New mandate for drunk driving detection in all vehicles

Hook Daddy

Hook Daddy

Well-Known Member
doublejj said:
They require seatbelts that I had to pay for.....and insurance. And other safety mandates like STOP signs that i had to pay for
Click to expand...
Taxes pay for stop signs, and yes before you correct me, we all pay for them. You completely miss my point. There are many ways to stop drinking and driving. They already have breathalyzers that wire to your ignition. They already have tech to electronically test the air without you blowing into a tube. Much cheaper, easier, already developed, and less invasive. But it doesn’t give you eyes into every car on the road, and that is the end goal, not your safety. If you think this is truly about the safety of anyone, you completely missed my point and in my opinion are either a bit thick or just trolling, my guess is a bit of both.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Hook Daddy said:
If your referring to me, I don’t ever drink and drive, and as I already said do not condone it in any way whatsoever. This thread was simply to point out how our government will take a valid issue like drinking and driving and use it for their own agenda. They pass a mandate under a spending and budget bill, but it passes and no one makes a fuss since drinking and driving is a serious problem. Next thing they aren’t testing the air but have a series of cameras in your personal car, that you HAD to pay for, and offloading everything you do to some server to be analyzed. Don’t get me wrong, I am not some conspiracy theorist, I just have an issue with them passing laws that affect my privacy under the guise of a spending bill.
Click to expand...
Hook Daddy said:
Ok, not everyone you are correct. I’m sure there are 40% of Americans that don’t give a crap about anything the government does as long as they get their free whatever.
Click to expand...
What you express is the belief that the government is out to get you, or the government will pervert a well intended action for its own purposes (something bad, I suppose) or something nefarious like that. I'm skeptical, not cynical. Your kind of cynicism is used to justify all sorts of wild ass bullshit, so, sorry but what you just said makes you sound foolish and I can understand the skepticism others voiced toward you in this thread. I don't think you are entirely wrong about the need to watch what happens regarding this mandate, but your conclusions about "use it for their own agenda" is based upon cynical belief and not facts.

Seatbelts were mandated to be put into cars in order to keep people's head out of windshields, not "get people used to restraints". (you didn't say that, I'm creating a cynical "agenda" to make a point). Regarding this mandate about monitoring people for impairment due to alcohol consumption, it doesn't exist yet. You somehow spin it into a nefarious government act without even knowing what it is. That part is bullshit.
 
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
Hook Daddy said:
Taxes pay for stop signs, and yes before you correct me, we all pay for them. You completely miss my point. There are many ways to stop drinking and driving. They already have breathalyzers that wire to your ignition. They already have tech to electronically test the air without you blowing into a tube. Much cheaper, easier, already developed, and less invasive. But it doesn’t give you eyes into every car on the road, and that is the end goal, not your safety. If you think this is truly about the safety of anyone, you completely missed my point and in my opinion are either a bit thick or just trolling, my guess is a bit of both.
Click to expand...
A 4 year old can defeat your tube devise....
Drinking Mom Gets 4-Year-Old To Blow Into Her Ignition Interlock
www.guardianinterlock.com

Drinking Mom Gets 4-Year-Old To Blow Into Her Ignition Interlock

Drinking and driving is foolish enough on your own, but taking along a child and having them blow into your ignition interlock device should result in jail.
www.guardianinterlock.com www.guardianinterlock.com
 
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
How about we see what the thing looks like and craft the tech so that I don't get a call from NIH telling me I'm a little overweight and perhaps I should not have eaten that burrito at the truck stop?
Click to expand...
Im not very likely to kill anyone while driving from eating too many burritos..........except myself, I love burritos
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Fogdog said:
How about we see what the thing looks like and craft the tech so that I don't get a call from NIH telling me I'm a little overweight and perhaps I should not have eaten that burrito at the truck stop?
Click to expand...
That gets us into the briar patch of nutrition medicine and nutrition politics. What is or isn’t good for us, and in what quantity, is not settled.

I will say that I look forward to the day when good food can be made without relying on agriculture as we know it. In my dreams, I can 3-D print a prime ribeye steak from nonbiological feedstuffs.

