The drunk can get someone else to blow into it, for one.
As far as invasion of privacy goes I think it’s a non-starter. As any reporter (like me) knows…any arrest or conviction is a matter of public record. So I don’t think there’s an expectation that one’s conviction, or multiple convictions, for DUI should not become public knowledge.
In Ohio they have DUI plates. They are yellow with red letters. I am not sure if they still assign them but I do see them from time to time. From what I understand they are required to be placed on all cars owned by the DUI offender.
I am not sure how they are assigned though. My ex had five DUI’s and never had the plates but I know a friend that had one DUI and he had DUI plates for two years.
This is a cleverly-disguised fallacy of denying the correlative at work, I think. The number of these other lawbreakers has no bearing on the possible relationship between a scarlet plate and its efficacy.
I’ve seen people get around those interlock devices so many ways, I’m convinced they are completely worthless.
Not sure I agree with point 3, but…
…at least in my state, convictions are easy to locate for anyone. Just go to a website and search by name - you’ll see all of their traffic tickets, criminal convictions, even if they’ve been sued. Instantly. For free. It’s really well-known here, actually, and if there were DUI plates, a lot of (most?) people would run to the database for the gritty details if they saw someone they knew who had them.
My fear is that it would invite vigilante justice. I’m sure there are quite a few grieving family members out there who might take a swing at the car in a dark parking lot.
Not a good idea IMHO. If the vehicle is being operated unsafely, a policemen seeign this will type int he plate numebr and have the information with seconds. There is no reason anyone else needs to know.
Bingo. In my state, DUI-third offense is a felony, and permanent loss of license is one of the automatic penalties. I see no reason a license plate should be issued to someone with three DUI convictions, so the special tag idea is moot.
Those devices are not perfect. They likely work on the same technology used in breathalyzer machines, which are known to sometimes produce erroneous results both positive and negative.
Yeah, #3 was my main point of contention as well. (I hope you don’t agree with points 1 and 2, since the whole thing was a sendup of RW’s argument against me ;))
I know there are ways to quantify the likelihood, if not verify outright, that the driver of the car is in fact the one with the DUI convictions, but that’s not the point. On this board, of all places, I hope I don’t have to argue the tendency of some people to jump to conclusions without applying due-diligence in fact checking or rational deduction. Add to that the fact that on the face of it, the conclusion “driver with DUI plates = DUI offender” doesn’t seem a patently unreasonable one to jump to, and the proposed legislation is a recipe for disaster.
Your friend lied about his one DUI–you have to have at least 2 to qualify for the “party plates” in Ohio.
Really? There’s a lot of vigilantism and “ooh, look at that chronic drunkard” whispering in states with party plates?
no, it doesn’t have the bearing on the efficacy of DUI plates per se. the rate of license-less drivers does have a bearing on the efficacy of DUI laws that allow restrictive driving for work purposes, though. the point being, since we have data that suggests that there are many people who will drive without a license (because the odds of getting caught doing so, especially if you drive lawfully, are extremely low), enforcing restricted driving privileges via the use of special license plates may be more effective.
Even if the device worked perfectly, they’re expensive, to the tune of $1500 to $2000 per unit. Also they have to be maintained and recalibrated every 60 days, and are a pain in the ass to use, particulalry the “rolling test” that retests the driver periodically while operating the vehicle. Any such law would also very likely have to be passed at the federal level to pass constitutional muster, the end result being that the vast majority of lawabiding citizens with no intention of driving drunk in the first place aren’t going to stand for the federal government requiring them to pay an extra grand or two to get the unit, get it recalibrated six times a year, and blow into it every 30 minutes or so while driving.
Well, driving drunk is pretty good at crippling human beings, so the offender’s economic productivity isn’t exactly my priority.
As for the plates: Not sure I understand what they’d accomplish, so let’s establish that before bothering to go into privacy and logistics.
We have the tell-tale “whiskey plates” in Minnesota. And while I don’t participate in any vigilantism, I definitely will think less of someone who has them. Yup, I think less of people who have DUIs and I’m the jerk.
One note, the link I gave had part of the law overturned by the Minnesota Supreme Court. The law stated that anyone who drove a car with whiskey plates would have to undergo a field sobriety test anytime a police officer pulled them over and that the pullover could be for no reasonable cause except for the whiskey plates.
The old lady at the BMV did not find it funny when I asked if I could have one of those instead of the regular plates, because “they looked nicer”.
I also remember when Ohio considered pink plates for sex offenders.
astro, is it really necessary to exaggerate when you start a thread? The state of Maryland didn’t propose any such thing. One legislator has re-introduced a bill that’s already been rejected twice. The bill has apparently never made it out of committee.
It’s a stupid practice to have a DUI license plate. They need to address the problem and require them to not drive drunk. We have enough scientific knowledge to do this for most cases. There will always be ways around anything you come up with and then the penalty should be very severe when they are caught. Something like you’re now in jail for the next decade. No work release for you.
They types of electronics to install?
Breathalyzer start
Motion devices that monitor steering that goes back and forth.
Motion devices for erratic speeds.
A device to call in and a black box that the police check for this encase the call in device is tampered with.
Other stuff like this as they have proved they can’t be trusted.
The first. Not the second, not the third. The first. Anyone who gets snockered and gets behind the wheel of a car is trying to kill other people.