Interlock Facts

SOME Pennsylvania counties fine a driver speeding 5 mph over the limit $35. A driver caught speeding over 20 mph owes more than $65. The rest of the state's traffic offenses follow the same theme: The severity of the crime determines the severity of the punishment. But a new bill before the state Legislature aims to change that.

There's a big difference between a person driving after two drinks and a drunk who drives after 10. However, proposed legislation would force Pennsylvania judges to ignore that difference and punish drivers charged with driving just a sip over the limit with the same sentence given hard-core offenders: ignition interlocks.

Ignition interlocks are in-car Breathalyzers that measure a driver's blood alcohol concentration (BAC). If a breath sample registers above a preset level, the engine will not start. These devices were originally developed for chronic drunk drivers with extreme alcohol levels. Already, many courts in Pennsylvania and across the nation prescribe interlocks to keep alcohol abusers and repeat offenders off our roads.

Proponents of the bill claim the measure will fight the drunk driving problem. National statistics, though, prove that the problem has been reduced to a few individuals who severely abuse alcohol and still choose to drive. Mandating interlocks for first offenders doesn't focus on those dangerous criminals.

With an average BAC of .19 percent - more than double the legal limit - the average drunk driver in a fatal crash has slurred speech, uncoordinated movements and delayed reactions. That's the scenario many people imagine when we hear about drunk driving. In reality, it only takes one drink to get arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI) in many states. Even though all 50 states list 0.08 BAC as the legal limit, many law enforcement agencies have adopted the notion favored by the Ohio State Highway Patrol: "There is no absolute 'legal limit' except 'zero.' "

The bar has been set so low that last year police arrested drivers in Oregon and Florida for drunk driving even though they were completely sober. One arrestee was presumed drunk simply because he struggled with a field test of counting down from 1,030 in increments of 7. Most innocent DWI suspects will never be able to remove the arrest from their records - even if they were never actually charged or convicted.

States can already arrest us for driving after any alcohol consumption. So it's rational to assume that many first-time offenders are not guilty of drunk driving, but of drinking and driving. Which is perfectly legal in all 50 states.

A couple of drafts at a ball game, a glass of wine at an anniversary dinner, a wedding toast or two: Moderate drinking - not enough to render you "impaired," let alone drunk - may soon be all it takes for drivers in Pennsylvania to be charged with drunk driving and saddled with an interlock in their car.

Other states have gone so far as to propose "universal" legislation- lobbying for mandatory interlocks in every car in the state. This kind of silliness may sound far off, but it's closer than you may think.

Saab, Nissan, Toyota and other car manufacturers are already developing new interlock technology that could be manufactured as standard equipment. In early 2007, Nissan unveiled a concept car fit with odor sensors to "sniff" any alcohol in the cabin.

This kind of zero tolerance is not anti-drunks. It's anti-drinks.

It's important to remember that drivers who speed or talk on their phones are more likely to crash than those who have 0.08 BAC. Though these reckless behaviors contribute to a growing death toll, Pennsylvania legislators are not clamoring to mandate speed-capping technology for first-time speeders.

If our representatives are serious about improving traffic safety, they should heed an age-old saying: "Let the punishment fit the crime." *

Sarah Longwell is the managing director of the American Beverage Institute in Washington, D.C., an association of restaurants committed to the responsible serving of adult beverages.