Questions about my train of thought cannot be summarily dismissed.

1664144946762.gif
 
Boatguy

Boatguy

Well-Known Member
Hook Daddy said:
If your referring to me, I don’t ever drink and drive, and as I already said do not condone it in any way whatsoever. This thread was simply to point out how our government will take a valid issue like drinking and driving and use it for their own agenda. They pass a mandate under a spending and budget bill, but it passes and no one makes a fuss since drinking and driving is a serious problem. Next thing they aren’t testing the air but have a series of cameras in your personal car, that you HAD to pay for, and offloading everything you do to some server to be analyzed. Don’t get me wrong, I am not some conspiracy theorist, I just have an issue with them passing laws that affect my privacy under the guise of a spending bill.
Click to expand...
Not a conspiracy theorist, just dont like basic life saving rules getting passed... I hear what your slinging..
The nerve of lawmakers
 
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
PJ Diaz said:
insideevs.com

Tesla Investigated For Two Motorcyclists Killed In Autopilot Crashes

The NHTSA wants to verify if Autopilot was indeed activated in these two crashes that occurred in darkness, on freeways.
insideevs.com insideevs.com
Click to expand...
Organ donors....why would any take a motorcycle to a car fight? Your never gonna win that one I don't care how many helmets you wear. If you choose to risk driving a deathrap motorcycle you have made a bad life decision and we want to repurpose your usable organs....
 
doublejj

doublejj

Well-Known Member
PJ Diaz said:
insideevs.com

Tesla Investigated For Two Motorcyclists Killed In Autopilot Crashes

The NHTSA wants to verify if Autopilot was indeed activated in these two crashes that occurred in darkness, on freeways.
insideevs.com insideevs.com
Click to expand...
Although motorcycles make up only 3% of all registered vehicles and 0.6% of all vehicle miles traveled in the United States, motorcyclists accounted for 14% of all traffic fatalities, 18% of all occupant fatalities, and 4% of all occupant injuries in 2020. A factor that directly influences motorcycle fatality trends is helmet use.

Fatalities among motorcycle riders and passengers increased 11% from 2019 to 2020, while the rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled increased by 23%. Over the last 10 years, deaths have increased 20% while death rates have increased 27%. The number of motorcycle fatalities now stands at 5,579 and the rate is 31.64 per 100 million vehicle miles. In 2020 motorcycle riders involved in fatal crashes had higher percentages of alcohol impairment than drivers of any other motor vehicle type (27% for motorcycles, 23% for passenger cars, 19% for light trucks, and 3% for trucks).

Motorcycles - Injury Facts

Motorcycles were 3% of all registered vehicles, but accounted for 14% of all traffic fatalities and 17% of all occupant fatalities in 2021.
injuryfacts.nsc.org injuryfacts.nsc.org
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
doublejj said:
you live in your car 24/7?...are you one of those "Van Life" people?
Click to expand...
umm,

did I offend you in some way? I'm comfortable with you and me disagreeing over whether or not the government needs to monitor my movement or should have access to data on my daily affairs without restrictions. As I said earlier, I'm all for research into how to prevent drunk driving. Before I'd say yes, let's do it, I'd like to see what they propose . If it is as simple and non-intrusive as a seat belt, then sure. If it involves sending video of everything I do while driving, then I'd need more information. I'd need a better explanation explanation on what data is being gathered, stored and shared as well as how effective it is at saving lives. Also, I'd like a better idea on the reliability of this system. I'd like to know what safeguards are in place for using data that is outside of this mandate, how it is monitored and penalties for abusing the system. In this regard, I'm on @Hook Daddy 's side. I don't blindly trust that the government will do the right things. Trust but verify, as they say.
 
Boatguy

Boatguy

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I'd like to know what safeguards are in place for using data that is outside of this mandate, how it is monitored and penalties for abusing the system. In this regard, I'm on @Hook Daddy 's side. I don't blindly trust that the government will do the right things. Trust but verify, as they say.
Click to expand...
Common sense laws aside, They are already watching you way closer than you think .
Would be naive to think otherwise.
It isnt going to get any less so a things move on. My fridge probably has more intel on me than my wife
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top