preview

Ignition Interlocks

Better Essays
Motor vehicles accidents are the leading cause of death and injury in the United States and is also the leading cause of death for children and young adults ages 4 through 35 (Beck, 2009, p. 312). In 2014, 209 children ranging in ages 0 to 14 years of age died in car accidents due to people driving while impaired (Impaired, 2014). Of those accidents, 116 children were driving in the same car with the impaired driver (Impaired, 2014). Since 2001, alcohol related fatalities have only gone down slightly, compared to motor vehicle accidence in general, which have gone down tremendously over the years (Chambers, 2011).
National Surveys have indicated that over 90 percent of the public view drinking and driving as a threat to their safety and wellbeing,
…show more content…
118). While this law should stop drivers from getting into a

vehicle with a child after drinking, it is still happening as the laws is still not strict enough.

On August 15, 2010, the ignition interlock system was introduced as the second part of

Leandra’s Law (Assessing, 2013, p 79). The ignition interlock was introduced to help prevent a

driver who has consumed alcohol form being able to drive. At the time of the writing of

Assessing the Expanded Use of Ignition Interlocks (2013), there were a total of 59 conditional

discharge monitors installed throughout New York. Only “84% were reported that the courts

always or most of the time notify them when a driver has a CD and has been sentenced to an

interlock device”, yet it is a requirement under Leandra’s law to receive such notification

(Assessing, 2013, p 79). This means that the courts are not giving the required notification to the

companies which are supposed to be installing the devices. There was also 53% of courts which

did not give the company information on the driver so they are able to contact the potential

interlock device driver Assessing, 2013, p. 79). We should expect the courts to be doing a
…show more content…
If the court is failing to provide information,

this could result in drivers still driving under the influence based on the fault of the court.

In 2004, the FBI reported that approximately 1.4 million people in the United States were

arrested for driving under while under the influence, with one third of them being repeat

offenders (Curran, 2010, p. 84). Curran (2010), found that while enforcement, treatment and

educational efforts have has some effect with the reduction of drinking and driving
Get Access