Moultrie Observer

Opinion

December 14, 2012

NTSB's suggestion is worth serious discussion

MOULTRIE — The National Transportation Safety Board has recommended that states require an ignition killer on cars after someone has been convicted of drunk driving.

This technology is already there. If a person has had to much to drink, a breath analyzer would simply keep the car’s ignition from engaging. That’s space age technology.

Assuming a DUI person would always drive the same car, that suggestion makes sense. And of course the key would be that the DUI person would bear the cost of having this device installed.

There are many good ideas put on the table every day. But as they say, the devil is in the details. For instance, if it’s just one DUI and a person’s record stays clean, would the device be removed at some point?

What would make more sense is that all new cars be equipped from the get go with such technology, but then again, how long would it take for aged cars to cycle out so that the concept was used universally? And how much would it drive up the price of a car? And some would argue that they do not drink and drive so why should they be punished for another’s vices? Again, the devil is in the details.

We know that many people are killed or maimed each year because of drunk driving. Anyone directly affected would argue heavily for this requirement in the case of someone convicted of DUI. And if any of us reflected long on the carnage involved in mixing vehicles and booze, we likely would join right in there.

The NTSB’s recommendation is certainly worth considering. If there is a better alternative, we should have enough brilliant minds out there to come up with such innovation.

There may be no fool proof plan but minimizing the damage in greater volume is likely attainable.

What do you think?

 

1
Text Only
Opinion
Business Marquee
Facebook
AP Video
SKorea Ferry Toll Hits 156, Search Gets Tougher Video Shows Possible Syrian Gas Attack Cubs Superfans Celebrate Wrigley's 100th Raw: Cattle Truck Overturns in Texas Admirers Flock to Dole During Kansas Homecoming Raw: Erupting Volcanoes in Guatemala and Peru Alibaba IPO Could Be Largest Ever for Tech Firm FBI Joining Probe of Suburban NY 'Swatting' Call U.S. Paratroopers in Poland, Amid Ukraine Crisis US Reviews Clemency for Certain Inmates Raw: Violence Erupts in Rio Near Olympic Venue Raw: Deadly Bombing in Egypt Raw: What's Inside a Commercial Jet Wheel Well Raw: Obama Arrives in Japan for State Visit Raw: Anti-Obama Activists Fight Manila Police Motels Near Disney Fighting Homeless Problem Michigan Man Sees Thanks to 'bionic Eye' S.C. Man Apologizes for Naked Walk in Wal-Mart Chief Mate: Crew Told to Escape After Passengers
House Ads
Hyperlocal Search
Premier Guide
Find a business

Walking Fingers
Maps, Menus, Store hours, Coupons, and more...
Premier Guide
More
weatherradar
Seasonal Content
Poll

Should abortion be legal for victims of rape?

No. That baby is alive, no matter how horrible its manner of conception.
Yes. It's wrong to force a woman to carry the child of her rapist.
Abortion is a private matter and should be legal for everyone.
     View Results