Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Alcohol Nanny Breathalyzers
American Spectator ^ | 07 aug 07 | Eric Peters

Posted on 08/07/2007 4:59:35 PM PDT by rellimpank

"Pre-emptive war" got us into a real mess in Iraq. So maybe we ought to think twice before adopting similar measures when it comes to traffic law. Specifically, when it comes to an idea floated by Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) to require that all new cars be fitted with an ignition interlock that can detect alcohol in the driver's system -- and shut the car down if it does.

Several large automakers (including GM, Ford, Toyota and Honda) also support the idea -- and are working on ways to get these things into new cars, maybe within the next two or three years, if not sooner.

Sounds OK in principle -- sort of like the idea of liberating Iraq. The devil's in the details, though.

(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abuse; alc; alcohol; alcoholism; automakers; death; govwatch; hazard; madd; nannystate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540541-546 next last
To: palmer
Yes, the drunk will probably ignore all stop signs creating a hazard each time. And no, one missed stop sign at the wrong time is all it takes whether drunk or not.

In my experience no. When I was drinking I was always more 'legal' regarding stop signs etc. to avoid been stopped. When 'drunk' as well as sober/distracted anyone can do something stupid. the difference IMO is carelessness vs inability to drive...

501 posted on 09/07/2007 9:54:58 PM PDT by Gilbo_3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies]

To: Bryan

Should law-abiding citizens have to bear the implicit cost of such a device? What about false positives?


502 posted on 09/07/2007 9:58:14 PM PDT by Pencil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

Wait a minute. Law and order are conservative principles.

I disagree with this method personally, because of the cost, the risk of false positives, and the minor inconvenience of having such a device in the car, but there is some validity I believe to the notion of “What do you have to hide?”


503 posted on 09/07/2007 10:02:20 PM PDT by Pencil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: toddlintown

Hell, next thing the government might say is no marijuana.


504 posted on 09/07/2007 10:05:45 PM PDT by Pencil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Duck Fan

I dare someone to try fitting one to a horse!


505 posted on 09/07/2007 10:09:36 PM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

What a “reality based” diatribe! /sar

My PhD in clinical psychology was earned a long time ago.

One of my internships was at a treatment center set up by the retired head of the Navy center that treated President Ford’s wife, betty. The treatment center paired an AA member, trained counselor—experienced alcoholic with one of us clinical types.

Beyond that, I’ve lived on the edge of the Dine Reservation which has had an enormous alcohol problem all the 60 years of my life.

And, my parents’ apartments have had more than their share of alcoholics cycle through.

Then there were my Navy years—including 2 years at a human relations project in San Diego on the wharf. Alcoholics were a sizeable chunk of Marine Corps, Coast Guard and Navy personnel who cycled through our intense group process project. And, one of the Chaplains and a Navy Chief on staff had been quite extensive alcoholics.

So, your notion that

“You may be booksmart, but in the reality of addiction, or of fundamental liberty you dont have a clue...”

is thankfully THOROUGHLY FALSE, UNTRUE, OFF THE WALL.

And, my only realistically possible, post plausible conclusion based on all that extensive experience . . . is that your own perspective is at best grossly flawed and likely awash in denial . . . not that THAT is all THAT uncommon in the field. LOL.

But sail on silvery moon . . . the issues are not going away. And in the over all scheme of things . . . alcoholism, regardless of your connections or not with it . . . will be amongst the least of your concerns in the not too distant future. However, for anyone having such a problem, alcohol is NOT a good aid to problem solving.

As Father Martin used to say in his chalk talks . . . or was it Dr Murray Banks . . . I think the latter . . .

ALCOHOL WILL NEVER WASH AWAY YOUR PROBLEMS—IT WILL ONLY IRRIGATE THEM A LITTLE.


506 posted on 09/07/2007 11:19:52 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 497 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

I’m enormously comfortable by God’s knowledge of my intensely trained capacity to Love the sinner and hate the sin.

And, I’m enormously comfortable with the 100’s of affirmations of feeling loved by me—volunteered by so many alcoholics in my experience. A good percentage of them affirmed that they’d never felt more loved by anyone as much as they felt loved by me. Thankfully, you are wholesale WRONG AGAIN. Alas, such misperceptions are common where alcohol is involved.

Speaking the truth in love has long been a goal of mine. But, as is so often in lots of cases where pride etc. are involved, the truth is often not perceived as loving by those swimming in the sea of denial . . . regardless of how lovingly it is wrapped. And, sometimes, forceful pointedness is the most loving thing one can offer someone.

BTW, I’m curious . . . perhaps you’d care to enlighten us . . . how many family members have lived around you observing your drinking habits? How many of them would agree with you? How many of them would agree more with me?


507 posted on 09/07/2007 11:26:06 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: stormer
Folks that can’t drink and drive are spoiling it for those of us who can.

