Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on February 20, 2007, to prohibit a person convicted of drunk driving and allowed only to drive a vehicle equipped with an ignition interlock device from driving any other vehicle, subject to up to six months in jail, a $5,000 fine, and automatic immediate impoundment of the vehicle not containing the device, The bill also revises the required interlock device standards, and requires review of these every four years. It is bill is part of a package creating a new high blood alcohol level drunk driving offense (above .15 milliliters per liter of blood). See House Bills 4920 and 4921

The vote was 96 in favor, 12 opposed and 2 not voting

(House Roll Call 465 at House Journal 107)

Click here to view bill details.

Stop with the feel good, look at me I'm doing something and start fixing the problems in Michiganistan

There is so much legislation on DUI it's unreal.I agree it's out of control these guys want someone who had two or three bears to be treated like murders or worse.They need to concentrate on the problems here not flooding are already over populated jails with people who really did nothing wrong.I think two or three beers shouldn't allow a person to be punished at all.I understand the drunks who kill or who drive drunk need to be punished but give me a break they want every guy who touches a budweiser to have his whole life ruined.The government is out of touch and control.

The government has to stop this kind of control over citizens. We are fast becoming what we do not want to be..all in the name of 'controling a problem.'

has been fixed for some time now. The big problem is that alot of people made alot of money and now they are addicted to it. The madd mothers have gotten rich. The ins co's have gotten rich, the government is getting rich. this is the reason they had the limit dropped to .08. It had nothing to do with making anybody safer since the average drunk crashes into a ditch at about .25. this just made the pool of suckers much larger. We are fast becoming a police state and no one seems to care.

IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. And the madd muthas have made this a politically correct target. They make millions on this scam, the government drags them in at gunpoint and hands them over to madd which then turns them upside down and shakes them till their pockets are empty. The numbers of folks hurt by drunk drivers is minute campared to the crimes of illegals but you won't find any of these girly men taking that on.

I do not feel bad for drunk drivers and the requirements placed upon them by the state. It is not fair to them? Get real! If any person makes the decision to drink and drive and put me or my family at risk then that person deserves whatever punishment is coming. I am not talking about the regular citizen who had a glass a wine with dinner. I am talking about the one that downs a six pack and thinks it is okay to drive! I support any and all legislation.

you to have an interlock when you hurt my family because you are not smart enough to drive and talk on a cell phone. You can't keep punishing people for "potentially" causing harm or there is no end to it. Remember, sober drivers cause 95.8% of crashes and deaths on the highway.

all legislation, no matter how unfair or unconstitutional it may be. that's not a thinking man's position on any laws, much less laws that this state is attempting to use to keep itself afloat financially. why not ticket those who use cell phones while driving? they cause three times more accidents and deaths than drunk drivers do. but you ever hear about 'rounding them up'? no. why not? because EVERYONE uses a cell phone. and EVERYONE would become a criminal if this were a ticketable offense. why not do what several other states and simply state that using a cell phone while driving is driving with total disregard for the safety of others. let's make driving while using a cell phone the proximal cause of any accident that it occurs in, with the person on the cell phone TOTALLY responsible for any damages, injuries, or deaths that occur as a result. THAT should make our roads safer.

also make it a rule that when a person on a cell phone steps out in front of your car and you run them over, that it is classified as a "cell phone related" accident? How about a guy on a bike talking on a cell phone falls off and gets hurt, this will be a "cell phone related" accident. And if you are sitting still in your car talking on the phone and someone runs into you that's not on a cell phone that will also be a "cell phone related" accident". ????? Sound Familiar? This would raise the statistics on "cell phone related" accidents" so high that we could ban them tomorrow, and put anybody that dares to talk on a cell phone in jail for years even before they harmed anyone. No one would ever speak out against the ban because we will do it to "save the children", how can you be against that. Wake Up Dummies!!!!!