The phone isn’t necessary. It’s already in new cars.
I can’t disagree. In many cases the severity of the punishment does act as a deterrent. But that has to start before someone kills someone. It has to be extremely costly even if no one gets injured.
I was in court once and a judge gave someone a fine and 90 days prison for drinking and driving, first offense. No injuries. I don’t remember the amount of the fine, but I remember the shock when I heard 90 days.
That is my point. No deterrent at all. That person will eventually kill someone.
Yes, you can find places where there is no service. Large areas, in fact. The coverage chart of Alaska shows that.
So some people are arguing from a context of area, and some in a context of population. And that means people are talking past each other.
I’m not going back to find out why it matters for the topic of this thread. What’s the point of the argument?
I believe the point of the argument was a what if scenario. What if you’re impaired in an emergency situation and have no cell service? Then you wouldn’t be able to drive your car with this tech.
More than that, if we allow the government to monitor us in our cars what is to stop them from monitoring us in our homes or anywhere else?
4 Likes
You will be neutral about it until your car won’t move in spite of your sobriety.
Yes, smart drunk. Alcoholism shows no favorites.
Or until the monitoring is also being done in their homes and by their phones.
I think this is dumb…how will the system know where the drunk person is sitting? Will it be smart enough to trace alcohol back to the source and allow vehicles to operate if the drunk person is a passenger?
Or will drunks be stuck where they are until they sober up?
Bad analogy.
No one ever got arrested for fat driving.
I’m having a problem finding another individual’s post that relates to marijuana, particularly states earning revenue from it being legalized.
Here’s some information on drugs that impair and the user should not drive:
Legal marijuana products about require a buzz saw to open, and dispensary personnel generally give a wealth of information about their effects. One near me requires a signed agreement by the buyer to get another driver when using.
It’s interesting the above article mentioned diphenhydramine, an active agreement in sleeping aids & antihistamines. I’ve never felt as if I got smacked in the head with a hammer after marijuana for pain management, but Benadryl, whether OTC or in an IV cocktail for migraine pain, sure does have that side effect.
Neither one using weed nor antihistamines should be behind the wheel, and, obviously, an alcohol detector will detect neither.
Most likely touch sensors in the steering wheel.
More conspiracy.
The proposed detector will pick up and quantify alcohol when a driver enters the vehicle, shutting it down when the driver is over that state’s limit.
Aren’t drivers on probation for drunk driving already required to have such a device on their cars?
Now obviously such a device can’t detect other drugs of impairment. But why would drunk drivers who could potentially kill another not being able to start their cars be a source of anxiety?
Already answered this question. Because my car is private property and if the fed has the power to monitor me in my car that necessarily means they also have to power to do so in my home.
How do you propose they’ll go about monitoring you in your home?
You’re aware states can revoke driver’s licenses for various age related impairments, no?
The state of California revokes licenses of anyone diagnosed with Alzheimers.
All 50 have a requirement for six seizure free months as reported by a neurologist for those with seizure disorder wanting the privilege to drive.
Some states are mandatory reporting if a patient has a seizure in spite of meds, & their privilege is suspended until those six seizure free months.
Driving isn’t a right for all to enjoy regardless of impairment.
Scandinavia?
Isn’t the age to learn to drive older in those countries as well, like 18?
And aren’t all vehicles 5 speed manual transmission, where you really need your full concentration?
When the mindset regarding alcohol consumption is more adult, & also, aren’t there more public transit options and more journeys that are walkable? Anyway there aren’t going to be as many drunk drivers with more difficulty obtaining a driver’s license and more transit options available.
In the absence of a more adult mindset and transit options, I can’t say I’m losing z’s over a drunk’s inability to start his/her vehicle.
I’m truly sorry for the loss of your son.
However, how will increased prison time change the drunk driver who served if they get zero reprogramming options, like A A while they’re inside?
Speaking from experience, I didn’t stick with A A because I felt I was running around in circles. Many members refuse to sponsor, so the new woman in particular can work one on with someone, yet the group gets pissed when that new member has no sponsor.
I’m sorry? Every time I ask someone, it’s no.
But regardless if someone sticks with the meetings, it does greatly interfere, really puts a stop to the urge to drink.
I don’t like seeing a thief or crackhead serve more time than a murderer, either. But with no mental reprogramming, they may be worse when they get out than when they entered.
Driving isn’t a right, period. It’s a privilege. I must have heard that 100 times when I got my license.
1 Like
How does the car distinguish your breath from that of the drunk friend you are giving a ride to?
