Absurd. But what a windfall for whichever congressman's cousin owns the interlock device company!

Just wondering how long the first time offender blow device has to be installed?

Life is a matter of choices. The interlock is only for those who choose to drink and drive and then desire to drive after conviction

It's pretty simple to me. You choose to do the right thing . . or the wrong thing. And we all know the answer to that. You drink and drive . . then you pay for that decision. We have to be accountable for our actions . . and pay the consequences for using poor judgment. Isn't that what we teach our children. The evidence about the damage caused by alcohol is everywhere . . . on the streets, in our homes, at schools. The emotional devastation is overwhelming . .not to mention the economic impact. Why do folk continue to enable the use of such a destructive drug. Statistically alcohol does exponentially more damage to society than all the other illicit drugs combined. Do your homework . . you'll find the lesson in critical thinking may open your eyes.

Ben & Nina have said it well. Life is definitely full of choices. There is so much "out there" about not drinking and driving. The person chooses to make that decision to get behind the wheel while drinking because he/she thinks they can handle it. Protecting my family or your family as well as the drinker is way more important than the inconvience of having to install a device in your car that will stop the drinker from driving.

No.

13 years ago I sat at a red light when a drunk driver slammed into my car. Witnesses report the driver never applied the brakes and estimate he had been driving over 40 miles an hour. My car was totaled. The car in front of me was virtually totaled. I was fortunate that my children were not in the car seats in the back seat. This driver had already received two previous DUIs. His family told him not to get in the car, but he lied and said he would be picked up by a friend. He got behind the wheel anyway. No question. I was lucky not to have sustained major injuries. The amount of time and effort including medical appointments, finding a replacement car, missed work. You get convicted of driving with an over the limit BAC, you can be inconvenienced to protect the rest of us.

Some things to be aware of: 1) unless the technology has improved since I saw it 15 years ago, the devices are a bit unreliable and can prevent a 100% sober person from driving depending on carbs they've eaten; 2) many people share cars, so the penalty will fall on innocent people as well. I wonder what the rate of repeat offense is for drunk driving; if it's high, it's further support for this plan.

All drunks, who are daily drunks should be denied drivers licenses. Maybe there should be driver checks by the local police, as Springfield did at one time. Checks were done in the evening.

A beer drunk drives with an open can of beer between his/her knees. Both in daylight and afterdark!!

A drunk, who is drunk all the time, does not need to be on the road. period! The rest of your comments do not apply. Drunk in daylight rams a telephone pole. Guess who pays for the new telephone pole? His wife. For a man who does/will not work or can't work because he loses his tools or sells them - the working wife pays for the broken pole and the car that was parked just the other side of the pole. The wife pays for the doctor bills to repair the drunk's mouth over $200 for the pole and over $150 for the stitches inside and outside the drunks mouth where his mouth hit the steering wheel. He drives, what he thinks is behind a stopped car and hits the car right between the two left side doors. Who pays for the damage to the wife's car that the drunk destroys? Who pays for the damage to the car he hit? The working wife. Who lives with the fights between drunk and wife, besides the wife? The three small children who hide out when daddy comes home drunk. Dear Mr./Ms. Brinn - please think before making those statements. You are very lucky if all your husband does is have one or two beers to wind down after work - how about a case 24 cans on weekends and about a six pack every day?

I'm sorry you've had such a terrible experience with alcoholics in life Sally, but my affinity for beer shouldn't preclude me or anyone else from having a license.

Bringing the hammer down on a first offender who is only one or two hundredths of a percent above the limit seems harsh. The ignition device ought to be required only for second offenders or first offenders with blood alcohol above some higher threshhold, such as 0.10%.

I support it. If you're flippant enough to drive impaired, then you have to suffer the consequences. Furthermore, if the first offense is really disruptive to that person's life, they should be a lot less likely to re-offend. Right?

I'm now convinced that Sally is drunk.

Of course life is full of "choices," but that's not the point of the question. If you automatically lost your parental rights after one DUI we wouldn't say 'life's a bunch of choices, sorry' would we? The point is whether it is a good idea to have such an interlock device installed on your car after the first offense. I tend to think that is a little harsh. John Verela put it well. Equating someone who's barely over (i.e., wasn't a sloppy drunk) with someone who's twice the limit seems a bit silly. I would hope that a judge would be able to see who is truly a menace to the roads and who is not. Politicians crafting a one-size-fits-all rule is not justice.

