There are several designs and at least six have already been patented. Most are based on the Breathalyzer that police use, which makes it very expensive.
The more inexpensive versions measure blood-alcohol-content (BAC) through the thin skin on the inside of the elbow or wrist. These will keep the purchase price of the car reasonable.
Alcohol is a factor in 40% of our highway fatalities. As long as it doesn’t prevent people who are under the legal limit from operating a motor vehicle, I don’t think it’s a bad idea.
Don't different states have different legal limits? How would this thing work if you drive accross state lines? Will it suddently shut the car down if you drive into a state with stricter laws than the one you came from?
Yea, if you don't break the law why be afraid to let any law enforcement
agency search your house also? Anytime they want, 24-7.
Why the hell not.
Incredible..
hypothetical:
What if I'm out in the woods fishing on my own property and have had a few beers, being over the "legal limit". I begin to have chest pains and want to get in the truck and drive to my house to call 911, or to have my wife drive me to the hospital. Suddenly my car won't start because I've been drinking and I die of a heart attack.
Thanks allot for your nanny state ideas and devices.
“As long as it doesn’t prevent people who are under the legal limit from operating a motor vehicle, I don’t think it’s a bad idea.”
Nanny poster. Sure we need more government interference in our lives. No cigarettes, no trans fats, and now cars that won’t start after I just gargled with Listerine before I left the house.
I agree. And let's get a test for driving without a license, no insurance or here illegally. While you're at it, let's also make sure no soccer mom's are driving medicated as well. Don't forget the old people in hats and those rich bastards slinging 40 tons of motor home down the road in a cross wind.......
Please see my post #25.........these things are notorious for failure. Failure of one of these can result in fatalities.
Words fail me when it comes to clueless Freepers who claim to understand personal property rights.
I’m tired of trying to convert them. Let them be absorbed into the Socialist Wave that’s sweeping this country. You and I know where we’ll both be in the end. ;)
While they’re at it, the safety-nazis should require a device that prevents cell phones from functioning inside the vehicle when it is moving.
Also, the car should be disabled if you attempt to drive it barefoot.
There should also be a scanner that detects mascara in women’s purses, so that the car won’t start if mascara is present; that way no-one will try to apply it while driving.
The same goes for any reading material. Many accidents occur because people are reading while driving. The breathalyzer can also be used to detect ink.
These are all potentially hazardous situations, and must be prevented at all costs.
It's such a good idea that the first place they should be installed is on police cars, fire vehicles and ambulances.
Sheeesh..
“...these will keep the purchase price of a car reasonable.”
Ahh! The government dictating the reasonable price of goods!
I LOVE IT!
Wait—what this...isn’t DU? Oh No! I’m posting in the wrong website!
Where on this planet did you get that idea?
Don't tell us MADD or NHTSA.
The "legal" limit is now in practically 0%.
Now what?
Another hypothetical, since you didn’t respond to my last one.
All firearms are fitted with these ‘breathalyzer’ devices. After all, they are more dangerous. Right?
You have had a few beers, and are over the “legal limit”. You are wakened by glass breaking and are under a home invasion by 2 criminals. You grab your shotgun and point it at the intruder who is headed for your child’s room only to find that it will not fire because of your blood alcohol content being too elevated. You are then killed by the intruder, and the rest of your family will suffer the same fate.
If you mean $0 - that's reasonable. Nobody should buy that which they don't want.
The more inexpensive versions measure blood-alcohol-content (BAC) through the thin skin on the inside of the elbow or wrist. These will keep the purchase price of the car reasonable.
Alcohol is a factor in 40% of our highway fatalities. As long as it doesn’t prevent people who are under the legal limit from operating a motor vehicle, I don’t think it’s a bad idea.
= = =
I end up coming down on your side of it.
No one who has had to clean up after such a crash as I described above—or even one not so hideous . . .
or no one who has lost such loved ones in an alcohol caused crash
would call it a nanny anything. They’d call it a lifesaver that was too late for their loved ones.
AS A GROUP—GENERALLY:
ALCOHOLICS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE—INHERENTLY NOT RESPONSIBLE. THEY ARE ANESTHETIZED—HOW CAN THEY BE RESPONSIBLE! The only difference between the anesthesia ether and alcohol is one water molecule.
