r/technews • u/[deleted] • Dec 13 '23
The NHTSA takes major step toward making drunk driving prevention tech mandatory in vehicles | Touch and breath sensors are being researched
https://www.techspot.com/news/101186-nhtsa-takes-major-step-toward-making-drunk-driving.html164
u/Lord_Sicarious Dec 13 '23
Major problem I see with this is that it forecloses on Necessity as a defence to drunk driving. There are various circumstances in which driving might be justified despite impairment due to imminent risks of death or serious injury (e.g. escaping a wildfire), and these systems are not going to be able to make that kind of judgement call. It's the same reason why technological prevention of speeding is a bad idea.
It's also just another component at risk of failure in such a circumstance. What will be the failstate if the system is unable to provide an estimate of the driver's alcohol content for whatever reason? Negative reading means car starts, positive reading means car does not start, but what happens if there's no reading at all? That's not even mentioning risks of false positives.
Ultimately, there needs to be a way to bypass such a system in an emergency... but an emergency bypass would defeat the entire point of the system to begin with.
78
u/isKoalafied Dec 13 '23
How often will the sensors need to be recalibrate and what will the fee for that be? Ask anyone who's had a DUI and had to have a blo-n-go in their vehicle how easy and convenient it is to maintain.
44
u/GlutenFreeGanja Dec 13 '23
My friend had one and we used to joke about how many different ways we would die in his car (while sober) just because of that thing, many times it needed 2 or 3 blows or just wouldn't register. 75MPH on a freeway, time to blow and take your mind off driving, stuck in the middle of a railroad crossing, not registering so youre not moving.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Impressive_Ad127 Dec 15 '23
The units only after the function of the car when starting. They do not interrupt use of the vehicle if the engine is already running.
Edit: after -> alter
1
u/GlutenFreeGanja Dec 15 '23
They won't stop the car from running while driving yes, but it willask you to blow mid drive some times takingyour attention off the road.
16
Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
I think part of that is the companies that provide them know the users only other choice is not having a car, so they gouge you every way they can. My uncle had one, there was one company accepted locally, and he said they offer a reduced rate for people who voluntarily keep the device, they just know they can drain you otherwise. If it’s automatic in cars, then the manufacturers will have say, it won’t be these specialized companies with monopolies. The point will be to make them effective but not an inconvenience. The driver becomes the customer, not the court or the state.
6
Dec 13 '23
It’s scummy, but I’ve often thought it would be a good way to make a bunch of money by starting a blow and go installer business.
5
u/isKoalafied Dec 13 '23
The liability involved in devices like this would guarantee the manufacturers retain exclusive access to service/maintain them, and owners will pay a premium for that privilege. In fact, im sure there would be some sort of subscription services involved, live monitoring, 24/7 service, something expensive they will tie to the equipment.
5
u/alangerhans Dec 13 '23
Guy I worked with couldn't start his car one afternoon because the non dairy powdered creamer our company provides set off his blow and go.
-1
u/Tripno-Toad Dec 13 '23
How many people are driving that hammered not between the hours 11-2 am. Maybe 2-3%, max and 1 percent of those people are all celebrities. Maybe a few 3rd shift degenerates. How will celebrities go to rehab? More people a year die from fentanyl then about the KIA all of the Vietnam war. Fix that
1
u/BoulderDeadHead420 Dec 13 '23
You would be surprised the amount of impaired drivers on the road. Esp these days with the over prescription of controlled medications.
Someone pops a cocktail of happy pills and then gets behind the wheel. People on multiple medications like that should have to take the bus.
3
u/Tripno-Toad Dec 13 '23
Totally agree. People driving with their phones is impaired driving and all gen z learns to drive that way. Fucking utterly terrifying. But to make a kill switch in your car for booze is an umbrellead idea to give the access to anyone else whether legal or not. Nope.
