This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Mandatory Breathalyzers Could Soon Be In Every Car If Feds Have Their Way
Submitted by John Vibes via TheAntiMedia.org,
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is currently working on a plan to put alcohol detection systems in every vehicle. The plan, called Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS), is still in its early stages, and they have not yet decided exactly how it will be implemented.
Some have suggested a system similar to Interlock, the breath system that people are required to install in their cars after they get a DUI. The device prevents the vehicle from starting unless the driver is able to breathe into the device to prove they are not under the influence of alcohol. However, less complicated equipment is being devised, like sensors that test the alcohol level in the breath of the driver as they sit in the driver’s seat or a touch system that would detect alcohol levels through the skin.
This technology will not just be used for DUI cases, though. The NHTSA is actually hoping to implement this in every vehicle on the road. As it wrote in one of its recent reports:
“While government regulations play an important role in ensuring vehicle safety, voluntary approaches to the design and implementation of vehicle safety systems are increasing in importance as vehicle manufacturers deploy safety systems well in advance of, and even in the absence of, government regulations requiring them. This paper provides an overview of regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to vehicle technology development and deployment, and will describe a new, innovative public/private partnership underway to develop an in-vehicle alcohol detection system.”
The report went on to indicate that these devices would be mandatory:
“In recognition that many alcohol-impaired drivers have not been convicted of DWI, an effort is underway to develop advanced invehicle technologies that could be fitted in vehicles of all drivers to measure driver blood alcohol concentration non-invasively. The Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS, a group funded by vehicle manufacturers) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have commenced a 5- year cooperative agreement entitled Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) to explore the feasibility of, and the public policy challenges associated with, widespread use of invehicle alcohol detection technology to prevent alcohol-impaired driving.”
They are calling this technology “non-invasive” but it tests the content of your blood every time you get into your vehicle, which by its very nature is extremely invasive.
As it stands right now, the way the state deals with drunk driving is tyrannical and infringes upon everyone’s rights - even people like myself, who hardly ever drink. Economist Jeffrey Tucker wrote an article on this subject and discussed the problems with the status quo while offering some solutions, as well. In his article, he said:
“Laws against drunk driving have vastly expanded police power and done nothing to stop the practice. The best prevention against unsafe driving from drinking has been provided privately: friends, services offered by bars and restaurants, community interest groups, etc. This is the humane and rational way societies deal with social risks. The police have only messed up this process by adding a coercive element that targets liberty rather than crime.
And we can see where this is heading. Texting is now illegal in most places. So is talking on the phone. Maybe talking itself should be illegal. Some communities are talking about banning eating. All of this is a distraction from the real issue.”
“If our ultimate goals are to reduce driver impairment and maximize highway safety, we should be punishing reckless driving. It shouldn’t matter if it’s caused by alcohol, sleep deprivation, prescription medication, text messaging, or road rage. If lawmakers want to stick it to dangerous drivers who threaten everyone else on the road, they can dial up the civil and criminal liability for reckless driving, especially in cases that result in injury or property damage.
Doing away with the specific charge of drunk driving sounds radical at first blush, but it would put the focus back on impairment, where it belongs. It might repair some of the civil-liberties damage done by the invasive powers the government says it needs to catch and convict drunk drivers. If the offense were reckless driving rather than drunk driving, for example, repeated swerving over the median line would be enough to justify the charge. There would be no need for a cop to jam a needle in your arm alongside a busy highway.
Scrapping the DWI offense in favor of better enforcement of reckless driving laws would also bring some logical consistency to our laws, which treat a driver with a BAC of 0.08 much more harshly than, say, a driver distracted by his kids or a cell phone call, despite similar levels of impairment. The punishable act should be violating road rules or causing an accident, not the factors that led to those offenses. Singling out alcohol impairment for extra punishment isn’t about making the roads safer. It’s about a lingering hostility toward demon rum.”
There is no doubt that drunk driving should be discouraged and that solutions to prevent people from driving drunk should be explored. However, it is entirely possible to do this without violating anyone’s rights in the process.
