ReconTHeJon: How about installing speed governors on first offense speeders' vehicles, (at their expense of course) if they are caught driving 15 MPH over the speed limit? The governors would limit the vehicle to 55 MPH.
After all, "its not going to cost you anything unless you" speed and drive.

im all for it, its not going to cost you anything unless you drink and drive!!!

Yes it is needed yet also they can have someone else blow in it.also they can use someone elses car hello.

If they really want to be proactive on this, they should have all cars supplied with these devices. This would take all debate out of the issue. everyone would have to blow into the devices before their car would start.

hey maybe the government could give us a coupon for the device, so we wouldn't have to pay full price. they could make it manadatory to go into effect on June 12th. NO WAIT!! that was digital cable.

If we don't treat the underlying alcoholism, of course they'll go right back to drinking and driving the first opportunity. We can't put people on a permanent interlock any more than we can put them in jail forever. The punishment model is clearly ineffective at dealing with the problem.
.
Note that the Tavern League supports the measure. They would rather draw a line about problem drinkers than have more limitations placed on their business. But Wisconsin has more liquor licenses per capita than any other state, so it's really no surprise that we have one of the highest OWI rates.

hannah, if I have to explain, you would not understand.

silly statement of the day....'Yes these do help to keep drunk drivers off the roads but do nothing in the long run'

In response to SuperDave's excellent question, "What is the state really up to," I'd say in part that this is a kick-back to those companies that offer this product. Of course, the state also wants us all to be scared, really scared, but that's a different matter.

"The plan would require the devices for first-time offenders whose blood alcohol content is above .15 percent or nearly double the legal limit of .08. All repeat offenders would have the devices in their vehicles for at least one year".
Since many have stated that this will do no good in the long run, this sounds to me like a "feel good" way for the ignition interlock suppliers, and others, to make money. Could they be politically connected, hmmm?
Why not just enforce the existing laws? Could this just be another diversion? What is the State really up to??

From the Milwaukee Sentinal Newspaper, a profile of 72 individuals who were killed becaus eof drunk driving.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/3...

I work on Orthopedics, I have taken care of many patients that were admitted for surgery as a result of a drunk driving accident. I have witnessed the pain these individuals feel. And that is the ones that actually survive the accident.

If interlocks came standard on all vehicles, drunk driving would be obsolete.

Right now the law only catches the few that are stopped, (usually at bar time) how many people have their kids with them at bar time?? so this is better than what we have.. if it take "Otis" of the street until he is sober , more power to them.. I am a former bartender from a country bar that was around when the drinking age was "18" and and then a retired EMT, so I have seen first hand what a "Drunk Driver " can do to someone at 2 am,3 am , or what ever time it is... it is not pretty , smart, or right... it usually disgusted me to the point of getting sick... I could take alot, but it just made me sick knowing that the person car the DRUNK hit was more often hurt worse ( or killed) than the drunk.... SO.. if the state wants to pass this as law ...DO IT... and leave us others that don't drink and drive safer (because THEY would not be able ...I hope)

How far can you drive below you need to blow again? It is my understanding a clean breath sample is needed occasionally to keep the car running. Is this true?

Ignition interlocks are many years old, just coming to the surface for the second time. They do little to solve the problem of repeat drunk drivers. Any sober person can blow into the interlock device, it need not be the driver etc. This is a "feel good" law for MADD and the public in general. I agree with coyote, if a judge feels the device would help in a specific situation he/she can still order it, under existing law. The only good thing about the law is the cost is passed to the violator. If Wisconsin wants to do something to improve their drunk driving laws, they need to make first offense drunk driving a crime. Currently first offenders are all prosecuted under civil actions brought by the city/county/state etc. This is totally crazy, 1st offense drunk driving needs to be a state criminal violation.

A bill is a bad idea; the judge can already mandate this at the time of conviction.