New Technology Could Put An End To Drunken Driving, Federal Officials Say

[Purveyor]

Last edited Thu Jun 4, 2015, 03:45 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: Washington Post

By Ashley Halsey III June 4 at 12:49 PM

A technological breakthrough that could virtually eliminate the drunken driving that kills 10,000 Americans each year was announced Thursday by federal officials, who said it could begin appearing in cars in five years.

The new equipment won’t require a driver to blow into a tube, like the interlock devices some states require after drunken-driving convictions. Instead, either a passive set of breath sensors or touch-sensitive contact points on a starter button or gear shift would immediately register the level of alcohol in the bloodstream.

Drivers who registered above the legal limit wouldn’t be able to start the car.

“The message today is not ‘Can we do this?’ but ‘How soon can we do this?’?” said Mark Rosekind, administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). “It is a huge step forward.”

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/new-technology-could-put-an-end-to-drunk-driving-federal-officials-say/2015/06/04/1cd31176-0a5b-11e5-9e39-0db921c47b93_story.html?tid=hpModule_99d5f542-86a2-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394

[Human101948]

1. How will all the drunks get around?

This is discrimination!

[melm00se]

5. Liquorsicles <nt>

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

13. The way they always do

In the backs of police cars and ambulances.

[snooper2]

19. Like a hack or work-around wouldn't be available on the intertubes within 24 hours

LOL

[sofa king]

45. With a solder iron and 1 cm of wire, of course.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

2. Gee, what could go wrong? NT

[HassleCat]

3. Beta testing

I just wonder how long it will require, after they introduce the new technology, before they have the bugs worked out.

[malthaussen]

4. Impossible. Think of all the politicians who would be stranded. n/t

[Throd]

11. Not in California.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article23051748.html

fuckers.

[Scootaloo]

26. What kind of politician drives themself?

I mean aide from the president of Uruguay, I guess.

[monmouth4]

6. It won't happen, there is too much money in the prosecution of DUI. Money to lawyers, probation,

all kinds of goodies the justice department just loves...

[Dopers_Greed]

9. Not to mention the Booze Industry

Restaurant and alcohol lobbying groups actively work to weaken DUI laws.

Less people driving drunk = less drink sales

[bvf]

10. Good point.

Sad, but a good point nonetheless.

[Deadbeat Republicans]

7. Damn cologne.

N/T

[NRaleighLiberal]

8. You know who will fight this? Wine/beer lobbies...perhaps even restaurant lobbies

Think of the mark up/money spent in restaurants for that bottle of wine to split, all those pints.

[murielm99]

39. They are fighting it already.

We had a governor here in Illinois, one who did not go to jail, who saw to it that the legal blood alcohol limit became .08. The hospitality industry tried to crucify him.

He was a Republican, but I respect what he did in this regard.

[jtuck004]

12. To prepare us for increasing the profits on a car by charging

tens of millions of people for something they would never need, on the off chance that it might catch someone. Like drug testing people on food stamps, or a war in Iraq, something else we don't need.

Instead quit letting the bank$ter/donors off the hook for their ongoing criminal conspiracy, restore the lives of the 100 million of our neighbors who have been moved into poverty or nearer there over the past 6 years, provide real jobs, not just false hope. I bet more people would quit drinking to avoid the pain of life. And that should be our goal, not enriching flashy techno companies.

This way they will just be on foot and drunk. Doesn't solve a problem, but it gives them great opportunities to make more bad decisions. And maybe grab a weapon, find a ride. In my world drunks are violent whether they are driving or not.

[thesquanderer]

24. I like the idea

True, it's something I would never need, I don't drink. But I would feel more secure on the road if I knew all the other cars had sober drivers in them. It's worth paying more for my car to have it if it means all the other cars will have it, because ultimately, that might save my life.

[jtuck004]

27. The only solutions I agree with throw jobs, education, and respect at people instead of

policing and "preventing" with a bunch of jack-booted suit-and-tie thugs and racists. Used to be part of a political party that believed in policy built on those. It got small.

Today people think they feel safer because of policing and interlocks. Vacant-minded, it's like prohibition never happened so they feel no need to have learned anything from it.

Then their family gets mowed down by a drunk driver who defeated their controls, and they are sad.

But they never seem to learn that their security begins with the person having a life worthy living, not one in which they drink to avoid, perhaps, you.

Ironic, ain't it.

[thesquanderer]

35. I'm not saying it solves all the underlying problems

but no matter what else you do, there will always people who get drunk, and anything that stops most of them from driving will save lives.

[jtuck004]

36. Effort spent in misguided and wasteful attempts at security, which will not provide what is promised

is Teabagger behavior. It is worse than harmful, because it lets people think that others believe in things that aren't so.

We made booze fucking illegal, put you in prison for drinking it. People opened new bars with the full consent of the citizenry.

Realized that was stupid, repealed it.

Did the same thing with marijuana, look at what is happening. Drug tested the SHIT out of the population, even people on food stamps who were working and found that by god they were as sober as anyone, even more so.

