DUIDocument Actions
BAC - Blood Alcohol Content
DUI Library: BAC
Fingerprint Technology Studied for Detection of DWI
Lumidigm, a New Mexico company, has developed fingerprint sensor that detects blood alcohol content (BAC) in suspected drunk driving cases.
Lumidigm, based in Albuquerque, has developed a unique technology that can be used for detection of drunk driving in New Mexico. They initially designed a light-based scanner that takes three-dimensional images of fingerprints. The sensors, however, can be adjusted to test for the presence of alcohol emanating from the skin.
The company has been testing the handheld equipment with the help of the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department. Darren White, speaking on behalf of the sheriff’s department, is encouraged by the potential of a new tool to determine if a motorist is driving while intoxicated. He felt the evidence gathered would also improve the prosecution’s chances of securing a conviction for DWI.
In the current United States Defense Appropriations Act, two million dollars were allocated for the development of a handheld fingerprint scanner. The technology is then expected to enter the private law enforcement sector.
Matthew Ennis, an executive with Lumidigm, projects the use of biometric technology in automobiles within a few years that can provide security and detect elevated blood alcohol content.
If you have been arrested for drunk driving, you will need to find a DWI attorney.
Listerine = DUI
Listerine Drinker Pleads Guilty to DUI
Adrian, MI-A woman with a blood alcohol content (BAC) three times that of the legal limit pleaded guilty to drunk driving and admitted that she had drunk three glasses of Listerine.
Carol Ries, 50, was immediately pulled over by police after she crashed into the back of a car at a stoplight. Ries admitted that she had consumed Listerine that afternoon, and police in fact found a bottle of the Pfizer-manufactured mouthwash in the woman's car.
While her BAC from a Breathalyzer test was lower than the 0.08 legal limit, a second-and less forgiving-test was administered to her with a different device. It measured her BAC at 0.30.
Listerine contains between 26.9% and 21.6% alcohol, depending on the variety.
Prosecutors have discarded a charge for having an open bottle of alcohol in the car, but Ries may still have to serve up to 93 days in Jail and a $500 fine for drunk driving.
January 21, 2005
Technology
Technology Targets Drunk DriversTHURSDAY, July 13 (HealthDay News) -- The war against drunk driving is turning high-tech.
Devices that can sense the amount of alcohol in the air around your face or even in your sweat are already on the drawing board, to join current technology aimed at stopping you from getting behind that wheel if you've had too much to drink, researchers say.
"People continue to drive drunk because they can," said Heidi Castle, a spokeswoman for Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). "That's when technology comes into play. Technology has the potential to not allow someone who is intoxicated to operate a motor vehicle. It essentially separates the weapon -- the car -- from the drunk driver."
But even though some technology has been on the market for a generation, impaired driving is still a problem.
Last year, almost 17,000 deaths and half a million injuries were caused by drunk driving crashes in the United States.
One of the featured technologies at a recent MADD symposium was the "ignition interlock," essentially a tube connected to the vehicle ignition. The driver breathes into the tube and, if his blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is over a certain threshold, the system prevents the car from starting.
"This is the gold standard," said Paul Marques, senior research scientist with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE), a nonprofit public health research institute.
"As far as deterrents or prevention, this is probably the most common," Castle added.
"We have 20 years' experience with interlock, but it's underutilized," Marques said. "It won't have an impact on impaired driving unless it's used."
The problem in the United States is getting courts to order it.
With 1.4 million DUI arrests every year, no more than 100,000 interlocks are being used. Studies have shown that the device results in a 65 percent reduction in recidivism.
A number of other futuristic technologies are also on the horizon. Among them:
Transdermal alcohol sensors, such as SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor), to measure alcohol that is lost through the skin through sweat. The gadget, worn as an ankle bracelet, "sniffs" every 30 minutes and transfers data via a wireless connection to a probation officer or other law-enforcement official. Passive sensors to sample the air around a person's face, usually without the person knowing it. The sensor can be hidden in a police officer's flashlight and, if it senses alcohol, represents probable cause for more sobriety tests. A 2.5-ounce device to monitor the movements of someone convicted of drunk driving. Worn as a bracelet or anklet, this gadget uses global positioning system technology to alert law-enforcement personnel if an offender has entered a bar or gone someplace he shouldn't. It's part of the Southwest Riverside County (Calif.) "Watch Your Step" program. Near-infrared spectroscopy to determine blood alcohol composition under the skin. These devices would go into every car and be totally passive -- in other words, the driver wouldn't need to do anything, even breathe into a tube. The device is still in development and is being used by former U.S. Defense Department physicists. "It's totally unaffordable today," Marques noted. But technology can only do so much to combat drunk driving.