- 27681 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -


I have no problem with this, as long as there is a high voltage electric cattle prod stuck up the ass of every politician and kleptocrat in the nation..., and we've all got clickers;)
this is muther fucking bullshit
Contact that kid who got handcuffed for building an electronic clock.
Bet he could disable this thing.
New biz opportunity.
Question: Who is supposed to breath into the breathalayzer in those Google Driverless cars?
will auto insurance be required when I purchase my driverless car.......
Driverless cars will put a lot of people out of the Tyranny business...which is why they are obviously delaying it. We have the technology now.
Andy will do it...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qkyuq-m-aGs
This is 1984 playing out before your eyes. Kind of sucks, don't it?
What the article doesn't really mention is that it costs 2500 dollar for 1 system.
I guess some lobbying was done and a few dickheads will be filthy rich.
But you'll all pay 2500 dollars.
Do you drive a wreck worth 500 dollars? Don't worry!!! It will soon be worth 3000 dollars after you bought the 2500 dollar breath analyzer!!!
Yeah, I read that and my first thought was that somebody would stand to make a lot of money. But when the feds get to the task of making sure that one is outfitted on every car, they'll find that enforcing it is logistically impossible, because a lot of people simply won't do it because they can't, or, as in my case, won't. The only place that they could get away with it is on new cars, and that is for logistical reasons. Fuck'em.
You won't?
Do you register and inspect your car? Do you have insurance?
Wait for the road blocks with compliance checks. Wait for states refusing to register your vehicle because it doesn't have the necessary safety equipment.
You know how angry the serfs are at the police right now? Multiply that a few times. Now do you want to man* a checkpoint?
* Yes, this cis white male is mansplaining and doesn't give a shit about your new vocabulary & grammar rules.
How many people won't be able to get to some shit job because they cannot afford to retrofit one into their shitbox?
But just think how much more employment there would be if they were $4500 each? Think of GDP! -- Paul Krugman, swooning
I see myself making millions of $$ selling black market, canned, "Clean Breath".
Why waste money on that?
Just ask any woman on the street if she wants to make a few bucks for blowing your tube.
And if she missunderstood you... well... money well spend.
It would likely be a lady cop, working a soliciting sting. (They'll have to justify their existence somehow, just as the revenuer bastards did when prohibition ended and they became the "gun police") aka ATF
The only ones who will get rich from this is compressed air can manufacturers. But I think a bicycle pump may also do. All these new hi-tech security features appearing on pretty much everything are just snakeoil. Funny as hell when haxx0red, but still snakeoil.
I don't know why anyone things the designers are that stupid. Since I may have had a brush in this arena, I did some research. They are currently very hard to actually beat. Temperature, volume, and velocity are the input variables (with other dependent on device). Other variables are plugged into your engine management system to detect engine actuation and also accelerometers that if detect movement (and I'm sure other now).
Not to mention you have to retest every 10-20 minutes WHILE DRIVING -Talk about being distracted. A study I found concluded it was just as dangerous if not more than texting or driving over the limit...... but it's for the kids.
Believe me... I saw the opportunity too.
Apparently they are trying to discourage buying new cars, which is fine by me since I'm not going to buy one. My vehicles are decades old and still work just fine and if they break, I can ix them easily......
You are not thinking like a politician (which is good) - you can not renew your registration with out adding an aftermarket device. Let that sink in. That will be where the used car market will get hit on this one.
At those prices, we could all install turret mounted .50 Cals...Hell, that sounds like more fun than drunk driving.
Ma Deuce and some road sodas.
Toss in the assless chaps and you have Mad Max.
pods
Ahh...assless chaps.
That brings me back.
Just toss a few drinks in with the .50 cal and DOUBLE your fun!
Good point.
They'll make it cheaper on the new cars and expensive on the old cars. And that will make many old cars unaffordable.
And for those who won't be able to buy a car anymore...
well, they'll be helping push back the greenhouse scam.
And they'll get it through, first they'll show commercials where a kid is run over and killed by a dirty old man and everybody will rally behind the new system.