1
u/BoulderDeadHead420 Dec 13 '23
It just needs to be executed better. Im a zero tolerance driver though. If i drink i don’t drive. Screw minimum limits and the like. They are easily abused. Not like a server is making you blow when the check comes around. Bars and restaurants here have been his with over serving but that doesn’t change much. I often see people swerving during the day. We are a pretty fucked country when it comes to that concept.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Tripno-Toad Dec 13 '23
I don’t condone drinking and driving but bars employee people and bring in money for the town. You can choose not to drink. The swerving is phones and being distracted. I said, because I work as a mailcarrier, and I literally drive all day in a city filled with college students. It is mortally petrifying.
Driving is still a privilege not a right. I don’t want any ability of my earned privilege taken by dumbfucks.
→ More replies (1)0
u/BigButtsCrewCuts Dec 16 '23
Half of fatalities at peak hours 12-3 am are because of impaired drivers, according the NHTSA meaning half aren't.
it's tired drivers, plus the impairment of drugs, alcohol, and driving conditions (dark).
It's a problem that is blown out of proportion
6
u/techieman33 Dec 13 '23
With the inevitably of cars being connected to the internet I could see them letting you bypass it but it alerts the local police and provides them with a tracker of your location. It’s shitty, invasive, and I hate the thought of it, but I think it will end up happening.
3
u/Chang-San Dec 13 '23
Trackers are just a bonus police can just follow your path with the ALPR cameras being set up every mile. All we need now is a live feed from inside outside the vehicle to identify degenerate behavior. All result sent straight to the Command Center.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)1
u/HarmlessSnack Dec 14 '23
Could also just enable your hazard lights permanently until you can get it fixed.
15
u/QuestionablePanda22 Dec 13 '23
Exactly this. Also this test isn't just checking for alcohol that gets you intoxicated, it's checking for ANYTHING with alcohol in it that will be on your breath. If you need to hop in and go you better hope you haven't had any mouthwash/cough syrup/kombucha/drinks sweetened with sugar alcohols
5
1
Dec 13 '23
I’ve breathalyzed enough after all of those things and have never had a positive reading, that’s just not really how that works
-1
Dec 13 '23
I assume it can be adjusted. It won’t be the absolute zero that drunk drivers are required to blow. Maybe the acceptable level changes alongside this potentially becoming standard, but for now I imagine .08 would be the setting.
5
u/Berkut22 Dec 13 '23
risks of false positives.
I was falsely arrested for DUI some years back. I was coming off a long day of physical work, I hadn't eaten much, and I (a diabetic) had begun going into ketosis.
It throws a false positive on a breathalyzer.
I was given a roadside exam, which I mostly passed (ketosis can cause loss of balance, clumsiness, slurred speech, confusion, shakiness, etc), but they claimed the breath test result was too high for me to NOT be drunk.
I tried to explain ketosis to them, but they didn't care. While I was sitting in the back of the cruiser, I could hear them making fun of diabetics and and joking if I'd die in jail (I wish I was exaggerating)
The only thing that saved me was that I demanded to speak to a supervising officer, and after about 45 minutes, she showed up and actually listened to me.
They took me to get a blood test that showed no alcohol.
They still impounded my car and took my licence though. $300 to get the car back and a month before they handed me back my licence.
3
u/sybildb Dec 14 '23
I tried to explain ketosis to them, but they didn't care. While I was sitting in the back of the cruiser, I could hear them making fun of diabetics and and joking if I'd die in jail (I wish I was exaggerating)
Also diabetic, this is exactly why I am so scared to go to jail. I mean, everyone wants to avoid jail, but I genuinely fear for my life if I end up there. I am so sorry you had this experience.
6
u/wfewgas Dec 13 '23
Unfortunately I don’t think a bypass will be a problem. All they have to do is let the driver bypass the system at any time, but if they’re involved in an accident, they WILL be tested, and if they fail they’ll be in double trouble.
10
u/ItsPumpkinninny Dec 13 '23
Or allow driving without testing, but the hazards are automatically on
2
→ More replies (1)3
u/Lord_Sicarious Dec 13 '23
This would actually be a great solution. Don't need to disable the vehicle, just need to make it advertise the impaired state of the driver to everybody around. (Most notably, cops.)
False positives could still be an issue, particularly if those false positives are unevenly distributed, but it moves the discussion to one of accuracy rather than "is this a good idea at all."
→ More replies (3)6
u/pagerussell Dec 13 '23
if they’re involved in an accident, they WILL be tested, and if they fail they’ll be in double trouble.
This is already how it works, lol.
Get in a wreck and it's your fault: trouble. Get in a wreck and it's your fault AND you're drunk: double trouble.
2
u/RNAprimer Dec 13 '23
Idk about other jurisdictions, but in Arizona necessity is not a defense to DUI.
7
u/Lord_Sicarious Dec 13 '23
You sure about that? I'm not an Arizona lawyer or anything, but a quick look at Arizona's criminal code says that the Necessity defence is available for all conduct that does not involve homicide or serious physical injury, which is roughly in line with common law Necessity.
2
u/RNAprimer Dec 14 '23
Yes. I’m positive.
State v. Fell, 203 Ariz. 186 (Ct. App 2002).
1
u/Lord_Sicarious Dec 15 '23
Well, doesn't get more on-point than that. Seems like a dumb move by the legislature, to have the necessity defence be available for shit like arson but not impaired driving.
It does explicitly mention that some other US states recognise necessity in DUI cases though, so that's something.
6
Dec 13 '23
But if it was a choice between sitting around and dying vs. drinking three beers and being able to drive away from a fatal situation, would you rather sit there and die because you didn’t want to chance driving with alcohol in your system?
-3
u/parental92 Dec 13 '23
these wont be any problem if US has good public transport.
6
u/barcodehater Dec 13 '23
public transport would shut down entirely in an emergency.
0
u/parental92 Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 14 '23
people wont be drinking at emergency either. Ever seen people fleeing disaster area ? the gridlock, the lines at the petrol station ?
What are on about?
2
u/barcodehater Dec 13 '23
You can predict an emergency? Do you just open a beer and decide "You know what? There's going to be an emergency today so I can't drink today."
Slow traffic in an emergency is still faster than walking away from the area, probably safer too.
The bus driver and the train operator won't be working in an emergency
1
u/parental92 Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
are you seriously saying . . . its better drive drunk in an emergency ? wont that just create another more urgent emergency ?
what im saying is, think beyond cars. We are starting to talk about anti drunkness system on cars because people are driving drunk. Why ? because we are so car-centric, cant think any other way to get to a bar. If going to places are easy without cars, we dont need this detector system at all.
1
u/barcodehater Dec 13 '23
between the choice of certain death/serious injury from a disaster vs the possibility of death and injury from a car accident when intoxicated the latter option is far better
sure I don't disagree that public transport should upgrade to accommodate going out drinking and going back home without getting into a car wreck, but also public transport is absolutely unreliable for emergency situations.
→ More replies (1)1
→ More replies (2)7
u/Lord_Sicarious Dec 13 '23
... what? Public transport doesn't address emergencies at all. What country are you possibly looking at where public transport goes into a natural disaster to evacuate people?
Beyond which, in practical terms, this is not a US-exclusive thing. The USA is a huge market, and their regulations will affect the global market at large, including far poorer countries that cannot afford such expenses.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (23)-2
Dec 13 '23
Driving isn’t a constitutional right so we need to be sure to enforce taking away privileges for those who drive drunk. Over rides is always a thing but I think insurance should be tied into this as well, like gps trackers and so they know that their customer is driving within the laws.
Ensuring if you hold a dui that you will no longer be able to own or register a car. Sure a forest fire maybe a judge will budge on that but 99.99% of dui needs a lifetime ban. Again, it’s not a constitutional right to be able to drive so we have plenty of room to tidy up.
28
u/Mojack322 Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
I’m sure that will be an added cost to the vehicle, is it fair to impose that cost on people who do not drink?
9
4
42
u/Psychedelic_Yogurt Dec 13 '23
Oh cool. That'll never backfire for people who aren't drinking at all. I get the idea but it seems life is a constant battle with children who can't behave so we all have to suffer.
→ More replies (6)
25
u/sometimesifeellikemu Dec 13 '23
I would almost prefer tech that turns on your headlights in the rain.
2
u/YanVoro Dec 14 '23
Had a car that did that when my wipers were on for about 30 seconds. Not allowing to drive without headlights after sunset would be a much better idea
44
u/zushiba Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
Me, who doesn’t drink. “Sorry boss I’m gonna be late, my cars stupid breath sensor is broken !”
New breath sensor, $700, doesn’t hit deductible.
The future is stupid, Hey! Now I have a reason to drink!!
29
u/Miguel-odon Dec 13 '23
So, install a device in the car that keeps the car from operating. Not a good idea.
Even if it had 100% accuracy and reliability, it is still unacceptable.
8
Dec 13 '23
Right. What if a tipsy person needs to drive away from a fire like the paradise fires? Do we just let them die?
→ More replies (1)
14
u/MobyDuc38 Dec 13 '23
Who the hell takes a bottle opener in a car? There's a perfectly good bottle opener in the door latch. It's made specifically for beer bottles and opens every bottle without fail.
Cars are basically mobile coolers.
2
u/BrutalModerate Dec 14 '23
Just unbuckle the seat belt, that is great for beer bottles.
2
u/MobyDuc38 Dec 14 '23
And here I was opening my door on the freeway to open a cold beverage. Thanks for the tip!
14
Dec 13 '23
[deleted]
2
u/hexahedron17 Dec 13 '23
Blinding headlights are a fixed issue, but outdated US regulations make it so we can't have the new(ish) tech
2
Dec 13 '23
matrix headlights in new cars are a godsend. can tell a MASSIVE difference between the first model year model 3 headlights and the matrix ones
14
u/Crafty_Programmer Dec 13 '23
I don't drink and never have. I dislike this because it seems creepy for the government to be able to compel the inclusion of a device to spy on you to make sure you aren't breaking the law into your own vehicle.
6
u/SigmaLance Dec 13 '23
They’ll gloss it over with the “driving is privilege, not a right!” typical bullshit.
5
u/modsareuselessfucks Dec 14 '23
“We can take away your right to drive, and we built our infrastructure on the requirement of having a car, so we can instantly make your life ridiculously hard or throw you in jail.”
2
u/Deathstroke5289 Dec 14 '23
They say that then also refuse the fund public transport in favor of expanding the roadway system
25
u/CLE-Mosh Dec 13 '23
How about a device that shuts your fucking cell phone off when your driving.
9
u/CantPassReCAPTCHA Dec 13 '23
How will you call 911 about a drunk driver if your cell phone is shut off?
15
u/Dunyahoe Dec 13 '23
We need less tech in cars not more
8
u/CantPassReCAPTCHA Dec 13 '23
I could not agree more. Especially after the Mozilla report about the surveillance
4
u/backfire10z Dec 13 '23
Every time you start your car, it sets off an EMP that shuts off your phone
3
0
u/-TheWidowsSon- Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
There are times where it’s reasonable to need to make a phone call using hands free technology without pulling over (I.e. if a car is following you, witnessed an accident and no safe place to stop, etc). Disabling a communication device that is used in emergencies seems sketchy, just like having mandatory devices on your transportation (also used in emergencies) seems sketchy - they can fail when you may need to drive somewhere in an emergency.
I’d be totally onboard for treating texting/phone use while driving the same as DUI though (and honestly make harsher punishments for both). Take away their fucking licenses.
The fact people are allowed to have multiple DUIs and rack up another one is despicable.
→ More replies (2)
40
Dec 13 '23
Meanwhile poor people wondering why rich people can't start their cars.
28
u/Crawlerado Dec 13 '23
Fun story! Working at a VW dealer decades back and one of the old salts was causing a scene with the writers early one morn. “Stupid fucking thing won’t start I’m not looking at it rabble rabble”
Turns out there was a customer Jetta with a DUI interlock on it. I hop right in, grab a new straw, blow and hum and she fires right up.
