Throughout the country, states have begun turning towards ignition interlock devices for first time DUI offenders in an effort to prevent drunk driving and ward off recidivism. Here in Virginia, Governor Bob McDonnell recently signed a bill that strengthens the state’s strict DUI penalties by mandating ignition interlocks for all first time DWI offenders. As a Virginia DUI defense attorney, I have concerns about the new law and the long term ramifications. When compared to the aggravated DUI requirement, that all of the cars registered or driven by the offender have the machine installed, the new law is relatively mild but it can still create problems. My concerns are not that the punishment is too harsh but rather I believe that this new requirement creates a logistical and bureaucratic nightmare.

First, states will see a substantial increase in the number of interlock devices needed and must find a reliable supplier to compensate. The market has exploded in recent years as similar laws are passed, but the new law in Virginia will not only require that everyone convicted receive the interlock but the interlocks be made available by July 1, 2012 when the new law takes effect. Despite the obvious financial spike for the companies providing these devices it’s hard to imagine that all of the orders could be placed, tests performed, and statewide distribution to take place before July 1.

Second, the new ignition interlock program will require revamped programs to ensure proper oversight. Virginia’s Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP) is responsible for the installation, maintenance, and monitoring of the ignition interlocks. ASAP is also tasked with educating, testing, and sometimes even treating DUI offenders. With every DUI offender now under ASAP’s responsibility, in addition to the statutory ten (10) week education class, it undoubtedly require that the organization increase staffing levels and expand into new facilities. This will cost money that can be made up for through ignition interlock rentals and other maintenance fees related to the devices, but the initial cost will be put on taxpayers.

Third, the device is a very sensitive piece of equipment that controls the ignition system and determines whether or not to allow the car to start. It takes a sample of your breath and tries to detect any alcohol. The recommended calibration schedule is every sixty days and the calibration requires technicians who are trained on the devices and the software that they run on. Without proper calibration, the machines can give false positives as well as violations for not getting it tested. This would require yet another trip to the local ASAP office for the offender which also creates another opportunity for a moving violation. In addition, the false positive or failure to calibrate result could result in the towing or impoundment of the offending vehicle, in addition to its disablement. This is a potential nightmare scenario for a shared vehicle household.

Fourth, the devices are far from perfect. The ignition interlock cannot tell the difference between alcohol that was consumed and alcohol that was created internally. The latter can be the by-product of body processes commonly found in dieters, diabetics, and certain medications. And since any violations are immediately reported to local law enforcement, the inevitable increase in false alarms will put an additional strain on police who must respond to the location of the violation.

Finally, we live in a time of increased fiscal scrutiny, and the new law doesn’t offer a proper balance between limited resources and public safety. Over the years I’ve heard from numerous probation offices, ASAP employees, and even the occasional repeat offender that making the first offense punishment stricter would’ve been a greater deterrent. However, the law in its current incarnation does not appear to effectively accomplish that goal. As the national movement toward mandatory ignition interlock gains steam, the balance between “tough on crime” laws and untenable requirements for monitoring and compliance needs to be monitored closely.