Posts Tagged ‘MADD’

New DUI Punishment Coming To Ohio

April 2nd, 2014

dui punishmentThe Ohio legislature is considering H.B. 469 (Annie’s Law) which would bring a harsh new DUI punishment to the State.

Currently, ignition interlock devices are used in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. However, states vary widely in how the ignition interlock devices are used and which drivers are required to install them. In West Virginia, for example, interlock devices are only ordered at a judge’s discretion while Michigan mandates their use for drivers who are found with a BAC more than twice the state’s legal limit.  In Ohio, ignition interlock devices are required for any driver accused of a second OVI (drunk driving) offense and are otherwise discretionary to the judge.  MADD has pushed to eliminate these discrepancies and urge the adoption of a model rule which covers first-time offenders with a BAC just over the legal limit and would require the installation of ignition interlock devices on hundreds of thousands more vehicles.  Currently, only 20 states require the devices for anyone convicted of a drunken driving-related offense.

Opponents to the law argue interlocks are too expensive and harsh for a first time offender, because they’re responsible for the cost of the DUI punishment. It costs about $2.50 a day, or $75 a month plus a hefty installation fee.  While there are numerous different designs, the typical ignition interlock requires the driver to blow into a tube that measures breath alcohol levels. If a person fails he or she may try again, before the vehicle is locked down.  At random times after the engine has been started, the IID will require another breath sample. The purpose of this is to prevent someone other than the driver from providing a breath sample. If the breath sample isn’t provided, or the sample exceeds the ignition interlock’s preset blood alcohol level, the device will log the event, warn the driver and then start up an alarm (e.g., lights flashing, horn honking) until the ignition is turned off, or a clean breath sample has been provided.  Other versions may also use cameras to record a person’s behavior behind the wheel. Courts may access the data recorded and, in some jurisdictions, a motorist who blew over the limit may face additional penalties.  No one has considered the proportionality of this DUI punishment.

Radley Balko argued in a December 2002 article that MADD’s policies are becoming overbearing. “In fairness, MADD deserves credit for raising awareness of the dangers of driving while intoxicated. It was almost certainly MADD’s dogged efforts to spark public debate that effected the drop in fatalities since 1980, when Candy Lightner founded the group after her daughter was killed by a drunk driver,” Balko wrote. “But MADD is at heart a bureaucracy, a big one. It boasts an annual budget of $45 million, $12 million of which pays for salaries, pensions and benefits. Bureaucracies don’t change easily, even when the problems they were created to address change.”

Attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in the Miami Valley and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself Dayton’s choice for drunk driving defense. Contact Charles Rowland by phone at (937) 318-1384 or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263). If you need assistance after hours, call the 24/7 DUI Hotline at (937) 776-2671.  You can have DaytonDUI at your fingertips by downloading the DaytonDUI Android App or have DaytonDUI sent directly to your mobile device by texting DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Facebook, @DaytonDUI on Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr, Pheed and Pintrest or get RSS of the Ohio DUI blog.  You can email CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or visit his office at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.  “All I do is DUI defense.”

Find information on DUI punishment on this blog, or check these city-specific sites at the following links:

FairbornDaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburgSpringboro,Huber HeightsOakwoodBeavercreekCenterville

Ignition Interlock Devices For Everyone – We Warned You!

March 10th, 2014

ignition interlockH.B. 469 (Annie’s Law) presented at the Ohio Statehouse on Thursday will require an ignition interlock device  be installed on the vehicle of all convicted drunk drivers, including first-time offenders.  Ohio law currently prescribes “blow to go” devices for repeat drunk driving offenders, but not on a first offense.  We have longed warned (previous story HERE) that this was at the top of MADD’s agenda and a continuation of their desire to impose penalties on a driver before they are found guilty of an offense.  Essentially, this law is an attack on a person’s presumption of innocence.  State Representatives Terry Johnson (R-McDermott) and Gary Scherer (R-Circleville) are the lead sponsors of House Bill 469.

Currently, interlock search devices are used in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. However, states vary widely in how the ignition interlock devices are used and which drivers are required to install them. In West Virginia, for example, interlock devices are only ordered at a judge’s discretion while Michigan mandates their use for drivers who are found with a BAC more than twice the state’s legal limit.  In Ohio, ignition interlock devices are required for any driver accused of a second OVI (drunk driving) offense and are otherwise discretionary to the judge.  NHTSA and MADD want to eliminate these discrepancies and urge the adoption of a model rule which covers first-time offenders with a BAC just over the legal limit and would require the installation of ignition-preventing interlock search devices on hundreds of thousands more vehicles.  Currently, only 20 states require the devices for anyone convicted of a drunken driving-related offense.

Some studies show that ignition-preventing interlock devices are about 75 percent effective in keeping those previously convicted of drunken driving from repeating their behavior. While there are numerous different designs, the typical ignition interlock requires the driver to blow into a tube that measures breath alcohol levels. If a person fails he or she may try again, for up to three attempts before the vehicle is locked down.  Other versions may also use cameras to record a person’s behavior behind the wheel. Courts may access the data recorded and, in some jurisdictions, a motorist who blew over the limit may face additional penalties.  Ignition Interlock devices typically cost about $150 and may run $80 a month or more to maintain.

Attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in the Miami Valley and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself Dayton’s choice for drunk driving defense. Contact Charles Rowland by phone at (937) 318-1384 or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263). If you need assistance after hours, call the 24/7 DUI Hotline at (937) 776-2671.  You can have DaytonDUI at your fingertips by downloading the DaytonDUI Android App or have DaytonDUI sent directly to your mobile device by texting DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Facebook, @DaytonDUI on Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr, Pheed and Pintrest or get RSS of the Ohio DUI blog.  You can email CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or visit his office at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.  “All I do is DUI defense.”

 Find information on Ignition Interlock devices on this blog, or check these city-specific sites at the following links:

FairbornDaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburgSpringboro,Huber HeightsOakwoodBeavercreekCenterville

Is This The End of Drunk Driving Arrests?

March 4th, 2014

drunk driving arrests

Will there still be drunk driving arrests in the future?  This is the question raised by Money Watch and CBS in the article about autonomous cars, “Will Your Car Be Driving Itself By 2020?”  According to the article,  ”[i]t all sounds like science fiction: cars that drive themselves, navigate streets and avoid crashes. But last week Nissan said it would have such “autonomous cars” to sell by 2020. And General Motors chimed in that it may have a similar model by then.”  The government is not as convinced. ”The car–no matter how automated–is not yet ready to be more than a co-pilot,” said National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator David Strickland in a statement.  There are also significant consumer issues.  ”A recent Kelley Blue Book poll found 53 percent of respondents said they would never buy a self-driving car while only 18 percent said they would consider one now if it were available. Twenty percent said they might consider buying if the technology improved in five to 10 years.”

 The implications of these changes could be enormous for attorneys.  If cars can be truly autonomous in the next ten to twenty years will that mean the end of personal injury attorneys? Will it spell the end of drunk driving arrests? It also raises practical concerns over MADD’s legislative agenda.  MADD has been working with major insurance companies and automobile manufacturers to get a passive alcohol system (called DADDS) as mandated equipment in every automobile in the world.  In 2008, at MADD’s urging, the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety entered into a $10 million agreement with the federal government to develop such a technology. This system would  search every driver (not just convicted DUI offenders) every single time they started their car.  This year, MADD’s power as one of the nation’s leading lobbying groups resulted in a provision in the Senate transportation bill to ““more widespread deployment of in-vehicle technology” that would prevent drunken driving.  The research will be carried out by the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety, a collaboration between NHTSA and the automobile industry.  It will be interesting to see if MADD is looking for a solution or more drunk driving arrests.

If you think the self-driving car is a pipe dream consider this: Nevada, Florida and California have passed laws allowing self-driving cars on their roads for testing with certain safeguards.  The 2014 Mercedes-Benz S class can brake and steer itself for a few seconds under certain conditions. Mercedes, BMW, Lexus and some other luxury brands have implemented automated cruise control that keeps your car a safe distance behind the one ahead and if the radar system senses an imminent crash, puts on the brakes.  The tech giant Google has also put resources behind developing the technology. Analysts believe Google, if successful, would try to sell the system to the auto industry rather than build cars itself.

 

Dayton DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in the Miami Valley and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself Dayton’s choice for drunk driving defense. Contact Charles Rowland by phone at (937) 318-1384 or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263). If you need assistance after hours, call the 24/7 DUI Hotline at (937) 776-2671.  You can have DaytonDUI at your fingertips by downloading the DaytonDUI Android App or have DaytonDUI sent directly to your mobile device by texting DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Facebook, @DaytonDUI on Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr, Pheed and Pintrest or get RSS of the Ohio DUI blog.  You can email CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or visit his office at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.  “All I do is DUI defense.”

Find information on drunk driving arrests and other city-specific info at the following links:

FairbornDaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburgSpringboro,Huber HeightsOakwoodBeavercreekCenterville

 

MADD’s Agenda For Ohio Is Announced

February 25th, 2014

MADD s agenda for OhioOver the last decade we have learned MADD’s agenda for Ohio via its “Campaign To Eliminate Drunk Driving.”  Their legislative and lobbying efforts have focused on three areas.

  • Support for high-visibility law enforcement activities
  • Legislation requiring ignition interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers
  • Development of automotive technologies for passive alcohol detection

MADD’s agenda for Ohio includes continuing the ineffective and expensive OVI checkpoint approach that is accompanied by a large budget media campaign.  This year, MADD’s agenda for Ohio included a buy-in on their media blitz to announce the new ROBOCOP movie.  As could be expected, they want to expand on this concept.

MADD’s agenda for Ohio includes a push for expanded use of interlock ignition devices. Currently, ignition interlock devices are used in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. However, states vary widely in how the ignition interlock devices are used and which drivers are required to install them. In West Virginia, for example, interlock devices are only ordered at a judge’s discretion while Michigan mandates their use for drivers who are found with a BAC more than twice the state’s legal limit.  In Ohio, ignition interlock devices are required for any driver accused of a second OVI (drunk driving) offense and are otherwise discretionary to the judge.  NHTSA and MADD want to eliminate these discrepancies and urge the adoption of a model rule which covers first-time offenders with a BAC just over the legal limit and would require the installation of ignition interlock devices on hundreds of thousands more vehicles.  Currently, only 20 states require the devices for anyone convicted of a drunken driving-related offense.