ALCOOHOLICS INHERENTLY LIVE IN DENIAL.
ALCOHOLICS INHERENTLY HAVE NO IDEA WHEN THEY ARE A DANGER TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS ON THE ROAD OR OTHERWISE.
ALCOHOLICS ARE THE LAST ONES TO KNOW THEIR DRIVING SKILLS AHVE BEEN COMPROMISED—AND OFTEN NEVER KNOW OR NEVER ADMIT IT EVEN AFTER AN ACCIDENT WITH THEIR OWN BODIES INJURED SERIOUSLY—THEY WILL !!!!STILL!!!! BLAME THE OTHER GUY.
ALCOHOLICS ARE EXCELLENT AT LYING TO THEMSELVES AND OTHERS.
ALCOHOLICS ARE EXCELLENT AT PLAYING A ROLE, PRETENDING—WHETHER IT’S PRETENDING BEING SOBER OR PRETENDING THAT THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AND IN THEIR RIGHT MIND. But they can’t totally pull it off when it comes to fine motor coordination, vision, reaction times etc.
ALCOHOLICS ARE UNWILLING AND QUICKLY BECOME UNABLE TO HANDLE THE PAINS OF DAILY LIFE IN AN UNanesthetized STATE.
BEING ABLE TO “HOLD ONE’S LIQUOR” IS A BAD SIGN, NOT A GOOD ONE.
Folkes who crave chocolate—AS A GROUP—have a higher incidence of alcoholism.
Evidence indicates that one drink of alcohol kills quite a number of brain cells. No. I’m not a teetotaler. I have 1-3 glasses of low alcohol wine about every year to year and a half. I’ve never been drunk nor tipsy nor had more than 2 glasses of wine over a long meal in 60 years of living.
Alcoholism has a genetic component. But environmental parenting factors are also contributive.
Two classes of families produce the vast majority of alcoholics: ALCOHOLIC FAMILIES followed by teetotler families.
I believe that all alcoholics arrested on their FIRST DUI should be court ordered into a 90 day residential treatment program.
And, that if possible, safe medically for the individual, for 1-3 years afterwards, antabuse should be required. If antabuse is not safe for that individual, then electronic monitoring and a check via breathalizer or some such every 4-12 hours.
Every 6 months, an interview with a skilled interviewer should be required during which the alcoholic will be assessed for whether or not he/she has learned to handle the pains of daily life with healthier coping strategies.
ALCOHOL IS DEADLY. HORRIBLY DEADLY.
It destroys lives, families and innocent highway victims at a rate that leaves the numbers of Iraq war dead in the dust.
Where’s the liberal idiot outrage at DRUNK DRIVING?
Price doesn’t even come into play. Neither does the fact that you have no problem with it. It all comes down to the state taking one more step to micromanage your life. Here is what it’s all about.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C. S. Lewis
What is the “legal limit?” It used to be 0.15, then 0.12, then 0.10, now 0.08, next, 0.05 and after that . . . ???
And who puts these statistics together? What is a “factor”? If I get run over by a bus but I have alcohol in my blood, it is considered a “factor,” even if not a causal factor. These highway statistics are collected by an agency with an agenda and do not reflect reality. Talking on a cell phone is supposedly equivalent to driving drunk (but at what limit, I wonder? They never say). Driving while sleepy is equivalent to driving drunk. Driving while carrying on a conversation with someone in the care is equivalent to driving drunk. But those offences won’t cost you $5,000 in penalties and fines, at least not yet. Let’s figure out what really causes highway fatalities and take steps to reduce them rather than using “drunk drivers” as a way to fatten law enforcement and insurance company coffers. Or, we could all move to Virginia and enjoy their wonderful system of fines.
It'll sure bollox things up out at the deer lease.
As long as it doesn’t prevent people who are under the legal limit from operating a motor vehicle, I don’t think it’s a bad idea.
Hey, as long as you, in your infinite wisdom, pony up the dough for it, I'll buy into the idea...
Oh, does it not sound as good if it isn't other peoples money?