Ahhhhh . . . are they giving out certificates now in QUALITY DRUNKEN DRIVING? I bet the insurance companies love those! Won't wonders never cease! LOL.

I suppose you are also in denial of THE FACT that even one can of beer has already BEGUN to put to sleep the judgment center of the brain. 2 more so; 3 more so; 4 very much more so etc. Of course, you could prove this to yourself--IF YOU WERE REALLY INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH ABOUT DRINKING AND DRIVING--by taking a Mavis Beacon typing test with no alcohol in your system. Taking the same test with 1 can of beer; taking it again with 2 beers; then with 3; then with 4; then with 5; then with 6; then with 7; then with 8; then with 9.

PLEASE DO. and post all the results hereon for us to view. That would show what great skills you have for driving and drinking. Perhaps your spouse or priest or pastor or boss could serve as a monitor to verify that you've taken the tests in a kosher fashion and that the results are authentically yours.

Actually, this perception that one has the CAPACITY TO DRINK AND DRIVE . . . for those of us in the professioin . . . is another tell-tale symptom of a more serious problem than otherwise might be the case. It correlates well above above average with an inreased genetic predisposition to abuse alcohol and to be thoroughly victimized by alcohol. So, it appears that we have yet again the umpteenth millionth confirmation of that fact.

Sadly, for the lives of the family members and children mangled in alcohol related accidents . . . such dying, bloody, pained folks are not very impressed with the drunk's PERCEIVED CAPACITY to DRIVE DRUNK. Neither are the EMT's, police and others who have to clean up such horrific messes.

It's like I posted above . . . the fellow court ordered into my group on his 9th DWI . . . had been hospitalized on one of his other such accidents. Had hospitalized a family on a different such accident . . . and the first words out of his mouth were:

I
DON'T
NEED
TO BE HERE.
I DON'T HAVE
AN ALCOHOL
PROBLEM.

He had a perspective that sounded a lot like yours. Very impressive. The group laughed him to wholesale scorn. He was so clueless, he was incredulous that they were laughing at him.

I'm a little curious if you use a cell phone at the same time you're drinking and driving? That could possibly increase the chances that you'll very thoughtfully remove yourself from the hazardous population sooner.

I also wonder if there's a synergistic effect on brain cells when cell phone use is combined with alcohol. I wonder if there's any studies on that yet. The recent study indicated that 10 minutes of cell phone use was enough to increase the risk of brain cancer. An added alcohol bath on the brain could really 'enhance' one's brain capacities, I'd imagine. /sar

I wonder also, how many decades have you been drinking and driving. My boss's blacked out driving of a Navy car from DC to New York City when he was assistant to the Chief of Naval operations . . . at speeds in excess of 80 mph (and IIRC, one trip in excess of 100mph) as proven by time stamps on some receipts . . . kind of convined him when he was in a more sobered state . . . that his driving drunk skills could have easily gotten him and a number of other people killed. That and some of his colleagues eventually persuaded him to get into treatment.

But you go right ahead and consider yourself the expert.

Though it would be interesting to have the 10 closest people to you log into FR and express their opinions on the issue.

508 posted on 09/07/2007 11:55:43 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3
the difference IMO is carelessness vs inability to drive...

AHHHHHHH, please cite for me the reference where it is proven, demonstrated that

ALCOHOL
DECREASES
CARELESSNESS.

I'd be VERY KEENLY interested in THOSE statistics. The Insurance Companies must be quite keenly interested, too. Goodness. Just think--they may start offering discounts to all of those who take up drinking while driving! What a new day that will be! LOL.

Why . . . MADD will have to regroup and restrategize. Perhaps many of them will take up drinking and driving after reading such studies. What a prospect!

509 posted on 09/08/2007 12:02:08 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies]

To: Pencil
Wait a minute. Law and order are conservative principles.

I disagree with this method personally, because of the cost, the risk of false positives, and the minor inconvenience of having such a device in the car, but there is some validity I believe to the notion of “What do you have to hide?”


Law and order are generally conservative principles, but there are limits. For instance, it is the current (declared) law of the land that abortion cannot be made illegal in any state in the union, yet is certainly isn't a conservative principle to argue that abortions should be legal. As an extreme example, if a law were passed saying that all Jews should be rounded up, it would not be a conservative principle to see that law carried out.

The "if you have nothing to hide..." concept should be banned from any conservative thinking whatsoever. If you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't mind police coming into your house whenever they want to look around. If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't mind government watching you 24x7. Similarly, if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't mind the government mandating devices on your automobile that determine when you can and cannot start the car.
510 posted on 09/08/2007 12:08:39 AM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3
BTW, nobody can define 'drunk' for anyone but themselves except in the 'legal' revenue generating sense...

OH REALLY?

