since for both your life is ruined, imagine you kill someone that way, can you still live with yourself?

I don't think I could...

 

[Bottesini]

I've never driven a vehicle after drinking. I don't drink alcohol. There is no hypocrisy in my previous statement.


So, do you want to give them more opportunities to get into wrecks?

You say "them" as though they are a subclass of humans, a person who gets a DUI is a person who made a mistake and it usually only happens once, you are using a tense as if these people have a disease and they do it always. This is where the propaganda comes into play.


I don't think the family members and friends of those 10,000 victims consider that "minuscule."

I would agree with you, but statistically speaking, it is a minuscule amount of deaths IN COMPARISON to the other deaths of people in this country. Also, in the circumstance where the drunk driver is not at fault; the drunk driver is at fault in the eyes of the law regardless of the evidence.


There is a cost to driving drunk but there's a solution that costs nothing. Don't drink and drive.

That is a good point however, it is most likely going to happen, the fact of the matter is it is not illegal to drive with alcohol in your system, but it is illegal to drive heavily intoxicated. Simply don't drink and drive is a bit of a narrow minded answer, especially when it is not even illegal.


Well, if that's where the drunk drivers are to be found and prevented from hitting the road that makes sense.

That sounds like entrapment.. that would be similar to saying marijuana is illegal for people to posses but it can be sold in stores, creating an environment where the individual can be penalized where the facility pushing the stuff has no penalty.

How to avoid all those fines and fees? Don't drink and drive. Simple.

Once again drinking and driving is not illegal, driving too intoxicated is... simple.

Not all bars or clubs have parking lots, especially ones that are in downtown areas. Other than that, the bar patrons can use designated drivers.

Most bars do have parking lots of some sort, even in downtown areas, for someone who doesn't drink you seem to know a lot about bars. A designated driver is a good idea, but once again it is usually a one time mistake people make, when it is legal to drink and drive but illegal to drink too much and drink it creates a big grey area that favors the law.

They should be treated the same but this doesn't excuse other people from driving drunk.

They should be penalized harsher, since they should know better than the average person. But that doesn't happen, so obviously there is something wrong with the justice system.

Not if they're still drinking.

Once again it is not a disease it is a mistake, and once again it is not illegal to drink and drive.

If the fatality was the result of reckless driving, then they get their licenses revoked, too. DUI's aren't the only bad drivers who get punished.

Simply put, accidents do happen; that is why they are called accidents. However a sober person who kills another person in an accident pays very little in fees in comparison to a person who doesn't hurt anyone and gets a DUI. The fact that there are almost 4 times more deaths from sober bad drivers is the point; accidents happen regardless of alcohol or not.


How is it propaganda? Do drunk drivers kill people or not? Is it an avoidable crime or not?

The propaganda is the pushing of public support for harsher fines and penalties through various media sources. People have been drinking for a long time in this country, but it wasn't until recently that we have seen ridiculous fines and penalties being thrown at people. Also in an scenario where a drunk person is killed by a person who is sober and driving reckless.. The drunk person is at fault no matter what the evidence, this manipulates the figures.


You will believe what you want, all i'm saying is it is not as black and white as you would like to make it seem. Unfortunately today, laws are not like they used to be, police are very strict to younger people; and you simply wouldn't understand because you are from a different time and don't have to experience the oppressive nature of todays justice system the way younger Americans do.

[/QUOTE]
Think about this. Deaf people are very likely to be harmed by a cop if they are stopped for anything. Your whining about drunk drivers losing privileges is petty.

 

[Reba]

You say "them" as though they are a subclass of humans, a person who gets a DUI is a person who made a mistake and it usually only happens once, you are using a tense as if these people have a disease and they do it always. This is where the propaganda comes into play.

I used "them" as a referent back to the phrase "Most people who get DUI's." A simple use of a pronoun so that I didn't have to repeat the phrase "people who get DUI's."

I didn't set the tense. I used the tense that was in the post that I quoted. Present tense "get," "don't hit or kill" was used in the post, not "got," or "didn't hit or kill."

The point was, if drunk drivers aren't kept off the roads, they will have more opportunities to get into wrecks.

Also, I never said drunk driving was a disease. I don't believe it is. It's a behavior and that can be changed.

I would agree with you, but statistically speaking, it is a minuscule amount of deaths IN COMPARISON to the other deaths of people in this country. Also, in the circumstance where the drunk driver is not at fault; the drunk driver is at fault in the eyes of the law regardless of the evidence.

That is a good point however, it is most likely going to happen, the fact of the matter is it is not illegal to drive with alcohol in your system, but it is illegal to drive heavily intoxicated. Simply don't drink and drive is a bit of a narrow minded answer, especially when it is not even illegal.

Maybe it seems narrow minded but it's the only sure way of not driving drunk. If drivers think they know how much alcohol they can consume before it effects their driving then that's the chance they are taking.

That sounds like entrapment.. that would be similar to saying marijuana is illegal for people to posses but it can be sold in stores, creating an environment where the individual can be penalized where the facility pushing the stuff has no penalty.

No, that's not the same. For one thing, it's not entrapment--the police aren't luring people into bars. Secondly, the police don't pour alcohol down the throats of drivers.

Once again drinking and driving is not illegal, driving too intoxicated is... simple.

Apparently, for some drivers, acknowledging that they are too intoxicated to drive is not so simple or else they wouldn't do it. If a driver doesn't drink at all, then there's no doubt.

Most bars do have parking lots of some sort, even in downtown areas, for someone who doesn't drink you seem to know a lot about bars.