MADD’s agenda for Ohio includes working with major insurance companies and automobile manufacturers to get a passive alcohol system (called DADDS) as mandated equipment in every automobile in the world.  In 2008, at MADD’s urging, the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety entered into a $10 million agreement with the federal government to develop such a technology. This system would  search every driver (not just convicted DUI offenders) every single time they started their car.  This year, MADD’s power as one of the nation’s leading lobbying groups resulted in a provision in the Senate transportation bill to ““more widespread deployment of in-vehicle technology” that would prevent drunken driving.  The research will be carried out by the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety, a collaboration between NHTSA and the automobile industry.

In a report released earlier this month, MADD set forth “grades” for each state given for the following agenda items:

  • Requiring ignition interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers
  • Conducting sobriety checkpoints
  • Creating enhanced penalties for those who drive drunk with children in the vehicle
  • Participating in “no-refusal” activities for those suspected of drunk driving
  • Utilizing Administrative License Revocation for drunk driving offenders

That’s right, MADD’s agenda for Ohio includes expanded use of ignition interlock, checkpoints, and forced blood draws.  They have also taken great efforts to make sure that Ohio’s decision makers are notified of their plans.  I call on you to contact your State and Federal representative to give your opinion on these and other important issues in the criminal justice system.

Ohio DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver in the Miami Valley and throughout Ohio.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself Dayton’s choice for drunk driving defense. Contact Charles Rowland by phone at (937) 318-1384 or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263). If you need assistance after hours, call the 24/7 DUI Hotline at (937) 776-2671.  You can have DaytonDUI at your fingertips by downloading the DaytonDUI Android App or have DaytonDUI sent directly to your mobile device by texting DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Facebook, @DaytonDUI on Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr, Pheed and Pintrest or get RSS of the Ohio DUI blog.  You can email CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or visit his office at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.  “All I do is DUI defense.”

 Find information on MADD’s agenda for Ohio and other city-specific info at the following links:

FairbornDaytonSpringfieldKetteringVandaliaXeniaMiamisburgSpringboro,Huber HeightsOakwoodBeavercreekCenterville

Will Ohio Lower The Legal Limit for OVI?

May 15th, 2013

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As this site has been warning, MADD and friends at the NTSB have been pushing to lower the legal blood alcohol concentration from .08% to .05%.  Today, the National Transportation Safety Board voted to recommend to states that they lower the blood-alcohol content that constitutes drunken driving.  Currently, all 50 states have set a BAC level of .08, reflecting the percentage of alcohol, by volume, in the blood. If a driver is found to have a BAC level of .08 or above, he or she is subject to arrest and prosecution.

The NTSB is an investigative agency that advocates on behalf of safety issues.  It has no legal authority to order any change to state or federal law. It would be up to individual states whether to accept the NTSB’s recommendation, and up to the Department of Transportation whether to endorse the recommendations. States are effectively forced to comply with the Department of Transportations guidelines to qualify for federal highway funds.  If the DOT acts forcefully, we may see the new legal limit within a few years.  Following this push, the neo-prohibitionists at MADD and their friends in the government will push for a .02% BAC standard.  They will not be satisfied until prohibition is the law of the land.

It will not be a defense that you are not affected by alcohol, much less impaired if the new standards are adopted.  All the prosecution will have to show is that the breathalyzer machine said you were over a .05% BAC and you will be convicted.  What makes matters much worse in Ohio, is that under a 1984 Ohio Supreme Court decision in State v. Vega your attorney will not be permitted to challenge the workings of the machine in court.  You read that right… In Ohio if the machine says you failed your attorney cannot argue to a jury that the machine was wrong.

The last move from .10 to .08 BAC levels took 21 years for each state to implement and Ohio was one of the last states to comply with the federal mandate.  We will keep you informed of this issue and provide updates as they become available.

Ohio DUI attorney Charles M. Rowland II dedicates his practice to defending the accused drunk driver.  He has the credentials and the experience to win your case and has made himself the Miami Valley’s choice for DUI defense.  Contact Charles Rowland by phone at 937-318-1DUI (937-318-1384), 937-879-9542, or toll-free at 1-888-ROWLAND (888-769-5263).  For after-hourshelp contact our 24/7 DUI HOTLINE at 937-776-2671.  For information about Dayton DUI sent directly to your mobile device, text DaytonDUI (one word) to 50500.  Follow DaytonDUI on Twitter @DaytonDUI or Get Twitter updates via SMS by texting DaytonDUI to40404. DaytonDUI is also available on Facebookwww.facebook.com/daytondui and on the DaytonDUI channel on YouTube.  You can also email Charles Rowland at:CharlesRowland@DaytonDUI.com or write to us at 2190 Gateway Dr., Fairborn, Ohio 45324.

 

 

Related articles