Current Events > Cars going to have to include breathalyzers as part of the infrastructure bill.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://time.com/6086981/bipartisan-infrastructure-bill-breathalyzers/

Putting big brother in the passenger seat whether you want it there or notas part of an infrastructure bill

I understand the desire to crack down on drunk driving but this seems like too much.

---

http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/transcripts/19731100roadandtrack.htm

"I have the RIGHT to drive drunk unless the cops catch me." - Tc

---

Adding it into an already unlikely to pass bill? Sure, why not.

---

This will die before it gets passed. No way in hell the big automakers are gonna take the hit on how much it will cost to include those devices on every new vehicle.

---

this seems like good intention but horrible execution. what if the stupid thing just doesn't work? what if i used mouthwash 20m before getting in my car?

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

This will die before it gets passed. No way in hell the big automakers are gonna take the hit on how much it will cost to include those devices on every new vehicle.

they wouldn't take a hit, that's not how big business works. they'd pass it on to us.

---

Ok. Let us sleep in our cars now then if we have to.

I'm ok with all vehicles made going forward requiring a breathalyzer.

Something like 10k deaths occur every year simply due to drunk driving. Not to mention injuries and possible permanent disabilities as a result.

I'd even support an initiative to provide incentives for cars to have them installed, at no cost.

---

if drunk driving into powerlines, buildings, safety barriers, etc results in significant amount of power loss, road closures, maintenance/repair, etc -- great.
---

Heavy_D_Forever posted...

No way in hell the big automakers are gonna take the hit on how much it will cost to include those devices on every new vehicle.

I think the plan here is to intentionally bloat the price of a new car. Republicans will see profits, and democrats will see social engineering.

In high school, the school police officer showed us how easy it is to make the machines go crazy. A tiny bit of mouth wash, and it thinks youre a walking cocktail. Now imagine being late for work and you accidentally use the wrong mouth wash. Oops, now youre even later because your car thinks youre loaded.

---

I didn't read the article but don't those things have to be sent in and calibrated monthly?

So you'd have to take your car in somewhere monthly for them to look at it or scan it or whatever they do .

---

Guess what if you have a hangover? You cant drive your car.

---

Why are responsible drivers getting screwed for the actions of the irresponsible? Hell I don't even drink for God's sake.

---

ScarfForLife posted...

I didn't read the article but don't those things have to be sent in and calibrated monthly?

So you'd have to take your car in somewhere monthly for them to look at it or scan it or whatever they do .

Hmm if that's the case maybe the technology isn't there yet

---

Prismsblade posted...

Why are responsible drivers getting screwed for the actions of the irresponsible?

just the way the world runs.
even with the coronavirus pandemic. the unvaccinated are ruining it for everyone else.
---

This seems like something that can be trivially bypassed, like that dumbass skip-shift gimmick.

And consumer gets charged for it no doubt.

ScarfForLife posted...

I didn't read the article but don't those things have to be sent in and calibrated monthly?

So you'd have to take your car in somewhere monthly for them to look at it or scan it or whatever they do .

Yeah another state inspection! And more $$$ for the dealer and state!

Barfs

Meh, just accelerate self driving cars, solves that issue.

I'd give it about a month before people figure out how to circumvent them

---

Ah yes, more useless electronics added to cars. This shit reinforces my desire to drive mid 00's cars as long as feasibly possible. It truly is the golden age of automobiles before everything went to shit with overtly complicated stuff being added.

---

pogo_rabid posted...

This shit reinforces my desire to drive mid 00's cars as long as feasibly possible.

I may just get a 60s Trabant out of spite.

kawalimus posted...

Ok. Let us sleep in our cars now then if we have to.

No shit. I'd be scared to wake up to a cops gun in my face.

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

I may just get a 60s Trabant out of spite.

Now we're talkin

---

As someone who never drinks, this idea is fucking stupid.

---

sondast posted...

A tiny bit of mouth wash, and it thinks youre a walking cocktail.

Or, the car "helpfully" detects the drunk ass idiots you're driving home.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Or, the car "helpfully" detects the drunk ass idiots you're driving home.

why would you have them blow into the breathalyzer?

---

kawalimus posted...

Ok. Let us sleep in our cars now then if we have to.

How about you don't fucking even take your car with you when you're drinking?

---

uwnim posted...

As someone who never drinks, this idea is fucking stupid.

You don't want to massively increase the price of cars for a nebulous idea that sounds good on paper before you consider what consequences it would have?

---

Unless it's going to take a picture of you and somehow detect that you're the one blowing into it like the current ones then you can bypass it either by having someone else blow into it or blowing an air canister into it.

Never underestimate the innovativeness of a drunk that wants to drive.

---

thronedfire2 posted...

why would you have them blow into the breathalyzer?

The feds are set to make it more difficult to get behind the wheel drunk, requiring automakers to install technology in new cars to prevent drunk driving that could take the form of passive monitors for drivers breath, eye scans to check focus or even infrared touch tests on ignition buttons.

metallica846 posted...

How about the punishment is a lot more severe instead of this shit? People drive drunk because the punishment for the first offense is basically a slap on the wrist. Make it hurt the morons who drive drunk, not those who dont.

Punishment doesn't seem to be a deterrent.

If the technology is cheap and reliable, I'm for it. Based on some posts itt it seems we're not quite there yet.

---

I don't mind this and don't see what issue you guys have with it. Nobody should have the right to drive drunk, because driving drunk is dangerous for other people on the road, not just yourself.

The legal limit averages about 3 to 4 drinks. Why are you guys trying to fight for the right to drink 5+ drinks and drive?

Maybe it'll help push to improve public transportation, private driving services, and self driving

---

This is so fucking dumb. You have to breathalyzer to start your car?

---

Imagine the lawsuits when this already unreliable piece of technology prevents someone from going to the hospital or something despite having no alcohol in their system

Awful idea. As if cars weren't overengineered enough already

---

The only people against this is people who already drink and drive or want to do it. This is a good idea and should be implemented, there is way too many innocent people killed from asshole drunk drivers who think they have the right to put innocent people at risk. Drunk driving needs to be punished more harshly, after the first one you should lose your license permanently, driving isn't a right

---

Doe posted...

You have to breathalyzer to start your car?

Soon:

pinky0926 posted...

Imagine the lawsuits when this already unreliable piece of technology prevents someone from going to the hospital or something despite having no alcohol in their system

Awful idea. As if cars weren't overengineered enough already

How would it prevent that?

---

this is pretty cool. glad they are doing this

---

Mr_Karate_II posted...

The only people against this is people who already drink and drive or want to do it. This is a good idea and should be implemented, there is way too many innocent people killed from asshole drunk drivers who think they have the right to put innocent people at risk. Drunk driving needs to be punished more harshly, after the first one you should lose your license permanently, driving isn't a right

No actually. I once took a taxi that cost me $300 to prevent my brother from drunk driving from a golf course after he'd had a couple of pints. I'm vehemently against drunk driving.

But I'm also for practical solutions and not ones that pass the costs and troubles on to consumers and are likely to be extremely unreliable at best.

---

Mr_Karate_II posted...

How would it prevent that?

Are we talking about cars that won't allow you to drive if you get a positive test?

---

metallica846 posted...

Thats what Im saying. Make the punishment much much worse before we start a program like this that would cost the good guys money. Then if they still cant stop driving drunk, a bolder approach can be looked at. Im talking about mandatory jail or automatic felony for driving drunk. Might make people think twice about that ride.

I disagree. Some states have a death penalty and that isn't a deterrent.

Furthermore these are people who are intoxicated, so they aren't going to be thinking critically even if the punishments are more severe.

If it's a simple quick breath test on an inexpensive device that doesn't require servicing more than a couple years, I'm for it.

---

Mr_Karate_II posted...

The only people against this is people who already drink and drive or want to do it. This is a good idea and should be implemented, there is way too many innocent people killed from asshole drunk drivers who think they have the right to put innocent people at risk. Drunk driving needs to be punished more harshly, after the first one you should lose your license permanently, driving isn't a right

Nonsense. This is similar to the universal healthcare question. When you ask people if they think healthcare should be made cheaply available to everyone, they say sure. Then if you ask them if they are willing to pay more in taxes for that to be accomplished, the percentage of positive respondents drops way the fuck down.

Here if you ask "should we do everything we can to stop drunk drivers?", the obvious response is "uh duh?" But then if you ask people who otherwise aren't drinkers if they are willing to spend an additional thousand dollars on their car because now it's mandated that all cars have breathalyzer tech, you're going to get plenty of people that are like "fuck that, I don't drink and drive why should I have to pay more?"

---

I'm okay with that.

---

pinky0926 posted...

Are we talking about cars that won't allow you to drive if you get a positive test?

Yes

---

Mr_Karate_II posted...

Yes

So basically, we're talking about adding an electronic device that is already extremely unreliable on the marketplace (as low as 60% accurate on some models), that is only shown to be semi-reliable when of an "industrial" standard that currently only law enforcement have access to, and only provided it is properly calibrated and maintained. And this thing is going to have the power to literally prevent you from being able to drive?

It will naturally have to be hardwired into your car so deeply to prevent tampering that only a certified mechanic at your dealership can maintain it.

Dude I don't even trust my car's fuel gauge.

I'm skeptical, let's say.

---

Son can you breathe into this thing for daddy?