DonT sez: "I heartily agree with the first half of that. In an ideal world education would be the way forward. However I emphatically disagree with the contention that tightening limits will be more successful. As I said above, all the evidence is that the majority of the target group will, as they do now, ignore those limits. Even after being caught, fined, and banned, they will tend to repeat the offence."
True enough, Don. If BTI's are the wave of the (near) future, I'd be of the opinion that a repeat offender should, as part of his punishment, have a BTI fitted to his/her car.
But a BTI on every car? I confess I'm distrustful of the technology; would it detect low amounts of alcohol -- say, from cough syrup -- on the breath and keep one from starting one's car because of that?
If they were to be fitted to all new vehicles, would they then get retro-fitted to older vehicles, by law, as well? Or are you thinking that a BTI should only be a standard feature of new vehicles (and that the authorities should count on DUI arrests declining as the older vehicles are junked??
I agree that the majority of car owners wouldn't have a clue about how to disable a BTI, but I think that those who are determined to ignore the limits would find a way to have their BTI's disabled, even if they had to find/pay someone else to do it.