Once it's passed, they'll tell you how much it costs.
they dont want the people to be able to drive - they want them to take a bus or a bike - raise the cost to unaffordability - we are talking about multiple ways to irradicate 90% of the population - too expensive to have kids - house - apartment - food - drugs - insurance........die faster and faster
bottom 90% are being squeezed out via defacto rules based discrimination - cant pay the parking ticket go to jail!
this country is not the place i grew up in - very very strange place
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner. Somebody is offering a kickback.
I never drink and drive and I say "HELL NO!"
I'll take 2 clickers pls. one for each hand.
John Boehner's car, will of course, be exempt.
Because politicians are honest, law abiding citizens. -- Mary Jo Kopechne
No, John Boehner's car won't be exempt. Like all Americans, Washington politicians want to know if their drivers have been drinking.
you're dreaming - they will have exemption with a kill switch
Will minorities and "immigrants" who cannot afford to pay the extra cost be fined.
No, we will be fined for them and then forced to pay for theirs.
I'm fine with it too - as long as mine is made by Volkswagen.
Well played my fishy friend. Well played.
This has about as good a chance of going into production as a gun with facial recognition.
MagnaVolt. No embarrassing alarm noise, no need to trouble the police... and it won't even run down your battery!
"I have no problem with this, as long as there is a high voltage electric cattle prod stuck up the ass of every politician and kleptocrat in the nation..., and we've all got clickers;)"
Better yet, link the tech. Every time we have to blow in the breatherliser to start the car the cattle prods activate.
Sounds fair to me. In fact it would make me even want to use it.
"Daddy, why do you keep asking me to blow into that thingee before we go for a drive?"
gonna make a lotta lawyers happy
Wow, another great way for the smart people in government to watch over us little dumbbells! These are the same great people who built up the 20 TRILLION in debt! Which one of the US Communist party thought this one up?
A few months back, I was shitfaced drunk and I realized I couldn't drive anymore so, I slept on the backseat of my car. A great way to mess up your back by the way.
And in the middle of the night, 2 cops knocked on my window while I was sleeping.
I had to get out and to a alcohol test, 2.4 promille.
While I was not driving the car, that shit will come up in court and could cost me 1250 euro's in fines and a month that I have to turn in my drivers license.
It's nothing to do with safety. It's money. Fines and fees.
This is one of the reasons that pot, hell basically every drug, hasn't been completely legalized yet. There isn't an accurate enough machine that can test for it on the side of the road.
Correct.
Unfortunately, alcohol is easy enough to detect in breath.
Also, there is no "impairment" level for pot, analogous to the 0.08% legally "drunk" level we have now for booze. i am sure this will be worked on.
Funny, I fell asleep in the front seat of my car, not super drunk but drinking, and the cops woke me up. It was a little over 20 years ago. They told me to get a cab or walk home. I was in a bad neighborhood they said. At least they were looking out for me. How times have changed.
I can't agree with that. The reason the laws exist is to provide profits to the drug companies. The only reason pot was made illegal was because it is too easy to produce on your own.
Same thing happened to my roomate, he did the right thing by sleeping it off. The stupid fucking police gave him a DUI anyway because he was in his car and had the keys in his posession, despite the simple fact that he was ASLEEP IN THE BACK SEAT. When I picked him up the next morning I told the cops off in epic fashion, and promised them that every single person who ever hears this story of these cops being INCREDIBLY stupid would to a man drive home instead of getting a DUI while fucking sleeping & 'doing the right thing'. So stupid.
The problem is that not enough people fight this bullshit so they can get away with tyranny.
Look, if you get fucked with by the police and you're legitimately in the right, which you are if you're fucking sleeping in your car, you have to fight the charges.
I fought the law once on a charge like this, I gave my lawyer 3 grand and the state only got 200 bucks out of me instead of 5,000. Also I had no charge on my record...because I fought. The judge was so pissed she made the prosecuting attorney make an impromptu statement in court apologizing to victims of drunk drivers right before I walked out with a shit eating grin on my face. She couldn't believe that someone was coming into her cunty fem-fiefdom and justice was actually being served.
When all you really had to do was explain to the cops that you wer'nt driving so how can you be arrested for drunkin driving.
Lol, say you dindu nuffin?
You talk like an on duty detective.
Reading your post along with the reasoning of Radley Balko reminds me that its no accident that the way the govt chooses to fight "drunk driving" violates a butt load of our civil rights.