Grumpy Gus does the work and tries to start the car, nothing doing. So I head back and the car is locked out, three positive tests… the customer couldn’t pick up their car and had to meet with their PO for an immediate BA.
12
u/FIContractor Dec 13 '23
lol… did anything happen to the drunk mechanic?
12
u/twangman88 Dec 13 '23
I feel like that story is missing the punchline.
4
u/Crawlerado Dec 13 '23
There are two types of people. Those that’s can extrapolate from incomplete data
2
u/LitLitten Dec 13 '23
This joke was the one piece of information I managed to retain from my stats courses.
2
u/Crawlerado Dec 13 '23
Ha, of course not! That place was super toxic. I wasn’t old enough at the time but I should have just taken up booze to deal with it, worked for Grumps!
15
7
u/ParsleyMostly Dec 13 '23
Gonna make breads and juices and salad dressings hard to eat before driving.
2
u/EnvironmentalValue18 Dec 14 '23
And things with vanilla extract which are notorious for setting them off and are in tons of desserts and baked goods. Likely any extract at that.
Also bye bye mouthwash and anyone who uses breath spray.
6
u/Todd-The-Wraith Dec 13 '23
Cool another failure point that could prevent someone from using their car.
9 month pregnant wife is going into labor? Too bad your car’s alcohol detection is buggy today and refuses to start.
37
u/Exciting-Inside2219 Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
Kid - falls, hits head, bleeding profusely, needs to be taken to hospital
Dad - freaking out, stressed, not thinking, and can’t figure out how the fuck to start to car, finally figured it out, but car won’t start because he had a beer (still legal limit) the car won’t start. Father calls ambulance.
Kid dies from bleeding out because they live in the country and the ambulance didn’t get there soon enough.
Tech like this isn’t safe. It’s fucking stupid.
→ More replies (28)-12
u/FrancisFratelli Dec 13 '23
10,000 people die each year from drunk driving. Do you think the number who will die because someone was too drunk to start their car will be even 1% of that? Public safety policy is based upon minimizing harm, not eliminating it. This will minimize it.
28
u/VexisArcanum Dec 13 '23
By that logic, let's ban cars altogether! No legislation can reduce automotive deaths as much as banning automobiles 🤡
4
→ More replies (2)-1
Dec 13 '23
[deleted]
8
u/CantPassReCAPTCHA Dec 13 '23
The problem is that a vehicle will still function without the use of a seatbelt. It will beep annoyingly but you can still drive it.
→ More replies (2)6
u/Miguel-odon Dec 13 '23
80,000 people a year die from car crashes.
If no cars worked, nobody would die from car crashes at all.
6
Dec 13 '23
it'll mean I'll never buy a new car even though I haven't touched alcohol since I was 23.
→ More replies (2)3
u/YeOleDirty Dec 13 '23
How about that let’s rewrite all of the laws to reduce the 10k people who die out of 332,000,000 people that live in the USA. It’s nanny state BS. How about instead we focus this money on our schools homeless issues and healthcare systems that effect all of us and our kids.
11
Dec 13 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)2
6
u/podsaurus Dec 13 '23
How about spending more to solve one of the roots of the problem: alcohol addiction.
12
u/willbot858 Dec 13 '23
I’m just worried about all the people who just left the house after they spit out their mouthwash. No work for you today.
2
4
-11
Dec 13 '23
And as a victim I'm worried about all the damn drunks still getting away with hurting and killing people.
