HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Rep. Debbie Dingell wants...

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:36 PM

Rep. Debbie Dingell wants to add breathalyzers to cars in honor of Michigan family killed by drunk

Source: MLive

Rep. Debbie Dingell, a Democrat representing Michigan's 12th district, announced plans this week to introduce legislation aimed at reducing drunk driving.

The action is prompted by the deaths of Northville residents Issam Abbas and Dr. Rima Abbas and their three children - Ali, 14; Isabelle, 13; and Giselle, 7, who were killed by a drink driver in Kentucky while on their way home from a Florida vacation.“Their loss has devastated our community in ways you cannot imagine,” Dingell said during a Thursday speech on the U.S. House of Representatives floor. “In every sense of the word, they were a community. Their absence stunned this community and is felt deeply and emotionally.”

Dingell, whose 12th District includes Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Dearborn and the Abbas’ hometown of Northville, is planning to introduce legislation that would require all new vehicles to have interlocking breathalyzers.

These devices are usually attached to the ignition system of the vehicles and require you to test your blood-alcohol content before unlocking and starting your car. Simply put, if your BAC is above the legal limit, it won't allow you to start the car.




Read more: https://www.mlive.com/news/2019/01/rep-debbie-dingell-wants-to-add-breathalyzers-to-cars-in-honor-of-abbas-family.html

25 replies, 1664 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 25 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rep. Debbie Dingell wants to add breathalyzers to cars in honor of Michigan family killed by drunk (Original post)
MichMan Jan 11 OP
NurseJackie Jan 11 #1
flotsam Jan 11 #20
TheBlackAdder Jan 12 #24
TheBlackAdder Jan 12 #23
USALiberal Jan 11 #2
dbackjon Jan 11 #3
Mr.Bill Jan 11 #4
TheBlackAdder Jan 12 #25
mahatmakanejeeves Jan 11 #5
Hotler Jan 11 #6
LunaSea Jan 11 #7
jmowreader Jan 11 #14
MurrayDelph Jan 11 #8
marble falls Jan 11 #9
Crutchez_CuiBono Jan 11 #13
Jose Garcia Jan 11 #10
Bernardo de La Paz Jan 11 #11
bitterross Jan 11 #12
Honeycombe8 Jan 11 #15
TomSlick Jan 11 #16
Cold War Spook Jan 11 #17
KO_ Stradivarius Jan 11 #18
JDC Jan 11 #19
Jake Stern Jan 11 #21
LiberalFighter Jan 12 #22

Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:38 PM

1. It will never happen.

But it's a nice gesture to honor the family.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 10:59 PM

20. It is not "Nice"

it makes democrats look like lunatics...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flotsam (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 03:06 AM

24. This is like when PETA wanted Fishkill NY to change their name because it indicates harm to fish.

.

When they went to the town to protest, and started a PR move with media present, the mayor mentioned that Kill is another name for Stream... hence, Fish Stream, NY.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 03:01 AM

23. NJ put PedoBear stickers on teen drivers cars, which identify vulnerable teens to cops and pervs.

.

It was all because one woman's kid got killed while riding in a car by someone I think driving past curfew.

The logic was, police might see the sticker and pull people over. It was a 'feel good' gesture that is a complete pain in the ass.


The problem is, these stickers are supposed to be attached to the license plates when the kids drive the cars and remove them when they aren't. In reality, people either leave them on the car, or never put them on because parents don't want pervs stalking young drivers.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:39 PM

2. What a hassle. No thanks! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to USALiberal (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:42 PM

3. Indeed. I had to drive a car for a friend that had that

 

For someone with asthma like me, it was hard to get a good reading sometimes.

Plus, it requires blowing every 10 minutes or so, which is distracting while driving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:44 PM

4. If they put it on every new car,

they will destroy the auto industry. Being from Michigan, she should understand this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 03:07 AM

25. Nothing transmits the RW/GOP message, "Dems want Big State," like this feel good overreach!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:51 PM

5. Fourth Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure....": etc., etc.

You can't search people just because it makes you feel good to search people.

Period, the end, SCOTUS 9-0, but it would never get that far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:56 PM

6. Sure, only if they add a cell phone blocker of some type also.

Drunk driving and distracted driving kills.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 08:56 PM

7. Didn't this get floated in the early seventies?

I recollect some discussion of such a device, but it was cut short pretty quick.
Similar arguments about "hurting the industry" were made about seatbelts and safety glass too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LunaSea (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:52 PM

14. In 1974 they had seatbelt interlocks

If you didn’t buckle up, the car wouldn’t start.

No one bought a 1974 car.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:00 PM

8. Can we put one

on the exit door to Brett Kavanaugh's office?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MurrayDelph (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:05 PM

9. I'll support that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MurrayDelph (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:51 PM

13. Snap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:14 PM

10. I'm frightened to wonder what her solution to STDs is

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:34 PM

11. Nanny state at worst. It would infuriate people many times needlessly locking them out.


It's a tragedy the loss of the family, but interlocking breathalyzers are not an answer. They are however an excellent requirement to impose on repeat drunk drivers (twice would be enough repetitions).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:35 PM

12. Bad idea. Talk about the nanny state.

The road to defeat by a Republican begins this way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:55 PM

15. Absolutely not.

We can't build armored cars to protect against every bad thing that someone does, when most people don't even do that. All mfrs need is one more thing to add to the cost of their cars, and one more thing to be sued over, if a drunk driver finds a way around that (getting his friend to breathe into it).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 09:56 PM

16. What a uniquely bad idea!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 10:00 PM

17. 1966, my girl friend was killed by a drunk driver while I deployed.

I never heard any one suggest this nor do I think it is a good answer to drunk driving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 10:20 PM

18. Yeah... right... fuck that.

 

Nanny state issues aside, even the ones cops use can be problematic and have to be
calibrated at least once a year, and even they can't get it right.
What's the plan for that (verifying and ensuring the accuracy of these)?
What about states with vehicle safety inspections.
Will that be something else for them to check?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 10:51 PM

19. Often DUI offenders are court ordered to install these devices

I don't drink, so I say nay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2019, 11:13 PM

21. I DESPISE drunk drivers

I also despise punishing people for crimes they haven't committed and requiring automakers to install an interlock in all cars is just that.

Hope this bill gets shitcanned ASAP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichMan (Original post)

Sat Jan 12, 2019, 12:19 AM

22. Absolutely not!

This will be a severe handicap for most people if they have to use it to start the car. If there is cause due to someone being a drunk then yes. But for the rest of us. Absolutely not!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread