This is like saying that you never need to wash your eating utensils if you make sure that the same person always uses the same one. (And, really, it’s at times like this when I think we need a “barf” smiley…)
I once met the guy who owns the relevant patents on these devices.
He offered me a job as a product manager specifically to promote the long term adoption of the device in all cars.
I said no thanks in a heartbeat, this is America after all and our freedom to travel internally without government approval is sacrosanct.
I’m not expert on American law - what about operating vehicles off-road, on private property? Do the same laws apply, or would such a system prevent activities which weren’t illegal?
In any case, the burden of cost of regularly maintaining and calibrating such a setup seems to me the most obvious reason for not making it compulsory.
Until they come up with some foolproof and cheap solution, I think I agree with all of you who say cost is a problem. My friend with the DWI told me it cost him about $10k all told – he didn’t even litigate, so that wasn’t (mostly) lawyer fees, but the terms of his voluntary pretrial intervention required multiple “services” that he had to pay for, including the interlock, weekly urinalysis, and the anti-abuse drug, all of which he had to pay for, with the (hefty) costs being (no doubt) split between the vendors and the county.
For all the talk of circumventing the system, I was imagining also scenarios in which someone is right over the line but thinks he’s a bit under it, and the interlock “fail” is a wakeup call that tells him, contra his blurry judgment, that he’s not perfectly all right. I’d like to think I’d be grateful for that definitive proof, and just take a nap or call a cab, rather than try to circumvent the system when I have proof positive I’m drunk, but of course the immediate rejoinder is that IRL
we’ve all seen the “I’m perfectly fine!” rejoinder to someone who’s been told they’re drunk by a human, and I have no real reason to think the drunk would be more receptive to being told by a computer.
Add an emergency switch that allows the car to start, but alerts the cops that someone is driving illegally. If thugs are chasing you, that’s exactly the point you want cops to show up anyway.
But if you drive drunk, you ARE a criminal.
With such clairvoyance, we should just close down all the courthouses and anoint you high priest of criminality.
The mouthpiece could be kept in the glove compartment. Seriously…how big do you think it is?
The fact that there are people in this thread that are actually discussing this as if it’s a good, sensible idea is proof that it IS going to happen in a few years down the road.
You can drive as drunk as you want if you are on private property.
I am from Arizona and have had this ignition interlock for a year now. I made a dumb mistake TWICE! Both times my BAC was .084 and .087- I was totally fine while driving, even in the dashboard video shows I was not swerving or anything such but I was still pulled over for suspicion.
I am not against every car having these in them but they are a pain in the @ss. It takes about 45 secs- a minute to start your car. Not to mention one time the unit was malfunctioning and there was nothing I could do to start the car, I had to have it towed over 50 miles! They need to come up with a workaround if it fails like that. And someone said they can just have another person blow to start your car, not anymore. The car now requires you to do tests while driving. Before, when the device first came out you only had to blow in it to start it so it wasn’t uncommon to be leaving a bar and having a person ask if you could start the car.
There are different levels… If you are about .02 range, you will be able to start your car no issues. If you are around the .04/.05 you will get a warning but you are still able to start it. If you get .06-.07 you will get a fail and will not be able to start it for 15 mins… Then, if you get .08 or above the car is locked up and you have to have it towed to the shop for them to turn it back on which costs quite a bit.
Yes, mouth wash will set this thing off. What I did was purchased a hand held breathalyzer so a morning after a night of celebration I was okay. But, I tested myself to see what would happen if I used mouth was and went to start the car 5 mins after, it registerd a .11!!!
I heard Toyota will be making a stearing wheel that can tell if you have had alcohol in your system, I think this is great! If one didn’t have to go pay a monthly fee for the device to be installed I would be all for it.
Newer breathalyzers do not have a mouthpiece. You simply blow into a hole from some distance, no contact needed.
OK, we’ve now installed these in our cars, what’s next? Got to have one that checks for marijuana, heroine and OTC drugs. Then we’ll need one to test for lack of sleep. After that we absolutely must have a test of motor skills and cognition so their will be a rubics cube hanging from the mirror (old timers get a fuzzy one).
Why don’t we just save time and have a chip implanted? It will be blue tooth compliant so it can call the police as needed.
Yup.
Now imagine living in the UK where people are a thousand times worse like this…
I give us about ten years; I give you about thirty.
you forgot mandating the integration of faraday cages into the automobile chasis so you can’t use your cell phone while driving.
Which brings us back to the passenger who unexpectedly needs to drive scenario from earlier.
I left my mouth piece in my car’s glove box. I’ve never had any legal trouble with alcohol or any other drug ever. But since the state feels I’m a criminal do I use my sick friend’s, or sit there stranded?
Don’t be silly. Drunk driving is a crime; a criminal is someone who commits a crime; if you attempt to drive while drunk, then you are by definition a criminal. No “clairvoyance” needed.
That would interfere with the implanted chip’s ability to dial out so it would have to allow 911 calls.
But how would the GPS/celler data system to get speed limits so it can automatically put your car in neutral if you exceed them work?
I am not a criminal. I never drink let alone drink and drive. Why should I be punished with something extra that can break and leave me stranded?
I guess we’ll just be banning cellphones outright - I mean unless you’re using them while sitting down, and presumably close to a land line, you’ll be using them while you’re partially distracted, be it driving a car or crossing the street. Safety first!
Let’s legally mandate padding for all those dangerous pointy corners!