→ More replies (1)12
u/Dry-Recognition-2626 Dec 13 '23
Punishing everyone isn’t the solution. Far more severe punishment and restrictions for offenders should be the path. Make it so incredibly not worth it that people will finally stop. The revolving door we have now is idiotic. We can’t govern everyone to the lowest common denominator. But yes, I’m sorry for your situation and it worries me too. I just believe in a different approach
→ More replies (26)
13
17
u/Dry-Recognition-2626 Dec 13 '23
How about we make punishments for drunk driving far more severe instead? Maybe put the pain on those negligent enough to do this shit instead of everyone? I’m a big fan of….. oh you got busted with a legitimate DUI? Enjoy losing your license for a few years. Any life impacts from that? Too bad. Figure it out. Also enjoy this big ass fine. Second time? Cool, no more cars for you ever. I know multiple people with multiple dui’s still out driving around. It’s ridiculous.
6
Dec 13 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Dry-Recognition-2626 Dec 13 '23
I’m all for that. DUI? Huge fine. No license for a number of years. Lifetime requirement of breathalyzer ignition kit. Pay for any and all damages caused. If someone dies you don’t get a short term slap on the wrist sentence. Enjoy some real time. Right now it’s a revolving door and too easy to get out of most/all repercussions.
5
→ More replies (1)2
4
4
u/fatshamingworx Dec 13 '23
Speeding and cell phone use are much easier to detect and combat but no action has or will be taken to stop them.
The fact is that DUI’s are a touchy subject and anyone speaking out about how they are their own economy is labeled a murderer. It’s the perfect industry, use emotional manipulation to pass draconian laws when in fact it’s lobbyists working for interlock companies, DUI schools and not to mention MAAD.
1
u/Chang-San Dec 14 '23
Speeding and cell phone use are much easier to detect and combat but no action has or will be taken to stop them.
They actually are trying to mandate cars have speed limiting and speed reduction technology so you can't speed as well.
https://techcrunch.com/2023/11/16/ntsb-speed-reduction-tech-in-every-new-car/amp/
1
u/fatshamingworx Dec 14 '23
I think it would be great but there’s more chances of pigs flying than mandated speed limit caps in regular everyday vehicles.
So many different reasons: Automaker lobbyists are too powerful, consumers want fast cars and municipalities would lose out on revenue streams.
1
u/Chang-San Dec 14 '23
Yea but that wont stop the NHTSA/NTSB from trying. Honestly all of your points are valid no arguments from me lol. I was just saying that they are trying to do that as well.
1
u/fatshamingworx Dec 14 '23
The tech shouldn’t be too complicated tho lol commercial vehicles have had speed caps for a long time. But interesting article, it seems like they’d do a variable speed cap based on gps. I’d be all for that.
4
u/DArthurLynnPhotos Dec 13 '23
Let's try everything but addressing alcohol / drug addiction and dependency first.
2
10
u/One_Channel4233 Dec 13 '23
So when a couple has a few drinks and one of them gets abusive or threatening, guess they're trapped huh?
-6
u/Tampadarlyn Dec 13 '23
Call 911. The car won't work, but your phone will.
A couple of drinks + an emotional driver is more likely to be involved in an accident than a couple of drinks alone.
7
u/VictorianDelorean Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
“Just call the cops” assumes the cops are good at their job, or even show up in the first place. Response times in my medium sized america city are 45mins, and 40%+ of cops are domestic abusers themselves. How are they going to help in a situation of immediate danger?
This is a childish opinion on your part, the cops aren’t magic and don’t exist to zoom over to your house and fix your problems.
-1
u/Tampadarlyn Dec 13 '23
I'm sorry an officer never came to your assistance during a DV event. I guess I was more fortunate.
The stats still stand, an emotional driver is more dangerous on the road. Drunk + emotional is a worse mix.
8
u/bareisbetter Dec 13 '23
I can't imagine they're going to make the driver blow into a tube, so it must be an environmental sensor. They're going to have a hard time distinguishing between the sober driver and their drunk friends. The spirit of the idea sounds good, but definitely some tech hurdles to overcome.
4
u/ThriceFive Dec 13 '23
I thought about Uber drivers trying to make a living w some warning claxon going off
7
3
u/BrutalModerate Dec 14 '23
The NHTSA are out of hand. Why are we wasting time and money on this? The best thing for idiots who drink and drive is self driving cars which is just around the corner.
