Are Interlock Systems Effective... or Just a Band-Aid Applied too Late?

According to this article, two residents from the Hampton-Roads region were on a walk one morning when they made an interesting discovery. A gentleman had stopped his vehicle at a traffic light, and as the light turned green, remained stopped. The witnesses approached the vehicle to find a man passed out behind the wheel, vehicle running and foot on the break. They woke the driver up, and he stammered out of the vehicle in an agitated fashion. A third bystander had witnessed the event, and had contacted local authorities. The driver, upon realizing the situation, reentered the driver’s seat and sped off, police in pursuit.

Delegate Sal Iaquinto, a Republican from Hampton Roads, views ignition interlock systems as a measure of prevention of these events. That's true, but only for the small fraction of DUI motorists who have already been caught. The interlock is a device which measures the driver’s blood-alcohol content, and is installed in a vehicle. In order to start the vehicle they must blow into the machine, and if it registers above 0.02, the vehicle will not start.

In order to avoid false-starts, the machine requires frequent retests while driving. Virginia currently is one of 10 states that implement this tactic for both repeat DUI offenders and those convicted with high BAC levels. Eight states currently mandate the system for all DUIs. The problem with the system is that it is rather costly, about $65 to install and $65 a month for calibration. This comes to $455 for six months, and $910 if the offender owns two vehicles.

However, there are numbers to support the theory that the system does save lives. New Mexico, for example, saw a 60% decrease in repeat offense rates when offenders were required to install the interlock system. So why not install interlock systems on all vehicles and take care of the problem before it occurs? Representatives for MADD, which relies on legal fascisim to solve this public health problem, apparently feels that this idea is good in theory, but that the devices are "amazingly inconvenient". Is that because universal installation would put them out of business?