| ▲ | SauciestGNU 5 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I've been hit by a drunk driver before. I know this will be a very unpopular opinion but I believe a single instance of DUI should be enough for a permanent prohibition on an individual owning or operating a motor vehicle. These interlock devices are already a weak compromise catering to people who oppose inconveniencing those who have already proven themselves to recklessly endanger the public when allowed to operate vehicles. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | benatkin 5 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I might agree with you, but I struggle to think of it in isolation from the move towards self driving cars. Also we already have a quite harsh consequence of not being able to visit Canada for 10 years that a lot of rich people can get out of by paying a lawyer to keep them from getting a DUI. If only deterrents worked better. Is the problem with an interlock device that they can drive when they can pass the interlock test, or is the technology not needed, and what technology would you propose for preventing drunk driving convicts from driving illegaly? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||