The alternative of punishment for accidents and road rule violations would strip the govt of a lot of its powers and more importantly restore the idea that the individual is responsible for that happens and should pay dearly when they hurt others. Notice how you could suggest life in prison for anyone who causes an accident drunk and it won't sway anyone who wants the limit lowered to say, 0.05. They aren't interested in accountability.
It reminds me a bit of the idea of scrapping the income tax and funding the state entirely with a consumption tax. Because the consumption tax can be collected relatively anonymously, it would be extremely uninteresting to the govt.
Or maybe I'm way wrong and driverless cars are nearly here and GM and Ford just want the experience of driving yourself to be made comparitavely tedious and humiliating. "Who *needs* to drive their own car anyway unless they are planning a terrorist attack?" Might be a commonly heard argument 10 years from now.
In the US you can legally bypass it by shoving your keys up under the bumper or inside the tire rim under the car. Technically you don't have the keys on you. It's still shitty those bastards try to bust you for being responsible.
It will never happen. This would completely eliminate billions and billions of dollars in revenue from DUI charges. Lawyers will never let this be a thing.
Ding Ding Ding!
That's why we will never go cashless.
Black Op money would go bye bye from drug sales.
All about money.
if we went cashless all the deep state would have to do for financing is to make a few big hacks, then blame it
on the Russian mob, or the Chinese, easy-peasy
I R, great in theory, but keep two things in mind when it comes to the cashless plan. 1. as always, there will be two sets of laws, ours and theirs. 2, heavy taxes on cash (anytime they distribute, or find it) as a deterrent.
This X infinity
Big booze will also get involved. If you can't go out to the local watering hole and have a have a burger, watch the game, and knock a few back, they lose a huge percentage of sales.
Yeah, it's similar to the 50-state settlement with tobacco companies:
- Your products have terrible health consequences for our citizens and should be banned.
- Ok, we'll agree to give you a bigger cut of all our sales.
- Sounds good. Please continue going about your business.
In order for this to actually work, you would need to install CAMERA'S as well, to make sure the person blowing is actually the one driving. YEAH, like that is gonna go over well with the people. Oh wait, the people are fucking stupid.
You have to admit, the videos would be funny as hell on Youtube.
Oh, no no, these videos would be stored in "Big Brother's Black Box" which you as a mere peasant would not have access to. Only the legally recognized agents of the state can examine a car's black box...
;-D
I've trained my dog. Now if I could just get her to pay the state fees and drive.
Maybe be one should be required to pass an IQ test before driving. Oh, wait, how would law dogs get around?
Really! You shouldn't talk this way about our "Pooches in Blue".
Tra la la la la,,,
;-D
Here in Northern VA all of the new interlock systems have camaras in them. It's already in the law as of (I think) June of this year.
So now instead of designated drivers we're going to have designated blowers. Doesn't sound so bad when you put it that way.
10th Amendment
US Constitution
Go fuck yourselves
The 10th Amendment is about as useful as the shotgun in your gun safe while an attacker is beating your ass with a baseball bat.
agreed.
So obvious, by its own terms, is it that the 10th amendment limits {or, reiterates the limits} of federal power that the Left has ignored it - to the extent that "Tenther" is an insult used by top academic Leftist lawyers.
In other words - someone who thinks the 10th Amendment exists, and means what it says, is "stupid" for the Left.
In other words, legal analysis that has grown allergic to the Constitution has relied more and more on arbitrary and capricious 'interpretations' that stray into amendment... and if you don't like it, fuck you.
Mentioning the 10th Amendment puts you on the list of likely terrorists.
Interstate highway traffic and national motor-vehicle standards are federal concerns. In theory a manufacturer could thwart the policy by only manufacturing and selling in one state, and only licensing the car for intrastate traffic, but the courts have ruled against that interpretation in the past.
Nullification without interposition is entrapment.
hopefully we'll soon have driverless vehicles and we can all ride around shitfaced; it's a brave new world
Just think, your teenage kids can go parking in the back seat without actually parking.
to hell with that, life is a carnival ride already, we don't need to implement it literally. besides, some of us enjoy driving.
