Car breathalyzers

Options
2»

Comments

  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 18,426
    Options
    "Land of the Free"

    It seems what was once a beloved statement is now a question.

    Sad that even some people on this thread are defending the question. Personally? I miss the statement. Something my son and his offspring will never get to experience.

    Tom
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • CottageChz
    CottageChz Posts: 366
    Options
    treitz3 wrote: »
    "Land of the Free"

    It seems what was once a beloved statement is now a question.

    Sad that even some people on this thread are defending the question. Personally? I miss the statement. Something my son and his offspring will never get to experience.

    Tom
    Not sure if this is aimed at my comments, but in my comments I have pointed out that I DON’T want extra sensors in my cars for this purpose (or extra sensors/monitoring of my life in general). My comments were meant to add information detailing the possible (realistic) way that this monitoring could be implemented; some people in this thread seemed to think that an always-on live camera feed that the government is constantly watching in every new car on the road is somehow a realistic possibility.

    I also wanted to point out that even if people REALLY think this “car breathalyzer” will be implemented as a camera, most people already carry around a device that would possibly allow a party with ill intent to obtain audio and video feeds.

    I guess I just kinda figured if you’re gonna kick this around, at least discuss the real way it will possibly be implemented, not the always-on camera fed straight to big brother - that is the easy way to have everyone chime in against government overreach but does not seem to be the actual way this would be implemented.

    Here’s the article I mentioned earlier if anyone is interested https://www.motortrend.com/news/anti-drunk-driving-technology-mandated-infrastructure-bill/amp/
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 18,426
    Options
    From the article wrote:
    While there are no specifics, the mandated technology in future models 2026 and beyond needs to "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired."

    We all know what happens when "no specifics" are involved.

    If we are to discuss the real way this will be implemented, we need the specifics. If they are to once again, going to use fear to drive an agenda (in this case, death by a drunk driver)? Based upon said history of using fear to do just that? I'll pass, thank you.

    Tom
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • sucks2beme
    sucks2beme Posts: 5,561
    Options
    So if it malfunctions, your car could automatically
    pull to the side of the road in busy highway traffic?
    No thanks. That is worse than the car not starting.
    "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." --Thomas Jefferson
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • nooshinjohn
    nooshinjohn Posts: 25,137
    Options
    treitz3 wrote: »
    From the article wrote:
    While there are no specifics, the mandated technology in future models 2026 and beyond needs to "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired."

    We all know what happens when "no specifics" are involved.

    If we are to discuss the real way this will be implemented, we need the specifics. If they are to once again, going to use fear to drive an agenda (in this case, death by a drunk driver)? Based upon said history of using fear to do just that? I'll pass, thank you.

    Tom
    Fear has been used to compel the surrender of liberty since the beginning of time. This is why it has become so important to undermine faith in God… for if our liberty, freedoms and the rights afforded to the people to protect those rights come from man instead of our Creator, they can easily be stripped away.

    Have you noticed that people without faith are far more likely to place complete trust in government for their protection? That is like a flock of sheep asking the wolves for protection.
    The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD

    “When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GlennDog
    GlennDog Posts: 3,095
    Options
    sucks2beme wrote: »
    a big issue is distracted driving. Cell phone/texting is just as dangerous

    That’s a sore spot with me. I write on twos (motorcycle) from April to November in Michigan and there are so many distracted drivers it’s unbelievable. Virtually, EVERYTIME I RIDE, there’s someone I wanna blow torch

    pitdogg2 wrote: »
    The real problem is as a nation we let these politicians create laws that walk all over us and 90% bend over and take it.
    Before you guys jump all over me I do not condone drunk driving or texting and driving. Like @daddyjt I'm all for serious consequences for both.

    Politicians and lobbyists create laws every day .... day in and day out. The number of laws on the books are excessive and infringing on our freedoms… Stop making stupid laws
    Kex wrote: »
    There’s no reason for “the gubment” to be monitoring these cameras. First of all, that would be impossible. The needs in manpower would far exceed what could be feasible at a reasonable cost..

    Just hire 87,000 new “qualified agents”
    daddyjt wrote: »
    Is it just me that finds it asinine that we, as a society, will go to this expense to curtail an act that about 1% of our society engages in? …

    like the tra ns thingy?

    AC Regenerator PS Audio PerfectWave Power Plant 10
    Source Lumin U1 Mini into Lampizator Baltic 4 DAC
    Pre Cary SLP-05
    Power Rogue M180 Dark monos
    Mains Salk HT2-TL
    Rythmik F12
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • treitz3
    treitz3 Posts: 18,426
    Options
    Texting while driving....never mind....

    GDog, we agree without ever talking about it. It's amazing what I observe in a truck. Simply amazing...

    Tom
    ~ In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence. ~
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • daddyjt
    daddyjt Posts: 2,348
    Options
    Kex wrote: »
    There’s no reason for “the gubment” to be monitoring these cameras. First of all, that would be impossible. The needs in manpower would far exceed what could be feasible at a reasonable cost.

    jx38ratoczxw.jpeg

    "Conservative Libertarians love the country, progressive leftists love the government." - Andrew Wilkow


    “Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.”
    ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter