Senator proposes stricter S.C. law, use of ignition interlocks after first offense
By Rick Brundrett | McClatchy Newspapers
COLUMBIA - A proposed state law would require all convicted drunken drivers to install a special device in their vehicles that would prevent them from driving if they're intoxicated.
Under current law, judges can order the ignition interlock devices, though they are not required to do so. An investigation by The (Columbia) State newspaper last year found that the 2000 law hasn't been enforced because regulations were never developed for the devices.
Many models, which look like a large cell phone or TV remote, work by blowing into a tube attached to the device. If the unit measures a blood-alcohol level above the allowed limit, it prevents the vehicle from starting.
The devices also can require drivers to randomly blow into the devices while they are driving; the car's horn typically sounds if there is a violation and won't stop unless the vehicle is shut off.
A bill by state Sen. Joel Lourie, D-Richland, would require the devices for all first-time and repeat offenders after their license suspensions end. For a first offense, the devices would be used for a year; second offense, two years; third offense, three years; and up to life for fourth and subsequent offenses.
"There is a feeling in the legislature, both in the House and Senate, that we have to look at the DUI problem in a much different way, and the ignition interlock device is part of the solution," Lourie said last week.
Of 1,093 people killed in wrecks in South Carolina in 2005, 36 percent died in drunken driving crashes, according to the federal government.
Lourie said he decided legislation was needed after reading The State newspaper's investigation, published Oct. 29. That investigation found repeat DUI offenders often face little punishment because they strike plea-bargain deals in court.
Last fiscal year, nearly 11,000 driver's licenses were suspended in South Carolina for drunken-driving offenses. About 2,300 were repeat offenders, according to the state Department of Motor Vehicles.
Lourie said he hopes to have his bill, introduced last month, before a Senate transportation subcommittee this week. The transportation committee chairman, Sen. Greg Ryberg, R-Aiken, is a bill co-sponsor.
A similar House bill, which would require the devices only for repeat offenders, has been stuck in the House Judiciary Committee since January.
Forty-five states, including Georgia and North Carolina, have ignition interlock laws. In more than half, including the Carolinas and Georgia, the devices are discretionary, according to Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
Laura Hudson, spokeswoman for the state MADD chapter, said her organization supports the devices.
"I opposed it years ago because it was nothing but a toy," she said. "Now, it's protected where it's practically foolproof."
Defense attorney Reese Joye of North Charleston isn't convinced.
"I have never seen any electronic device that has worked right 100 percent of the time," he said. "It's just like the [DUI] breath-test machine. There's no such thing as an accurate breath-test machine."
Lourie said he modeled his bill after a New Mexico law. Alcohol-related fatalities dropped 12 percent after that state began requiring the devices in 2005, he said.
Rachel O'Connor, New Mexico's drunken-driving czar, said stiffer enforcement and a public education campaign also led to fewer fatalities.
"Ignition interlock was a part of that but was not a sole component," she said.
Joel Sawyer, spokesman for S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford, said Sanford is open to Lourie's proposal. He added, "We think a more prudent first step would be to reform DUI legislation."
In November, Sanford called for tougher drunken-driving laws. A House Judiciary subcommittee this week is expected to take up a bill that would replace the state's existing drunken-driving laws with a tiered system that would tie punishments to a driver's blood-alcohol level and number of prior offenses.