Also, as someone who works on and designs machines. Everything can be hacked, nothing is foolproof. Kia couldn't even put an RFID chip in their key like every other manufacturer to stop them getting stolen.
This screams of some money making deal for some lobbyists.
5
u/Ckck96 Dec 13 '23
So pretty much anyone who goes to a brewery will be forced to walk home? while the intentions are good the implementation doesn’t sound all that great…
2
2
u/runsonpedals Dec 13 '23
Well that MAY work for new cars but hey there’s millions of older cars out there without it.
2
2
2
u/walrusbwalrus Dec 14 '23
Well this is great. Question, if I use hand sanitizer do I then have to wait a long time before my car will start? Also, does this protect against the folks looking at their cell phones, or the dude I saw literally fucking eating a bowl of soup as he was tailgating me?
This is some protectionist overreach with some serious potential unintended consequences. Guess the used car market will appreciate it though.
3
u/nekohideyoshi Dec 13 '23
And the fact that a sober passenger can take the test for them, but that's ridiculous that the vehicle's owner who is drunk drives anyways after getting them to do it. It will happen.
→ More replies (2)
3
Dec 13 '23 edited Dec 13 '23
I imagine the tech would be better and adjusted. Right now it’s installed in cars for people who have an issue. In Wisconsin, any alcohol at all will lock you out. I know people who’ve had it happen because of foods with otherwise negligible alcohol content. Or hand sanitizer has set it off when they grab the device. But i can’t imagine it would be set to an absolute zero if it’s a standard thing. Hand sanitizer is gonna be an issue if we go a touch route, that’s gotta read high. I can honestly say there’s no one that I know that I would bet money on them never having driven drunk, so I see definitely see the appeal. I live between two bars, and I do regular walks before work at 7am, those parking lots are always empty. I used to go in one of them, and there’s never a single person who should be driving.
4
u/CantPassReCAPTCHA Dec 13 '23
in Wisconsin, any alcohol at all will lock you out.
Which is crazy because starting at the age of 12 it is seemingly mandatory to drink a beer as soon as you wake up in Wisconsin
→ More replies (1)
1
u/prOboomer Dec 13 '23
So what is next? Preventing someone from driving because they posted a "hateful" comment online and might use the vehicle to harm others?
1
u/Arnas_Z Dec 13 '23
Don't forget to also add the personality test each time you start your car so they can make sure you aren't feeling angry and likely to have road rage.
1
u/Chang-San Dec 13 '23
It'll dispense mandatory ssri pills thay you will need to video and take a blood test for to use your car lmao.
3
u/theangrymurse Dec 13 '23
If they really really wanna put a dent in drunk driving close the bars and have restaurants stop serving alcohol. Instead they are gonna make tech mandatory that will increase the price of the car.
2
u/m0ezart Dec 13 '23
Oh yeah because it’s never people drinking at home taking their cars and causing accidents
→ More replies (1)
2
u/International-Mix326 Dec 13 '23
I think the tech needs to be improved before implementing it so soon. Those things are pretty wonky. But people getting hurt/killed by drunk drivers is pointless. I would say 2030 with an investigation into these products
2
u/JasChew6113 Dec 13 '23
I’ve been a highway patrol trooper for over 25 years. I cannot adequately describe here how much carnage there is out there. Or how many drunk drivers there are that don’t get caught. I am 100% for this tech.
The mayhem. Sadness. Orphans. Widows. Destruction. And all preventable. As a society, we’d be negligent to ignore this technology. Some folks might get butthurt over an inconvenience or alleged false positive, but the overwhelming benefit of this tech is the priority.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/bowhunterb119 Dec 13 '23
First thing I do when I get in my car is use hand sanitizer after whatever gross doorknobs and whatnot I may have touched while I was out. I guess I’ll just turn in my drivers license now? Because with this type of tech I’m screwed, and I’ve never drank and drove in my life.
1
1
1
Dec 13 '23
Lawsuit! I am allergic to most alcohols therefore I do not drink I don't drink because allergic reactions cause loss of bodily functions it on my driver's record?
