Interlock technology was developed to keep chronic drunks off of our roads. And when used for that purpose, interlocks are an effective tool. But the neo-prohibitionist movement is slowly redefining “drunk.” For most people the term “drunk” means slurred speech, uncoordinated movements, and delayed reactions. But it only takes one drink in many states for a driver to be arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI). And now anti-alcohol activists want to put an ignition interlock in your car.

Earlier this year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration launched a 5-year campaign for universal interlocks. Contracting with the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS), the agency has budgeted $10,000,000 to solicit research and development on the widespread use of in-vehicle technology to prevent alcohol-impaired driving. Once unobtrusive, inexpensive technology is available, the only barrier between these activist groups and universal application will be public opinion. And they’ve already begun working on that.

Since the end goal is preventative, rather than punitive technology, the groups are scrapping the term “ignition interlock” in hopes of also ridding their new campaign of its negative associations. In its place, they’ve coined a new name -- Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) and have already started branding it on a new website: www.DADSS.org  (With this new branding, being against DADSS already sounds like being against safety.)

Recognizing that public opinion is the most critical component of the universal campaign, NHTSA has contracted with Gallup for nationwide surveys to collect public opinions about drinking and driving. Undoubtedly, the group will use the information collected to craft messages that convince Americans of a dire need for the technology. The website features the main arguments for devices in all vehicles:

Even if every driver convicted of drunk driving was not able to continue to drink and drive, many impaired drivers still would go undetected, and continue to add to the thousands of lives lost on our roads every year.

Note the use of “impaired” as “drunk.” Even though 0.08 BAC is considered the legal limit in all 50 states, many law enforcement agencies have adopted the position that “there is no absolute ‘legal limit’ except ‘zero.’” If the anti-alcohol lobby gets the opportunity to impose this faulty notion through government-mandated technology in all cars, then responsible social drinking prior to driving will become a thing of the past.