I know my communities. I know where the parking is and where it isn't. I read the newspaper and watch the news so I know what people are complaining about. Downtown parking and neighborhood bars are common complaints in the news.

A designated driver is a good idea, but once again it is usually a one time mistake people make, when it is legal to drink and drive but illegal to drink too much and drink it creates a big grey area that favors the law.

Actions have consequences, and that's a fact of life.

They should be penalized harsher, since they should know better than the average person. But that doesn't happen, so obviously there is something wrong with the justice system.

Well, I think all drivers know that they're not supposed drive drunk. However, persons in positions of authority need to be held accountable just like everyone else.

Once again it is not a disease it is a mistake, and once again it is not illegal to drink and drive.

So, how would you ensure that the "mistake" doesn't get made again?

Simply put, accidents do happen; that is why they are called accidents. However a sober person who kills another person in an accident pays very little in fees in comparison to a person who doesn't hurt anyone and gets a DUI. The fact that there are almost 4 times more deaths from sober bad drivers is the point; accidents happen regardless of alcohol or not.

Traffic collisions haven't been called "accidents" for a few years now by most agencies.

http://blog.driversed.com/why-we-use-crash-not-accident/

Drinking before driving is not an accident. Texting while driving is not an accident. Speeding, tailgating, unsafe lane changes aren't accidents.

The propaganda is the pushing of public support for harsher fines and penalties through various media sources. People have been drinking for a long time in this country, but it wasn't until recently that we have seen ridiculous fines and penalties being thrown at people. Also in an scenario where a drunk person is killed by a person who is sober and driving reckless.. The drunk person is at fault no matter what the evidence, this manipulates the figures.

What are those figures?

You will believe what you want, all i'm saying is it is not as black and white as you would like to make it seem. Unfortunately today, laws are not like they used to be, police are very strict to younger people; and you simply wouldn't understand because you are from a different time and don't have to experience the oppressive nature of todays justice system the way younger Americans do.

And you don't know much about history. If you think the justice system is harsh on young people today you obviously don't know anything about civil rights oppression and battles in the 1960's. The Miranda warning wasn't even established until 1966.

"Today, roughly 30% of America’s traffic fatalities involve a drunk driver. Back in the 1950s and ‘60s, that percentage was closer to 50%."
http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/drunk-driving-and-the-pre-history-of-breathalyzers-1474504117

Of course, young people in the USA today can't legally drink until age 21, so the really young drivers don't have a legal limit. Back in my ancient day there were still places where 18 year olds could legally drink, so even more of them could be legally drinking but driving.

It was a lot worse back then. You don't know what "strict" is.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

I thinks it's bit hypocritical to say such a thing.. if you consume alcohol or used to ever, most likely you have driven a vehicle. Most people who get DUI's don't hit or kill people. Last year 10,000 people were killed in drunk driving accidents, and 38,000 people were killed in non-alcohol related accidents, 400,000 people died from smoking. In comparison the death toll from alcohol related deaths is minuscule. The whole DUI thing is all about MONEY; probation fee's, court costs, ignition interlock devices, alcohol classes, lawyers, ect (usually 7,000-10,000$). Police park outside of clubs and bars waiting to pull people over at night. The point i'm trying to make is that giving DUI's is a business, it gives people huge fines that the state receives, effects peoples ability to get jobs, and honestly the amount of DUI's given really effects the middle class. Some people get stuck in the court system for simply not having the money to pay all of the fees and survive simultaneously, getting a better job is very hard because now they have a criminal record with the DUI. If we don't want people driving intoxicated, then don't let bars or clubs have parking lots, it's that simple; but that will never happen because these businesses pay taxes and provide jobs. On top of everything, a lot of judges have been pulled over drunk but are never charged with DUI's (google Nora Longoria). This is a just another way to put people in jail, so counties receive more tax dollars and fine dollars. You or a family member has driven with alcohol in their system, do you think they really should not be able to drive... ever? If so, then bad drivers who kill people sober, shouldn't be able to drive, and they outnumber the drunks. The DUI business is Just a way to take money and hype the population with BS propaganda, so they believe it's right.. Our justice system is not right, the USA has the most prisoners incarcerated out of any country in the world, and the private prison slave-camps are allowed to exist because of lobbyists.

Do you know this thread was started in 2011?? I think it's strange to be digging up zombies threads. You're wrong that most people that DUI do this only once!
There been cases of people doing this 5 times and more !

 

[Barbaro]

Troll?

 

[Calvin]

Troll?

Either that or a rant about DUI issue.. perhaps that poster has a record.

 

[Barbaro]

Either that or a rant about DUI issue.. perhaps that poster has a record.

Or he knows someone has a record he thinks is unfair. This thread triggered him to post this like that. Hmm..

I don't drink alcohol and I do know it is very wrong to drive after consuming any alcohol beverage.

 

[Foxrac]

Do you know this thread was started in 2011?? I think it's strange to be digging up zombies threads. You're wrong that most people that DUI do this only once!
There been cases of people doing this 5 times and more !

Quit whining!!!

 

[LoveBlue]

Do you know this thread was started in 2011??

So what?

 

[DeafDucky]

Do you know this thread was started in 2011?? I think it's strange to be digging up zombies threads.

And your point is....?

There's nothing wrong with old threads and nothing strange about digging them up. It's far better to find and post in an old thread than to create a newer thread on the exact same or similar topic. Waste of space.

Your head would explode in many other forums I've visited as they TELL you to go post in the older thread (no matter what year) and close your brand spanking new thread.