No. 10 yers ago, a dear friend was enduring an ugly divorce and depression. Sadly, he got a DUI. Since a part of his job included driving his employer's leadership from airports to assorted federal agencies, an ignition lock could have destroyed his career.

He was given the opton of an ignition lock or attending outpatient rehab. He choose rehab, despite its costing three times more than the ignition lock. He benefitted from the therapy and has done well ever since. Mandatory approaches are not always the best decisions.

KM makes a good point. So do Ben, AP, DMcC,KB, SS, JV, MJF, & some bits of others appeal to me. Since I tend to doubt that a driver's first DUI is really the first time they've driven under irresponsible/illegal influences/drunk - maybe give the judge in a 'first caught' offender case an option. As KM wrote, the judge decides either ignition lock or strict outpatient rehab attendance as penalty for drunk driver's first offence. Also very, Very thorough, multi jurisdictions/multi states searches need to be completed & given to judge prior to judge's decision to prove this really is first time for this impaired driver. Then judge & system are also responsible & accountable for any DUI repetition by this driver. Driving on our public-paid-for roads, bridges, etc., is a privilege to be earned and protected. So YES under these conditions, am still in favor of first time DUI's having serious penalty of ignition breathalizers installed/required in every vehicle DUI might drive or strict rehab - either for a very, Very. long amount of time. Any interest in second-time-caught DUI discussions ... ? ;8-))

Here's a link to the actual law:
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?121+ful+CHAP0141

If you are convicted of DUI you can apply to the court for a restricted license. That restriction generally enables you to drive to and from work/school only. What the law says that if choose to apply to apply for a restricted license after choosing to drink and drive you will only be able to drive a car with one of these devices installed.
There is no doubt that this is a very tough law... very tough... I've seen the lives ruined because they were victims of drunk drivers and I'm sure if you talk to an emergency department physician you'd hear the same... I think what the General Assembly is really trying to balance is the tremendous harm to a person/family who becomes an innocent victim of someone who had "one too many " (or worse) vs. the inconvenience of having to operate only a car with an interlock device if you are able to convince a judge to give you a restricted license. I think it is a fair balance..others can certainly disagree... It will certainly make all of us think a little bit more before getting into the car after having had a few beers. In my view "so be it."

tough, yes.

actually, the more i think about this i looks like the new law doesn't actually change much. When you are convicted of DUI in Va you are going to have your license suspended, usually for 6 month for first time offense. so you aren't allowed to drive. Period.

You can generally apply for a restricted license, meaning you can drive a little bit.. to and from work.. to and from child care..things like that... obviously, during this limited time you are allowed to drive, you aren't supposed to be drinking...

The interlock just reinforces that..but in terms of your actual privilege to drive after a first time conviction, it doesn't change much.

Interested in your feedback. I'm a lawyer but not a DUI lawyer... if there are any DUI attorneys who are on Patch, interested in your feedback

Unless things have changed, judges are not the ones handing down punishment. They are overseen by the jurisdiction's substance abuse program. So, once a person pleads (or is found) guilty, the person pays the fines, then their oversight is turned over to the local program. Historically, those staff could require documented attendance at AA meetings, attendance at a series of the substance abuse program's classes, ignition locks, rehab recommendations and driving restrictions.

I tend to wonder if this new law is intended to add more uniformity across jurisdictions. Again, I'm not sure if things have changed. My friend's experience was ten or so years ago.

I can guarantee you we drive among many a closet drunk. Mommy's little helper. I know a Kingstowne mommy who drinks everyday. Drives her daughter here and there or pawns her off. She goes to book club, PTA, runs and leads a cute little girl scout troop. She's a regular at the bar and rarely misses a chance to drink for one reason or the other. She even cheats on her husband. All the mommies in the neighborhood should keep an eye on this one. You see she's no "one time offender" she just hasn't been caught. When she when she's caught put a Interlock on her Mazda.

Fairfax driving school is the basic platform to learn driving and your child get trained by my trainer with driving license satisfied by American Automobile Association (AAA). AA Driving academy provide special batches for working professional and driving improvement program, so get best result with me, visit us for more information at: http://aadrivingacademy.net