BTW, nobody can define 'drunk' for anyone but themselves except in the 'legal' revenue generating sense... PLEASE show me the study demonstrating that! LOL. Or even the pseudo logic!

Are you going to next try and convince us that

'Nobody can define driving nude for anyone but themselves?'

And, I suppose if a drunk driver leaves a trail of a dead motorcyclist; a mangled car with a dead mother and 2 dead children that swerved into a semi to avoid the drunk driver; and a dead family of 6 that were head-onned by the drunken driver . . . that if the drunk driver then declares that he was not drunk . . . they all must have died because of the hiccups? Or would it be from the farts?

511 posted on 09/08/2007 12:11:59 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 496 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak
I AGREE that the "nothing to hide" thing is a tyrannical and horrid excuse that will be increasingly used by the likes of Shrillery and her globalist gestapo to enslave increasing numbers of hapless victims.

But PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IS A CONSERVATIVE VALUE.

And where there is AUTHENTIC, VIABLE, EFFECTIVE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, there is no need of such draconion laws, regs, practices.

On this thread, we see the opposite--PERSONAL IRRESPONSIBILITY JUSTIFIED AS A CONSERVATIVE RIGHT. That I disagree with.

No way will I ever condone the willy nilly PERSONALLY IRRESPONSIBLE bloodying, maiming, horrifically killing innocent children as a conservative RIGHT. It never has been and still is NOT.

The conservative right is to act PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLY so that the social system around one doesn't have to intervene.

512 posted on 09/08/2007 12:20:11 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 510 | View Replies]

To: Quix
It must be true that most shrinks NEED shrinks !!!

You most definately need to get back on your meds.

My family would most likely petition for your removal due to your emotionally driven negative attitudes toward 'DRUNKS'.

BTW, Ive been to the gates of Hell and back, from what Ive listened to for 500 plus posts, your arrogant phd bullsh!t hasnt convinced me that you are anything but a bitter crusader. Treatment has little use for intolerant snobs who havent walked the walk...

513 posted on 09/08/2007 12:54:19 AM PDT by Gilbo_3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

Another impressive demonstration of totally misperceived notions stated as facts.

Fascinating.

I can’t recall . . . unless maybe it was some old brief reading of W.C. Fields . . .

I can’t recall anyone in my recent memory championing DRUNKS AND DRUNKENNESS—MUCH LESS DRUNK DRIVING!

Fascinating.

It is very encouraging that you are so wholesale wrong about my character, feelings, emotions, etc. in such matters.

Very comforting to see your judgment so off the wall wrong about me.


514 posted on 09/08/2007 1:10:13 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

BTW,

I’ve never observed that

FOOLING THE PERSON IN YOUR MIRROR

ends up being a good survival habit.


515 posted on 09/08/2007 1:11:55 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

The more I think about it . . .

The more that BITTERNESS slam sounds like projection.


516 posted on 09/08/2007 1:13:50 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: Quix; elkfersupper
in your multicolored long winded example, that driver SHOULD be charged with a mile long list of physical and property crimes, [for which mankind has had righteous laws for thousands of years] but its intellectually dishonest to say that one number fits all for intoxication, especially someone who claims to never have even been 'tipsy'.

Tell me exactly the moment I go from drinking to drunk without resorting to a random number. If the hysterical response is that the first drop of booze starts impairment, which it does, then just say that one drop is too much. At least that would be honest, but then the golden calf of DUI revenue would be slain along with the power gained by socialist thugs that cant rule free people...

517 posted on 09/08/2007 1:16:50 AM PDT by Gilbo_3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3

It would not be honest to say that one drop is too much because I do not believe that.

I’m not convinced that a logical dialogue about these issues is possible with you.

Dangerous drunk driving in terms of blood alcohol levels depends on a number of factors including idiosyncratic physiological ones for each person.

Society does it’s somewhat reasonable best to establish maximum blood alcohol levels that to some degree set the criteria for which responsibility for wreckless mayhem related to alcohol can be fittingly assigned.

You make it sound like every drinking driver should be in charge of their own definition of personal responsibility etc. etc. etc.

That is one of the most laughable things I’ve ever read on the net anywhere since about 1980.

And you want me to think that your assertions on the matter make sense. LOL.


518 posted on 09/08/2007 1:31:24 AM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: Pencil

Don’t know if you’re trying to be funny or not, but any reason you’re commenting on a post I made back on August 7?


519 posted on 09/08/2007 3:39:12 AM PDT by toddlintown (Five bullets and Lennon goes down. Yet not one hit Yoko. Discuss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 504 | View Replies]

To: Quix

Wow, thanks for the rant. My comment was intended as a joke. Do you understand the concept of sarcasm? Sorry about the confusion.


520 posted on 09/08/2007 4:20:34 AM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540541-546 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson