Lawsuit claims ignition interlocks not safe
Monday, September 13, 2004

The Associated Press

NORRISTOWN, Pa. — A lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania claims a dashboard device intended to stop people from driving drunk can actually be a safety hazard.

The suit was filed by a two-time drunken driving convict who passed out and crashed his car while blowing into an ignition interlock, a small machine that measures alcohol on the breath and won’t allow a car to start if the driver has been drinking.

Judges can order repeat drunken drivers to install the interlocks in their cars. Drivers must also perform the test periodically while their car is in motion.

Jason Reali, 29, of Telford, claims in his suit that he had to blow into the machine so hard to make it work that it often left him dizzy.

A heavy smoker, Reali said he blew so hard during one test that he fell unconscious and crashed into a tree, severely injuring his hand. He was sober at the time.

Other drivers have had similar complaints.

A 79-year-old woman filed a lawsuit in Florida after she couldn’t muster enough breath to get a reading on her court-ordered interlock. Her suit asks the state to lift the requirement that she equip her car with one of the devices, saying that in the case of someone with shortness of breath, the rule violates the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Center for Auto Safety in Washington has questioned the safety of having drivers perform the breath tests while trying to concentrate on the road.

Many of the devices require users to take a deep breath, blow for as long as six seconds, sometimes in bursts, and hum while doing it. The humming was added to the routine to defeat drunks who tried to get around the tests by using compressors to shoot fresh air into the machines.

“I wouldn’t want to be driving down the road and have someone coming the other way trying to blow into a tube,” Clarence Ditlow, a spokesman for the Center for Auto Safety, said. “There are some real safety issues with regard to distraction that need to be looked at to see if the benefits outweigh the potential risks.”

Backers of the devices say such problems are infrequent, and that the interlocks do far more good than bad. Last year, interlocks stopped would-be drunken drivers in Pennsylvania from turning on their cars nearly 34,000 times.

Drivers are also free to pull over to perform the test.

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation said it will adjust the breath-volume requirement on the machines for people who can produce medical proof that they have diminished lung power.

Reali’s lawsuit names the state and an interlock manufacturer as defendants.

Posted in General |

This entry was posted on Monday, September 13th, 2004 at 11:22 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.