2006-09-04 07:11:50 · 19 answers · asked by jeffrey h 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I think it is actually a good idea because my uncle was killed by a drunk driver. But it should be mainly for people who have previous problems with breaking the law. Like the gentleman above said though it would be expensive but people should STOP drinking & driving without having to be told. If you are old enough to drink you should take responsibility for your own actions.People please use a designated sober driver if you decide to go party...Thnx!
2006-09-04 07:13:11 · answer #1 · answered by Ashley 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nice idea, but impractical. Technology always malfunctions in some small (and sometimes significant) percentage of cases. There are fuel and oxygen sensors that register incorrectly, the same will happen with any electronic device.
Someone could be stone drunk but pass the vehicles' test due to equipment failure and you're looking at massive liability if they drive and cause an accident. Or someone in a life-or-death situation might be unable to move the car out of harm's way (like a brush fire or oncoming train) because the sensor is registering a false positive. Maybe an earthquake occurred and people were caught under a collapsing shelf in a liquor store, now someone is bleeding badly and needs to be driven to a hospital but the sensor registers what everyone's clothes are soaked in. This is a nightmare of liability for any manufacturer, they won't touch it.
Plus, people would tamper with the things- just as they currently try to fool smoke detctors in airplanes and puff on a cig.
I agree that having the technology would help. Many people would wisely choose not to drive when their car alerts them they are over the limit- but ultimately there must a way to override it.
2006-09-04 14:29:27 · answer #2 · answered by C-Man 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the idea is great. It will be a long time before it would be perfected. There can't be any glitches or the owners will be pissed. Drunk driving is a problem. I hope to see this device implemented someday. It needs to include a test for Drugs too. Alcohol is not the only problem.
2006-09-04 14:17:10 · answer #3 · answered by nm1dancer 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too many things can go wrong, too expensive, too much liability to the car manufacturers for emergency situations.
Several years back, some car companies tried to make it so that cars would not start unless the seat belt was fastened. They manufacturers got sued when several people couldn't start their cares during emergencies, and were raped or seriously injured as a result. Car companies don't need the liability.
Plus, any electronic system like that is too easy to override, and too easy to fool, unless the system is so expensive that it's not worth installing.
2006-09-04 14:13:04 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They actually have them on some cars and use them in some cases, like that. There will always be evil people, who learn how to beat the system. There is no need for everyone to pay for what a few bad people do either. Cars are expensive enough, and many cannot afford them.
2006-09-04 14:15:28 · answer #5 · answered by Shayna 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
its a great idea. but what will keep them from getting someone else to blow into it so the car will start and the one thats drinking actually drive it will not solve all the problems, had a step uncle that was required to have one due to getting a dui and he always did this and drove everywhere drunk still. so they wont be that much help
2006-09-04 14:16:37 · answer #6 · answered by misty_51273 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great idea. I do go out with friends and have an occasional drink - try to make sure never more than one beer per hour etc, . While I don't think I ever drive impaired - it would be nice to have that back-up as a guarantee. I know it wouldn't be fool-proof - but it is a lot better than trusting your own judgement.
2006-09-04 14:16:06 · answer #7 · answered by arkiemom 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
These devises are really expensive and why should someone who does not drink have to go through all that to go anywhere. People with past convictions are sometimes ordered by the court to have them installed in their cars...that's enough
2006-09-04 14:19:20 · answer #8 · answered by shelshe 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nice idea in theory, but fact is, it's more of a pain in the *** than most are willing to deal with.
2006-09-04 14:21:45 · answer #9 · answered by Bush Whacker 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do like the concept of requiring them for previous violators, since recurrance is common. However, what assurance would you have that it is actually the driver taking the test?
2006-09-04 14:18:44 · answer #10 · answered by Joe D 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