Ignition interlock device

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A breath alcohol ignition interlock device (BIID or IID) is a mechanism similar to a breathalyzer which is installed in a vehicle's dashboard. Before the vehicle can be started, the driver must breathe into the device. If the analyzed result is over a programed blood alcohol concentration, commonly .02% or .04%, the vehicle will not start.

At random times after the engine has been started, the IID will require another breath sample. The purpose of this is to prevent a friend from breathing into the device, enabling the intoxicated person to get behind the wheel and drive away. 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, etc.) until the ignition is turned off. A common misconception is that interlock devices will simply turn off the engine if alcohol is detected; this would, however, create an unsafe driving situation and expose interlock manufacturers to considerable liability.

Modern ignition interlock devices use an ethanol-specific fuel cell for a sensor. A fuel cell sensor is an electrochemical device in which alcohol undergoes a chemical oxidation reaction at a catalytic electrode surface (platinum) to generate an electrical current. This current is then measured and converted to an alcohol equivalent reading. Although fuel cell technology is not as accurate or reliable as infrared spectroscopy technology used in evidentiary breathalyzers, they are cheaper and tend to be more specific for alcohol.

The devices keep a record of the activity on the device and the interlocked vehicle's electrical system. This record, or log, is printed out or downloaded each time the device's sensors are calibrated, commonly at 30, 60, or 90 day intervals. Authorities may require periodic review of the log. If violations are detected, then additional sanctions can be implemented.

Periodic calibration is performed using either a pressurized alcohol/gas mixture at a known alcohol concentration, or with an alcohol wet bath arrangement that contains a known alcohol solution. The costs of installation, maintenance and calibration are generally paid by the offender, and typically are about $75 per month.

Among manufacturers of IIDs are LifeSafer Interlock, Smart Start Inc, SOS, Ignition Interlock Systems, Intoxalock and Monitech. A list of federally-approved IID devices is maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in their NHTSA Conforming Products List.

Many countries are requiring the ignition interlock as a penalty for drivers convicted of driving under the influence, especially repeat offenders. Most U.S. states now permit judges to order the installation of an IID as a condition of probation; for repeat offenders, and for first offenders in some states, installation may be mandated by law. Despite the claims of critics that IIDs are inaccurate, ineffective and dangerous ^[1], in November 2006 Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) launched a highly publicized campaign advocating mandatory IID installation for all first offenders ^[2]. Some politicians in Sweden^[3]^[4], Japan, Canada, the U.S. and other countries have called for such devices to be installed as standard equipment in all motor vehicles sold.^{[citation needed]}

1 Legal Code & Ignition Interlock Devices
2 Criticism
3 References
4 External links

[edit] Legal Code & Ignition Interlock Devices

In some states like California driving on a suspended license due to a DUI conviction (California DUI Vehicle Code Sec. 14601.2)^[5], legally the court must impose an ignition interlock device requirement for up to a maximum of three (3) years from the date of conviction.

[edit] Criticism

A serious concern is that the devices might actually increase crashes. The California Department of Motor Vehicle’s “An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Ignition Interlock in California” concluded that the devices “are not effective in reducing DUI convictions or incidents [after being imposed] for first-time DUI offenders.” (The study did show, however, that the risk of crashing was higher for offenders with a lock installed—perhaps because they were being asked to conduct breath tests while driving.) .^[6]