"When you're talking about drunk driving, there's no silver bullet," Castle said. "What we need is a comprehensive solution. One of the main components is law enforcement, but we will likely never have enough police officers on the street to arrest every drunk driver."
Marques added: "Drunk driving is a slowly unfolding tragedy that doesn't get better. Technology can help, but we can't do it without a human program."
More information
MADD has more on drunk driving.
Source: http://www.forbes.com/
Saab Has New Alcohol Detection Key
28 Jun 2004, 16:13 UTC
John Birchard
One of the most stubborn highway safety issues around the world is fatalities caused by drunk drivers. Here in the United States, 40 percent of traffic deaths last year involved alcohol-impaired drivers.
Growing concern about drunk-driving in Sweden and many other countries has prompted Saab to develop a device called Alco-key. It's a miniature alcohol-sensing device that would be built into the car's key fob, and it works off already-existing anti-theft technology.
"After you unlock your car, you then blow into the breath-sensing device in the end of the key and it reads the blood-alcohol content of your breath and determines whether or not you're fit to drive, based upon a pre-programmed threshold that is set into the system," said Saab's Kevin Smith, describing the procedure for using it.
The breath sample passes down a small internal tube containing a semi-conductor sensor the size of a pin-head. The sample is analyzed and a small green or red light on the fob lights up. The green light signals you're good to go. A red light means the anti-theft engine immobilizer is active and your Saab is not, and won't be until the time limit is past and you get another chance. Or another, non-drinking driver takes over.
Saab spokesman Kevin Smith says there are several groups who might be interested in the pocket-sized Alco-key.
"A company might want to have this device on their company car fleet of vehicles because it puts a good corporate face forward to the public," he said. "They are concerned about public safety. It's also protective of their own employees."
A second group that could be customers, says Kevin Smith, is parents of young drivers.
"Another potential might be parents that are perhaps putting their child into their first car or sending their child away to college," said Mr. Smith. "Most parents like to send their children to college in a good, safe car to drive and this would raise the level of safety even further."
Saab is currently conducting tests on the prototype to verify its reliability and accuracy. The software controlling the engine immobilizer can be adjusted to the blood-alcohol limits where the car is registered. In commercial production, the Alco-key would cost about $300, which is a fraction of the cost of a fixed system installed inside the car.
Kevin Smith says it's too early to say when the Alco-key may be ready for sale.
"They've brought it far enough along in its development at this point that they intend to show this new Saab Alco-key technology to the world and demonstrate how it functions for the first time in August at a safety seminar in Sweden," he explained.
If all goes well, it's intended that the Alco-key will be available as an accessory through Saab dealers.
Automakers Preventing Drunk Driving
Automakers Look to Install System to Prevent Drunk-DrivingMajor car manufacturers such as Nissan Motor Co. and Toyota Motor Corp. are looking to equip their vehicles with a system to prevent drunk-driving, sources said.
Nissan reportedly is looking to implement a system to prevent an engine from starting when a certain amount of alcohol is detected on the driver's breath. Toyota also has begun discussing an anti-drunk driving system.
However, manufacturers face a variety of problems in implementing the system such as the cost and legal regulations.
Car manufacturers believe measures against drunk driving are necessary at a time when many drunk drivers are causing traffic accidents. (Mainichi)
Source: http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp
TOKYO — Nissan is developing a new system to stop drunk drivers from starting their vehicles, according to a report in Japanese newspaper Nihon Keizai Shimbun. The system is said to be similar to the immobilizers used in the United States as part of some drunk-driving sentences.
Additionally, the system may be combined with a camera that monitors the driver for drowsiness. The automaker did not spell out a timetable for putting the anti-DUI technology on the market.
Saab and Volvo have been leading similar research efforts — in part because Sweden has tough drunk-driving laws.
Source: http://www.edmunds.com
Drunk Driving Cases Turn on Source Code
Breath Test Company Refuses to Disclose Code, to Defense Lawyers' DelightMarch 12, 2006
MIAMI - Timothy Muldowny's lawyers decided on an unconventional approach to fight his drunken driving case: They sought computer programming information for the Intoxilyzer alcohol breath analysis machine to see whether his test was accurate.
Their strategy paid off.
