Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Call to make drink-drive interlock rules tougher - The Age

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by Sir Ride Alot, Feb 26, 2013.

  1. Call to make drink-drive interlock rules tougher

    Date February 25, 2013 Henrietta Cook

    Companies set to make a windfall from tough new laws that will order all drink-drivers to fit alcohol interlock devices in their cars are pushing for even harsher road rules.

    Under radical changes to Victoria's road laws, any one who records a blood alcohol level over 0.05 will be ordered to fit an interlock device to their car, increasing the number of devices installed each year from around 6,500 to 17,000.

    Victoria's three approved interlock companies- Draeger Safety, Guardian Interlock Systems and Smart Start Interlocks- have applauded the changes but are pushing for an even greater crackdown on drink drivers.

    Smart Start Interlocks managing director John Doherty said all P-platers should automatically have an alcohol interlock fitted into their car for at least 6 months.

    "So many kids don't understand that they still have alcohol in their system after they stay out late and get in the car in the morning."

    He has also asked VicRoads to investigate court-ordered alcohol interlocks with cameras- which would make it even trickier to evade the devices.

    "It would stop the lies like 'it must have been my mate'."

    Guardian Interlock Systems managing director Les Libbesson said police officers should be given new powers to hand out drink driving infringements which give motorists the option of fitting their car with an alcohol interlock or going to court.

    He said this scheme was already operating in British Columbia, Canada, and had been a huge success.

    "A person found with a blood alcohol level over 0.05 should be put on an interlock immediately, without a court order. There is no such thing as a first time drink driver."

    Interlocks cost almost $2000 a year- which includes an initial installation fee as well a monthly fee.

    Under the Baillieu government's plan, the motorist would foot the bill for the machines- which prevent cars from starting unless a driver has passed a breath test.

    Draeger Safety managing director Andrew Hawke said Victoria had taken a sensible approach to reduce accidents.

    "We applaud the idea and yes, of course it means we will do more business."

    Mr Hawke said alcohol interlocks with cameras- which currently can not be ordered by Victorian courts- made the technology fool-proof by taking a photo of the driver every time they used the machine.

    "It's not only photography, there's lot of other technology that improves ability of knowing who is blowing."

    Under current laws, only repeat offenders or drivers who record a blood alcohol concentration of more than 0.15 are required to fit an interlock to their car.

    Minister for Police and Emergency Services Peter Ryan said the new laws would save up to 20 lives a year, and the devices could eventually become standard in all new cars sold in Australia.

    "We intend for this legislation to have its effect. We think it will profoundly do so, it will be very beneficial, it will save lives. We are the first in Australia to do it."

    He said the new laws would apply to all drink drivers, except in exceptional circumstances determined by the courts.

    Victoria Police assistant commissioner Robert Hill welcomed the move, and dismissed claims the new laws would clog up the courts.

    He said motorists caught drink-driving did not always end up in the court and Victroia Police were working with Vic Roads to ensure this continued to occur.

    "We expect this to have a significant impact with road trauma here in Victoria," he said.

    Drink driving is responsible for up to 30 per cent of deaths and 11 per cent of serious injuries on Victoria's roads.

    Repeat drink drivers account for 30 per cent of all drivers caught drink driving.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/call-to-make-drinkdrive-interlock-rules-tougher-20130225-2f1s9.html#ixzz2LzSTxbKo
  2. The question needs to be asked.

    Are some of our politicians on the take?
  3. What this whole idea fails to recognise is it won't stop people from drink driving in the first place.
    Only after an offence do they intend to have an interlock installed.
  4. As a heavy drinker I have zero tolerance for drink drivers. Sounds good to me.

  6. Is that an opinion piece ?
    Could also be said there is no such thing as a first time .... Shop Stealer, Bank Robber, Murderer, the list goes on

    So back to my original point.
  7. I was having a bit of a dig at both you and Les Libbesson.

    I'd be interested to hear your views on how you'd prevent first timers. It didn't work too well in Miniorty Report as I recall :)
  8. #8 adjustedpete, Feb 26, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2013
    Lets let a few more companies get in on the action. Why are there only 3 ??.. And why can't we just buy them and have them fitted. Maybe with checking stations, not unlike rego checks. Or any other options that may be available.

    Umm, not sure..... :LOL:
  9. Smells like a pump and dump. Interlock manufacturer trying to generate speculative interest in their stock ahead of an IPO or private sale of the business.
  10. If I had the answer to that i would be a very rich man.
    We all know prevention is the best option but implementing it without impeding on civil liberties is a fight that will go on for eternity.

    Even the harshest penalty 'sentence to death' doesn't prevent people committing murder. So you could say prevention is a lost cause
  11. Something smells here. Are we going to see a senior cop or public servant pick up a well paid consultancy or board position when they retire? Rather like a former senior cop and a speed camera manufacturer.
  12. Anytime you are stopped by Police they can ascertain whether an Interlock device should be installed on a vehicle and request that it is operational.
  13. Sounds like an opinion piece to me..

    I don't drive drunk but I won't hesitate to drink up to the magic 0.05 limit. I've seen plenty of those RBT shows, I'd be farking mad if my life was turned upside down by a reading of 0.051. It's like getting done for half a kph over the speed limit
  14. Mick, that part I understand, Im just whimpering about why can you only buy/rent the damn things from government approved companies. This to me is a monopoly. And I for one will be on the lookout for when they float the companies. After 20 beers Im a idiot that will ride/drive... ok ok, after 1 beer Im a idiot but it still stinks that the cost of the enforcment is so high to us. In good ole US of A they cost from $300 to $1000, and no mention of a monthly fee. So why the prohibitive cost here. I personally think they should me fitted to all vehicles by manufacturers'.
  15. Yes. If they were truly serious about road safety IMHO all new cars would be fitted with alcohol interlocks. Within 5-10 years I reckon it will happen.

    Incidentally systems are coming that do register/check the DNA each test so no one else can blow for the person who has the interlock fitted.
  16. That is why this press release was made. The float price includes a premium for extraordinary profits from operating in an oligopoly. This press release tends to inflate that premium, so the existing owners can make some extraordinary profit from suckers who buy into the IPO.
  17. Just one question. What if the offender doesn't own a car?.

    I am effectively 'tea total' these days, but this seems a bit drastic for a first offence, particularly if you blow 0.051 (or 0.05 for that matter).

    Yet another example of the nanny state mentality in Victoria.
  18. I'm for stopping drink drivers and inappropriate mobile phone use, but there are things about this (and also the new Vicroads mobile phone disabler app) that just don't sit right.
    I does smell like the process is being driven by the commercial considerations for a start. Now they are talking about fitting them to every Learner and P-plater regardless of conviction. At $2K a year for three years that would be an absolute fortune, and not open to free market competition.
  19. Fitted to every p-plateer's car? Soooo just register the car in parents name (as heaps do anyway to save on insurance premiums) and it's all sweet. This hasn't been thought through. And the cost! jesus my first car was less than $2000.

    Just thinking out loud, but could you keep a few balloons of 'clean' air in the car and use to pass the device?
  20. if this is just about road safety then Im all for it, as soon as they can manufacture a similar type speed limiter device that can be retro fitted to every vehicle owner's car bike or truck that has been done for speeding regardless of the amount.

    With real time satellite technology, devices fitted to these vehicles would track they roads these vehicles are travelling on and not allow these vehicles to travel any more than 5 k's of what ever the posted speed limit of the road they were on.

    But I think this is less about road safety and more about revenue for both the Government and Interlock manufactures.