Couldn't stop it, trying to figure it out, still mostly stupid and ignorant people bumbling around it, but they can't stop it.

Now you think you have a magic thing that's going to stop anyone? Because it is shiny?



Good luck. I'll wait to see if it is any better than any of the others, most of which are largely a waste of time as compared to getting rid of the reasons they drink. Then you deal with the much smaller hard core using effective and proven treatments.

This is more like digital homeopathy. But there will always be believers in snake worship, eh?

Drive safe. But after picking up a lot of bloody accident victims, i can assure you that's the very least you can do.

[thesquanderer]

40. Exactly. Prohibition won't work, even if it were desirable.

But I don't see how a device that impedes the ability for a drunk person to drive a car falls into the same category as trying to make alcohol illegal, or of being snake oil.

You honestly believe that mental health programs, anti-poverty programs and the like are going to eliminate the possibility of people getting drunk? And sometimes driving when they do?

As you say,

[LanternWaste]

44. Tens of millions do not ever "need" seat belts either, regardless of the off chance it may...

Tens of millions do not ever "need" seat belts either, regardless of the off chance it may save a handful of lives...

[leveymg]

14. Will On*Star send the alert to the police or your insurance company first?

Guess the onboard camera and GPS gets activated, too. Doors lock, computer voice comes on:

"Remain calm. Assistance is arriving."

Oh, Brave New World.

[yurbud]

15. self-driving cars will take care of this too.

[metalbot]

21. This

Sure, we could mandate drunk detecting cars in 5-6 years, but at that point, you should be able to buy a car that will drive you while you're drunk.

[yurbud]

38. at least as many people need a self-driving car while sober--some need it then more

[seveneyes]

16. Good news, it's downhill off this mountain

[Xithras]

17. You'll start seeing Craigslist ads from people offering to deactivate the interlock for $100

And, honestly, interlocks are easy to beat. Breathalyzer interlocks aren't defeated because the people who have them are generally under court order to have them installed, and they face jail time if they're removed. With a passive device like this, there's no way to prevent people from just removing it.

[snooper2]

22. People still get around those-

[aggiesal]

18. Not too many problems with this ...

Who's going to calibrate these devices?

What happens if the law changes from the current alcohol level to a new alcohol level,
how will this get reset?

You know that the calibration levels will be hacked and distributed in the Internets.

Next law will be if you're caught drunk with the calibration setting modified, you'll be
in deeper $hit, then if you were just caught being drunk behind the wheel.

It's a noble thought, but I'm sure we can think of more issues with this system.

[rock]

20. Problems indeed

How to keep a friend from starting it for you (or a passing child)!

[bluedigger]

23. I was hoping they were going to bring the party to me.

[Android3.14]

25. Bad idea.

Can you imagine if someone leaves a bar, has an angry ex following as he or she heads to the parking lot, and then the car won't start?
I'd rather we develop self-driving cars.

[Travis_0004]

28. What happena if I want to wear gloves in the winter?

[jtuck004]

29. Federal program that hires chaufers for everyone that needs one, $0 a ride in the city.

Millions of jobs, under Federal control, more employment for black folk to drive Ms. Daisy, (I wanted to go ahead an be the first on that one),

I would rather do that than serve french fries or do home care - and we would need less home care with millions of relatively free batter-powered taxis running around.

Maybe we could hire all the taxi drivers we put out of business, prefer not to ignore what is gonna happen to them. But I am not going to keep older folks in their homes just to keep the profits for cabs intact.

Or maybe communities just create a cooperative and run one, outside of the government.

jobs...

[Man from Pickens]

30. drunken legislating is a bigger problem

let's test pilot this technology in a legislature and see what happens

[harrose]

31. I use alcohol based hand-sanitizers often.

I guess I won't be able to drive after this comes up. Or else I'll be forced to switch brands.

[nichomachus]

32. Great new opportunity for kids to earn money

Hang out outside a bar. "Hey, mister, I'll start your car for $10." Or even "Hey, mister, buy me a six pack and I'll start your car for you." Win-win

[underpants]

33. I thought we already had Uber

[rurallib]

34. Could be a real boon for the recreational marijuana industry

Can't drink because your car won't let you? Don't stroke, toke!

[leveymg]

37. Just wait. They'll make you pee in a cup before you can start your car.

Same question with who gets notified first when the results come back positive - your State Farm Agent or the DEA?

[MicaelS]

41. So, it'll appear in 5 years....

What about all the cars on the road? Is government going to force people to retrofit them, and if so, who pays for that? Considering that cars last longer and longer these days, if only the new cars have it, it could be 25 years before every car on the road has the feature.

[eggplant]

42. It won't happen, because the whole concept is one big fail.

These (theoretically) prevent someone who is drunk from *starting* the car. It does nothing to prevent *driving* the car while drunk.

And they are easily defeated.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

43. I'm sure there will be secret ways to bypass the locks ...

... known only to cops and legislators.

[Snow Leopard]

46. Awesome

I can't wait until big brother can tell me what to eat and think too