Hand me the "Chappaquidick stick", I need to start my car!
Perfect.
(what's a chappawhosis Grandpa?)
Does this mean I'll have to wait to start drinking until after I'm already driving. Dastardly!
Hell no. Just leave your car on idle when your in the bar.
Emissions for everyone.
We'll be safe. Sounds good to me.
The 2005 Real ID Act took 10 years to kick-in. When does this new Safety Law kick-in? 2020?
I propose that we install a "sperm-a-lizer" breath test in the oval office.
Wonder if it'll detect methane??
Yes, they are coming out with a "pootalyzer" model. See above...
;-D
then ill have mandatory uber thursday, friday, saturday nites
Fuck, I live in an extreme fire zone. I'm literally toast if I've been drinking Fireball and can't start my truck when a brushfire breaks out
The papers will have fun with that one
or if you've had two drinks and your buddy has had 20 and needs to be rushed to the hospital for alcohol poisoning...
or if a woman who's had a few drinks needs to flee from a rapist...
We could put together an endless list of circumstances where needing to move or use a car is more important than making sure it doesn't start for someone with a little bit of alcohol in their system.
If there were any justice, the woman trying to escape from the rapist would be the one instrumental for getting the law passed because she wanted the world " safer".
I have drawn at least 50 people for legal blood alcohol testing. My record was 0.45 and if it weren't for the overwhelming alcoholic breath, I never would have guessed he was drunk. I sat on his bed and we had a nice talk. We actually debated the merits of Schopenhauer of whom I detested at the time. When I finally drew his blood he shook my hand " you're ok kid".
Back in the lab I damn near fell off my stool when I ran it. I recalibrated my instrument and it repeated. Most people would be dead with such a high BA. Fascinating man. I wished I had got to know him better, obviously his life story would have been interesting.
I've drawn other people who could not walk a straight line and came out 0.04. People cannot be pigeonholed no matter how determined those who wish to control our lives claim it is possible.
Miffed
+ 1000 Miffed. LOL, I probablly resembled that gentleman you are speaking of 25 years ago, got my only DUI, passed all the field sobriety tests and the two cops were laughing their asses off when I blew a 0.32 BAC.
If this shit happens, you can bet a serial rapist will take advantage of it. Step 1: go to bar, buy 3 free rounds for your target. Step 2: annoy her into leaving the bar. Step 3: Wait for her .gov-mandated breathalyzer to kill her engine. Step 4: Rapey, rapey!
I would rather take my chances with the drunks.
How often do you have to check the system to see that it's working properly? Any volunteers?
Just make everything a mandatory dick up the ass system.
Everything with a seat will have a 6" protrusion that measures all vital signs. At first some women will like it, but then they will be told, "No it doesn't go there, it goes in your ass."
Why does everything today remind me of Idiocracy?
This one goes in your mouth, that one goes in your ear, and put that one in your ass. Oh wait, no. That one goes in your mouth, that one goes in your ear, and that one goes in your ass.
South Park Unicycle
look at the acronym... DADSS
now try to pronounce it
It sometimes is a little disturbing that south park always has the answer. Fuck I love that show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JscQXDsSgco
“We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your bilogical and tecnological destinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.”
Locutus: Why do you resist? We only wish to raise quality of life, for all species.
Lieutenant Worf: I like my species the way it is!
Are you muslim?
“We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your bilogical and tecnological destinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.”
How about just put all the money into self driving cars.
You decrease insurance rates, reduce injuries, decrease the need for cops, reduce road rage from stupid and / or senile drivers...
If you're going to put something in the car now, an auto eject for old drivers going under 25MPH for driving more than a few miles yet has no problems blatantly running red lights...
You're looking to implement solutions. You obviously don't work for the government.
Whoever is looking forward to driverless cars might as well ride the goddam bus with the rest of the slaves
... and a quick DNA scan with a little bit of data sent to the NSA and we're done...
Blow up a balloon when you're not drunk. Keep it in your car.
Lacking pressure sir. Cigarette lighter plug in air compressor.
Even better!
I watched the video, and I'm left puzzled as to why a drunk driver type person would voluntarily purchase this premium safety option for his or her own car.