The company that makes the Intoxilyzer refused to reveal the computer source code for its machine because it was a trade secret. A county judge tossed out Muldowny's alcohol breath test - a crucial piece of evidence in a DUI case - and the ruling was upheld by an appeals court in 2004.
Source: http://msnbc.msn.com/
Ignition Interlock Device Report
Criticism of Ignition Interlock Devices from the California DMVSanta Fe, NM-The California Department of Motor Vehicles' (CA DMV) has sparked a controversy with their latest report, which states "there is no evidence that interlocks are an effective traffic safety measure for first DUI offenders." Ignition interlock devices (IID) are attached to the car's ignition and require the driver to perform a Breathalyzer test before the ignition can be turned on.
The report found that IIDs increase chance of crash by up to 130%, and concluded that the use of IIDs should not be condoned.
The controversy centers around the usage of the findings in a March press release from the American Beverage Institute (ABI), an association of restaurants committed to responsibly serving alcoholic beverages. The New Mexico legislature and governor will soon decide on the state's proposed law to implement IIDs in DUI cases. They have been presented with the ABI press release.
The California DMV and anti-alcohol lobbyists focused on findings in the report that counterbalance the critique of IIDs, despite that such findings were not applicable to the new law. ABI has accused the DMV of glossing over the pertinent issue that interlocks can bring undesirable consequences on the roads-particularly accidents.
The report's primary writer, David DeYoung, clarified the DMV's stance on the matter in a subsequent press release, saying, "It's true that we found court orders to install an ignition interlock device have no significant effect in preventing repeat DUIs among first-time DUI offenders."
March 21, 2005
Also See:
You may view a complete copy of the CA DMV Ignition Interlock
report (PDF
download).
What Is an Ignition Interlock Device (IID)?
A breath alcohol ignition interlock device (IID), or ignition interlock system, is a mechanism like a breathalyzer that tests for alcohol on a driver's breath. An IID, however, is installed in a vehicle to require a driver to breathe into the device before the vehicle can be started. If the driver's breath alcohol concentration (BAC) is over the programmed limit (typically .02% to .04%) the vehicle's ignition is disabled and the vehicle will not start.The U.S. Government's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) maintains a " Conforming Products List" (PDF download) of breath alcohol devices approved for law enforcement use. Interlocks that meet the NHTSA standards not only require a test to start the engine, but also require a test every few minutes while driving - a "rolling or running retest." This type of test prevents an individual other than the driver from starting the car and then allowing an impaired driver to drive the vehicle. (NHTSA guidelines for most regions call for only one subsequent test). Ignition interlocks can be difficult to circumvent when properly installed and monitored regularly.
The amount of time an individual is required to have ignition interlock on his or her car varies based on prior offenses and other restrictions. See which states require ignition interlocks.
Steps for using an Ignition Interlock:
- Get in car and put on seatbelt.
- Push button on Ignition Interlock.
- Wait for confirmation messages to appear.
- Blow into mouthpiece.
- Wait for "pass" (or "fail") confirmation messages to appear.
- If "pass", place keys in ignition and start vehicle.
Also See:
Related Libraries:
Related Links:
Ignition Interlock Study
The Associated Press
PHILADELPHIA (AP) - Breath-alcohol detectors installed in the cars of convicted drunken drivers prevented them from driving under the influence more than 10,000 times in the first year of Pennsylvania's Ignition Interlock Law, according to a study.
Drivers must pass a breath test before the system will allow them to start their vehicles, and they must periodically test themselves throughout their drives.
Their blood-alcohol level must be below 0.025 percent - less than a quarter of the legal limit - to keep the car running.
After three lockouts, the driver must pay to have the car taken to a certified service center in order to have the system reset.
Under Pennsylvania's law, drivers whose licenses have been suspended for two years may get the licenses back after one year if they agree to have the interlock device installed in their vehicle.
From Oct. 1, 2001, to Sept. 30, 2002, 1,855 of the 18,600 eligible DUI offenders chose that option, according to the report by the Pennsylvania DUI Association, which was contracted to evaluate the system.
The interlocks' internal logs showed the devices kept those drivers from driving drunk 10,142 times, the report said.
Pennsylvania is one of the first states to complete a comprehensive evaluation of its ignition interlock program, and other states may soon look to Pennsylvania as an example.
Jason King, a spokesman for the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, said he wasn't aware of other figures demonstrating the effectiveness of the devices.
It has sometimes been difficult to track the success of ignition interlock programs, said Dr. James Frank, a psychologist in the office of research and technology with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
"The information that comes back to us is very anecdotal," he said.
Pennsylvania started its program in 2000, and participants started using the devices in October 2001, said Dave Holt, assistant manager of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation's alcohol highway safety administration. Holt said he hopes the program will be made mandatory after a one-year suspension.
The main complaints about the program so far have involved drivers having to figure out how to get the machine to work, said Anthony Tassoni, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania DUI Association.
"There's an extremely large learning curve," Tassoni said. There are five types of approved ignition interlock devices, with some requiring the driver to just inhale or exhale, while some require the driver to exhale while humming.
Forty other states and the District of Columbia have some form of ignition interlock law, according to Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
New Mexico's ignition interlock law went into effect Jan. 1, so transportation officials there said they are just starting to work out their system - and they're keeping an eye on what Pennsylvania is doing.
"We're going back to change the law to have some fixes," said Virginia Jaramillo, chief of the traffic safety bureau of the New Mexico State Highway and Transportation. "I'll probably be calling them to see how it worked for them."
Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Ignition Interlock Findings Criticized
Ignition Interlock Findings Criticized - The California DMV's ResponseSacramento, CA-The California Department of Motor Vehicles (CA DMV) says a March 15th press release from the American Beverage Institute (ABI) misrepresented the results of a new DMV study of the effectiveness of ignition interlock devices in reducing the incidence of driving under the influence.
The ABI press release said "dramatic findings in a recently released study by the California Department of Motor Vehicles show that interlock devices had no statistically significant effect in preventing subsequent drunk driving convictions, but they increase their users' general crash risk by 130%." DMV officials said that statement seriously misrepresents the published conclusions of their study.
"It's true that we found court orders to install an ignition interlock device have no significant effect in preventing repeat DUIs among first-time DUI offenders," said the report's lead author, David DeYoung. "But what the ABI press release completely omitted was our finding that when second-time offenders install the device in order to be able to drive with a restricted license, they have a significantly lower risk of repeat DUI incidents - a 41 percent reduction. Since DUI repeat offenders are a major cause of U.S. highway deaths, this misrepresentation by the ABI press release greatly concerns the California DMV.
"In quoting our finding that DUI second offenders using the device have a 130% higher risk of a subsequent crash, ABI seems to imply that the device itself somehow increases the likelihood of a crash. That is not what we said. It is not that installation and use of interlocks causes crashes or that the devices themselves are unsafe," said DeYoung. "Obviously if someone who has previously been forbidden to drive is allowed to return legally to the roadways with an ignition interlock and a restricted driver license, their exposure to accidents increases, no matter how sober they are."
The ABI release quoted the DMV report as saying: "Because there is no evidence that interlocks are an effective traffic safety measure for first DUI offenders, the use of the devices should not be emphasized." But the ABI release neglected to mention that the DMV report specifically stated that the devices "are effective in reducing subsequent DUI convictions."
DeYoung, manager of alcohol and drug projects in DMV's Research & Development unit, said: "We are concerned because the ABI press release quotes our report out of context, presents incorrect information and misstates the findings of our report so completely that the entire tenor of the ABI release is seriously inconsistent with what the report actually says. We are especially concerned because the ABI release uses that misrepresentation as a pretext for urging legislators to "abandon" any attempts to require the devices before a third offense. On the contrary, the DMV report specifically stated that requiring second offenders to install the device if they want to be able to drive with a restricted license significantly reduces further DUIs."
DeYoung added: "It's true that our study showed that court orders to first offenders to install an ignition interlock device are not effective in reducing recidivism among that group - perhaps because many first offenders tend to be in denial, resent the devices and refuse to install them. But the ABI press release completely omits our finding that the devices can have a real effect on repeat offenders who are beginning to come to grips with their alcohol problem and who often find the mechanical devices to be helpful in keeping them out of cars when they've been drinking. We urge judges, police, alcohol rehabilitation experts and anyone concerned about the nation's increasing death toll from drinking drivers to study our report."
Under current law, California judges are required to order ignition interlocks for drivers convicted of driving while suspended, if the license was suspended for DUI. Judges may order interlocks for first-time DUI offenders with high blood alcohol levels at time of arrest, and for repeat DUI offenders. In addition, there is an administrative program where repeat DUI offenders can, after serving half their license suspension period, install an interlock and obtain a restricted driver license from DMV.
March 21, 2005
Also See:
View a complete copy of the CA DMV Ignition Interlock report (PDF download):
- An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Ignition Interlock in California (September, 2004)
- An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Ignition Interlock in California (May, 2002)
Related Links:
In the News