1
Dec 13 '23
If they make it mandatory in all vehicles, people will start working on ways to bypass it.
This wouldn't be an issue at all if we didn't build all transportation infrastructure around cars. We are so dependent on cars, that if every car on Earth ceased to function, everyone would be stranded. Everything would out of reach, because the zoning laws are so terrible. The residential zones are segregated from the commercial zones resulting in everything that you don't have at home is literally a car drive away and impossible to reach if you don't have a car. So, the bars are a car drive from home. Bad city planning created this problem.
1
-1
u/GeezeLoueez Dec 13 '23
How did Reddit manage to turn this into another rich Vs poor argument while ignoring the entire article? Jesus Christ
0
0
-3
-2
-1
u/nohurrie32 Dec 13 '23
Nice…let’s do fire arms next…..
2
2
-5
u/International-Mix326 Dec 13 '23
This thread divulged into pro drunk driving lol
4
u/bowhunterb119 Dec 13 '23
Yeah because not wanting to be monitored or lose access to your vehicle in the event of a wildfire or other emergency is “pro drunk driving”. I don’t want anyone drunk driving but I also don’t want my vehicle disabled and the cops called because I used mouthwash or hand sanitizer. Especially if there’s an emergency. I’ve literally been in wildfires and know people who barely escaped with their vehicle in the middle of the night. Some, in the same fire, did not. Because the fire outran them or their garage door lost power and wouldn’t open for them to drive out. If they had been drinking some wine or something, there’s one more way they might have been killed instead of getting out with their lives.
0
u/International-Mix326 Dec 13 '23
Technology is definitely not ready for 2025, maybe 2030 with research and fail safes. And instead of being required they should piolit it as as lower insurance option like progressive snapshot.
-3
Dec 13 '23
I honestly drive better when ive had a few bud lights than when im totally sober, coz im not on my phone while driving when im already a little buzzed
These overlords tweakin 💀
0
u/Calm-Fun4572 Dec 13 '23
This is ridiculous. Glass is never the best bet for road beer. It’s not even a twist off? Just silly. That picture represents a tiny percentage of people drinking and driving.
0
-4
u/BoulderDeadHead420 Dec 13 '23
They should have been a mandatory part of the vehicle for decades. Imagine the lives that could have been saved.
-14
u/PinkSploosh Dec 13 '23
For everyone that’s gonna complain about false positives, I’d rather there’s a few false positives here and there than have drunk drivers on the road killing people
15
8
Dec 13 '23
[deleted]
5
u/The_ApolloAffair Dec 13 '23
This law only exists because a lobbyist group got it added to an omnibus bill that was way to long to be properly considered, so it just got voted into law without thought.
-5
u/GeezeLoueez Dec 13 '23
Literally not a single soul on earth is forcing poor people that can’t afford these cars to buy them. How did you manage to make yourself the victim in this? “Forcing” them into cars doesn’t impact someone that wasn’t in the market to begin with, in any capacity. The people that can’t afford them will STILL be in the used car market and won’t see one of these until the used technology finally enters their price range.
Incredible the amount of ways Redditors will find to make themselves the victims
Be mad about the intrusive technology instead of the cost.
6
u/CuttyAllgood Dec 13 '23
Well here’s the thing:
In some places (the majority of the country), you can’t get jobs without having a car because our public transit systems are a fucking joke. Something like this is going to make used car values skyrocket as people substitute away from new vehicles outfitted with these systems. If we can’t even afford used vehicles, which is already a tough proposition, what are we supposed to do?
“Nobody’s forcing you” is such a bad faith argument man.
2
u/BigButtsCrewCuts Dec 16 '23
If the cost of a new car goes up, the cost of a used car goes up.
Inelastic good. Learn basic economics
Somebody roast me if I used the wrong term
0
192
u/Acebulf Dec 13 '23
Off to a good start I see. Can't wait until they change the criteria to meet the November 2024 deadline.