There's never been a "safety feature" or technology that hasn't been defeated. Ever.
Most are beaten before they even get implemented. This will be no different.
Sure. Invent an idiot-proof device: along comes a better idiot. Still as long as it doesn't provide an inconvenience to the rational people, I think it's a good idea to erect some additional barriers to stupid behavior.
What about when this piece of shit malfunctions and you can't go to work that day?
dp
Compressed air in a can
Dry ice. Its got carbon dioxide; it's what sensors crave.
Polish and Russian migrants are F'ed...
Which candidate is vowing to cut back on government controls ?
http://www.chapalalaw.com/the-long-arm-of-the-us-law-and-expats/
Typical leftist government; your guilty - now prove your not
it's the scam to force us into self-driving cars that the gov can then control and know our whereabouts at all times
Be great for motor cycle sales
If you haven't done anything wrong you don't have anything to hide...
<snarc>
Hey baby. When you are done blowing me. Blow in this straw so we can go home.
Cop says yeah, good idea, that fixed everything.
she tried but your semen registered 2.1 SEC (semen alcohol count)
Next thing they will introduce is some sort of way to corral pedestrians into staying in the crosswalks. Perhaps some sort of mild shocking.
"We're from the government and we're here to help".
...bend over now.
Bend over, spread 'em, and take a deep breath.
As a historian its very interesting watching the fall of a once good country happen right in front of your face, during just my lifetime...
None of us expected that Obama would make things much worse
Expect a 10th amendment challenge to this in red states. I think they better think twice about this one.
Great for people like my human relatives in Pittsburgh.
I would be much happier if there were a pornalyzer on every government computer and a blowhookerlyzer on every Congresscritters car.
And for the Secret Service & DEA too.
States would lose tons of taxes if this is enacted. Besides, Miguel will just blow for Julio anyway.
Won't matter soon when we're all held at gun point to ride in Apple and Teslas drivlerless slave mobiles. The next step from this automatic breaking horseshit is automatic driving
And after that comes rides in crowded boxcars.
So should I plan on starting a "I'll blow your car", business on the side?
Can you imagine the liability in this when Gramps is stroking out, and Grandma can't start the car to take him to the ER because she had a tablespoon of caugh syrup for her cold a few minutes before, and the machine gives a false positive.
I imagine the liability will be zero - by law.
Ding, ding, ding. You cant sue us, but we can sue you.
Seems to me that a strip of Duct tape over all the little holes that are supposed to do the sniffing would render the entire system ineffectual.
I wonder if the dimbulbs that conceived this idea thought of that?
Probably not.
Or you could carry around a pack of cigarettes and light one up, and blow a big exhale into the sensor. Wonder how it would handle a full blast of Lucky Strike smoke?
I would be in favor of this in theory. Drunk driving is a major cause of preventable death. As far as compelling behavior, I don't think it is much different than seatbelts, which I am definitely in favor of. Now how, specifically, it would work would be a major question. For example, how does it know whether the alchohol it detects is the driver or a passenger? Do I have to pop a prod into my mouth every time? How accurate is it? Does it shut off the engine, or does it alert the authorities and my insurance company? These are major concerns.
you are a moron - the minimal risks to the general public from drinking are worth the freedom !
guns are next auto locks - I dont own a weapon never have - but i can see now that they want a completely controlled population - Fascism is ugly !
Reminds me of the SOuth Park episode with the 'It' vehicle complete with 'Flexy Grips'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1y4RRWm3xw
#nullify
Anyone else remember the seat interlock in the middl 70's that kept your car from starting until you had your seatbelt on?
Looks like congress has been given much Google (driverless cars) ICar (Apple driverless) or Uber stock and we are soon to be unable to drive ourselves. Next we will all have to move to the "city" and forbidden driving "For our own good"! WuckFads!
Official US Government Motto:
BECAUSE WE CAN!
How about catherization? They could sample urine on a real-time basis to foil people opening "travellers" on the road, plus long-distance drivers could avoid rest stops so productivity would go up. Win Win!!
While they're at it, they can build an onboard stool sampler into each vehicle.